F1 switching to 4-cylinder engines in 2013?

[AGRiculture]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport/formula_one/9255871.stm

[Jack Harrington]

I hope they do...Monaco will be fun...Again...And it makes sense...IMHO...

[porscheman]

I guess this means that F1 will miss the switch to high-tech V6 Turbos coming in 2012. How shortsighted of them.

porscheman

[TC in Indy]

Half the cylinders and the same horsepower; albeit with turbocharged boost. Sounds like F1 will most certainly influence passenger cars down the road with these advanced recovery systems and the advancement of the turbocharger. Nice to see the turbos back in F1. Can't wait to hear what these new engines will sound like.

Thanks for the heads up and the link AGRiculture.

[Sleepcheap]

SAY IT AIN'T SO!!!!!!

4 bangers belong in lawn mowers and garden tractors. Maybe Formula Atlantic. NOT Formula 1. What a travesty.

[Mike Kellner]

4 bangers belong in lawn mowers and garden tractors. Maybe Formula Atlantic. NOT Formula 1. What a travesty.

BMW won a couple of World Championships with Turbo 4 Bangers.

mk

[stnkypete]

SAY IT AIN'T SO!!!!!!

4 bangers belong in lawn mowers and garden tractors. Maybe Formula Atlantic. NOT Formula 1. What a travesty.

Yeah, because the Offy was a glorified lawn mower engine.....

[thehairpin]

It will be interesting to see what a modern F1 car looks like with a lower-profile rear end. I wonder if there will be any knock-on effect to the aerodynamics of the front end.

I may find this more exciting than most as the turbo F1 cars were before my time (I was 5 when they mandated the atmos.) and I am excited to see F1 turbos for the first time.

[Hardscrabble]

Yeah, because the Offy was a glorified lawn mower engine.....

It might have been in Tim Taylor's hands...

[Indy-hp]

Small-displacement turbo-charged I-4's should be interesting, and should eventually have some direct application to future road car technology, something high-rpm, small-displacement V-8's were never going to do.

Solving the problem of turbo-lag, for example, and advancing energy-recovery technology would both potentially be applicable to road cars in the future.

Indirectly, this may also help IndyCar distinguish itself as well, since most interested manufacturers seem to be planning for V-6's in 2012 and beyond.

[Mike Kellner]

I don't want to get too far off topic here, but... As best I understand it, Indycar was going to also go the turbo 4 route, but allowed Honda to run a larger V6 they already had in development, which forced everyone else to a V6 as well. I think this was short sighted by Indycar & Honda. Going to an similar engine spec would save both series money and increase supplier counts.

I assume the F1 motor will be more expensive and highly developed and create more power than the Indycar motor, but a detuned version would be quite durable and would have lower entry costs for F1 motor makers.

I still really like the idea of the World Racing Engine or whatever it is called. A great idea for racing in general. A good way to cut costs and increase choice. I would have liked to see Indycar and F1 get on that train.

mk

[Indy-hp]

I believe Cotman said I-4's were legal and welcome in IndyCar if any manufacturer wants to build one, though the displacement would be the same as for V-6's, 2.4L (?)

[Mike Kellner]

I believe Cotman said I-4's were legal and welcome in IndyCar if any manufacturer wants to build one, though the displacement would be the same as for V-6's, 2.4L (?)

A 2.4 L won't be interchangeable with F1 which negates the advantage to manufacturers. No one is going to build a 4 because a 6 has more valve area for the same displacement and therefore more airflow and power.

The idea of the world engine was to get many big time series using the same blocks and heads to spread development costs and reign in motor costs. The big leagues could turbocharge and get lotsa power. The ladder series could run the same motors NA and at lower revs and have a motor that lasts all season.

mk

[JMFVET]

A 2.4 L won't be interchangeable with F1 which negates the advantage to manufacturers. No one is going to build a 4 because a 6 has more valve area for the same displacement and therefore more airflow and power.

The idea of the world engine was to get many big time series using the same blocks and heads to spread development costs and reign in motor costs. The big leagues could turbocharge and get lotsa power. The ladder series could run the same motors NA and at lower revs and have a motor that lasts all season.

mk

We still don't know whether Group Lotus IndyCar engine will be I4 or V6. They will be competing in both F1 and Indy in 2012 when the new IndyCar Engines come on line and in 2013 when F1 new engine specs come on line. I don't see why they couldn't develop a SINGLE ENGINE for both series with only minor differences in boost, presence or absence of KERS, and some electronic changes. The IndyCar spec allows I4 UP TO 2.4 liters, it doesn't require 2.4 liters.

The final rules are not out for IndyCar so I think they could easily allow for the displacement differences.

Using the same of very similar engines in both IndyCar and F1 would give Lotus and Cosworth a big step up against their F1 opposition. They would get a full season of "testing" done in the IndyCar series before putting the engine in F1. Other F1 teams will have engines that come into the 2013 season with a limited amount of testing IAW F1 rules. IndyCar involvement is a loophole for them.

[JM64]

For what it's worth, running a smaller capacity 4-cylinder turbo would not save money for the Indycar series. If anything it would increase costs, as it would be harder squeeze 700hp out of 1.6 litres of capacity than 2.4 litres. And I doubt there would have been much cross-polination between the series, as an F1 engine would have completely different requirements in terms of power output/revs, materials involved, and cost. A current F1 engine lease/supply for a season is at least 20 million euros. That isn't going to decrease for 2013.