V6 turbos

[cameraman]

So the good Mr Will Buxton got a tour of the AMG engine works and was given the full pr push about the new engine specs. He said any fears about the engines sounding horrible are totally unfounded. So it seems that all the way around the the new spec should turn out to be a good thing. At least that's what AMG is selling.

http://willthef1journo.wordpress.com/2013/01/11/ive-seen-the-future-and-it-is-awesome/

[Gnam]

As such, the concept of “performance” as we know it now will cease to exist. In its place, we will deal with the term, “energy efficiency.”
If a turbo V6 is good enough for Ford pickups, why not F1. :shakehead

The thermal energy recovery sounds interesting though.

[WickerBill]

Not sure about anyone else, but I'm remembering a time when I loved the sound of turbos.


However, I'd still love to see them rev to the limits they do today.

[opinionated ow]

Not sure about anyone else, but I'm remembering a time when I loved the sound of turbos.


However, I'd still love to see them rev to the limits they do today.

I believe that in Formula 1 they should be allowed to rev as high as the engine designer can make them and to buggery with mandated rev limits

[Insomniac]

I believe that in Formula 1 they should be allowed to rev as high as the engine designer can make them and to buggery with mandated rev limits

I agree. Impose the race minimum, but if they can get it to rev higher, good for them.

[Insomniac]

Not sure about anyone else, but I'm remembering a time when I loved the sound of turbos.


However, I'd still love to see them rev to the limits they do today.

I'm good as long as it sounds good. We've seen examples over the years where either type can sound bad. I never had an issue with CART/ChampCar.

[Gnam]

I agree. Impose the race minimum, but if they can get it to rev higher, good for them.

The rev limit is for cost control, right? The higher an engine revs, the more the materials and engineering cost.

[Napoleon]

The rev limit is for cost control, right? The higher an engine revs, the more the materials and engineering cost.

It seems to me that rev limiters in and of itself would do nothing for cost control. It would only make a difference if otherwise the rules somehow require the engines to be robustly built (such as out of certain materials and certain dimensions) but even then you could make a good argument it may not matter.

[opinionated ow]

The rev limit is for cost control, right? The higher an engine revs, the more the materials and engineering cost.

I think its a bs excuse for more regulation.