Twin engined F1 cars?

[duke_toaster]

I thought I'd post this having had a non-loophole in the KERS mentioned.

The use of any device, other than the 2.4 litre, four stroke engine described in 5.1 above and one KERS, to power the car, is not permitted.

This implies that only one engine is permitted, but it isn't exactly clear. Like the Ferrari issue with two rear wings.

Have I actually spotted a loop-hole?
Even if it's illegal, would it be beneficial to have a 1600hp car that is heavier, drinks petrol and goes through rear tyres more?
Has it ever been tried in the past?
Should I go back to my padded cell?

[RotorFan]

Interesting idea! I love this sort of stuff

To me, the phrase "the 2.4 litre, four stroke engine described" is a description of a type of engine, not a specification of the number of engines.

I wouldn't be surprised if there are other regulations that would prohibit it though, like a single output shaft or something like that.

[GORDON STREETER]

In another thread I said why dont the F1 rules just give external measurments of the car and you can do what you like (any cc or type ) Just limit the amount of fuel.
It would certainly give GP racing the shot in the arm it needs !

[dtype38]

We all love the idea Gordon, but the trouble is that at the start of the season there'd be a whole load of completely different cars, but one would be much better than the rest and the season would be a walkover. Only way to make the racing close is to keep the design of the cars close.

[duke_toaster]

One interesting idea could be to do that in reverse. Allow a certain amount of power and torque at the rear wheels (750hp, 350nm?), and allow all types of engine that run on pump fuel. Six races, price cap for independant teams.

Test the manufacturer engines fuel economy, award them points on some scale for the WCC. All the engines would have the same power as far as the WDC is concerned, so the racing could be interesting.

This plan would involve customer cars and customer chassis too. I have a number of other similar measures, generally based on capped prices and bans on certain materials.

[SZRacer]

Done 70 years ago....

http://www.ddavid.com/formula1/alfa-romeo-bimotore.htm

[Al Weyman]

Fantastic machine and top speed of 208mph!! Would'nt fancy that myself in that thing, those guys certainly had balls back then.

[R59]

No Al, they didn't know any better!

[JohnD]

Originally Posted by dtype38

We all love the idea Gordon, but the trouble is that at the start of the season there'd be a whole load of completely different cars, but one would be much better than the rest and the season would be a walkover. Only way to make the racing close is to keep the design of the cars close.

Why so? If testing were allowed, they would soon know if they had a dog.
And under the present regime, it's looking as if McLaren do have a dog!
Hamilton 15th on grid??? Shurely shome mishtake?

John

[duke_toaster]

Originally Posted by SZRacer

Done 70 years ago....

http://www.ddavid.com/formula1/alfa-romeo-bimotore.htm

Cracking piece of kit that, it's not exactly realistic but that's the ultimate brown underpants car in Spirit of Speed

The issue with Gordon's idea is that costs would go through the roof, and so would speeds. I'd go for tighter control in some areas, but less control in engines (using the system I outlined earlier with a power limit rather than stipulations on what sort of engine generates it).

[ensign14]

Every turbocharged car had two engines and was illegal.

(Discuss.)

[Jeff 8]

Isn't KERS like a second engine?

Jeff

[Al Weyman]

A definition of an engine is a device that generates power from heat, does a turbo really work like this, I know they get hot but thought the power was generated by the primary engine's exhaust pulses. The KERS I think is definitely a 2nd engine.

[duke_toaster]

Well, if you term an electric motor an engine it is. It's certainly no internal combustion engine.

[GORDON STREETER]

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

Fantastic machine and top speed of 208mph!! Would'nt fancy that myself in that thing, those guys certainly had balls back then.

I remember Hakkinen testing one of the 50s Merc GP cars, and the commentator in an interview afterwards said "there appears more room in the cockpit compared with today's F1 cars". In his dry humour he said "they needed it for their big balls"

[tristancliffe]

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

A definition of an engine is a device that generates power from heat, does a turbo really work like this, I know they get hot but thought the power was generated by the primary engine's exhaust pulses. The KERS I think is definitely a 2nd engine.

No, the primary drive for a turbocharger is temperature not pressure. The turbine isn't blown by the air zooming past, but the heat of the air zooming past. The zooming has little to do with it.

[duke_toaster]

True, although the temperature and pressure are linked. It certainly wouldn't make a car twin-engined like an Alfa Romeo Bimotore, heat or pressure.

[chapmanite]

Originally Posted by dtype38

We all love the idea Gordon, but the trouble is that at the start of the season there'd be a whole load of completely different cars, but one would be much better than the rest and the season would be a walkover. Only way to make the racing close is to keep the design of the cars close.

While I'm disinclined to agree with Clarksonius on much, I think one of his suggestions was a decent idea: Let constructors build the car they want to, and then have them driven in round-robin. the best drivers and consturctors would probably still win, but the victories would be much harder fought if Kimi spent half the time in a crap car, and Ferrari had to deal with the next Scott Speed some weekends.

[dtype38]

I see where you're coming from and in principle its a good idea. In practice though there are a whole load of issues that would make it difficult.

Just one example: who would pay the drivers? At the mo its the constructors, but what would Ferrari think if their very expensive star driver did a good job in cars belonging to other constructors? Would they tell him to drive badly for everyone else, but steal as many of their secrets as he could? For this reason the competing drivers would have to financially independant of the teams, and probably have to be kept away from the development of the cars as well so as not to risk design secrets being swapped around.

I'm not saying it couldn't work, but I think it would need a totally new structure to the sport. Clarksonius has lots of great ideas... he just doesn't think many of them through is all :-))