Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 55

Thread: Pathetic noise

  1. #11
    Nosevi's Avatar
    Nosevi is offline There's an outside too? Where? Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Lincolnshire
    Name
    Pete
    Posts
    10,846

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zuff View Post
    Given it a few races. I mean ...........
    ..........Total thumbs down. For once in my life I find myself agreeing with BE!
    So do I. But he does, and has had, a fairly big say in it, whether he admits that or not. Everyone said it was going to kill the 'atmosphere' but they pressed on with it anyway.

    What I don't get is the claim that V8s are a thing of the past so they had to change to V6s. Just look at the car manufacturers that actually race - McLaren still uses a V8 in the P1, Ferrari have said that they'll be sticking with a V8 and not abandoning it in favour of a V6 turbo, Mercedes seem to be sticking with a V8 in the SLS AMG. If anything the sound of these new engines has ensured that they stay. Ok Renault stick with little turbo engines every time they want something to go faster and Lotus seem to be well and truly in the V6 turbo camp now, but to say the V8 is dead when practically every Supercar manufacturer uses one in at least their 'baby supercar' models is just tosh.

    My thought is that it was possibly influenced by Honda and a wish by the likes of BE to get them back into F1. Think I'm right in saying they were the biggest 'spenders' when they were in the sport and that's not going to hurt BE one bit. Judging by an engine recording that's popped up on the net of the Honda V6 I'm not sure it's going to help - frankly I thought my builders were cutting wood when I heard it. Hopefully a proper exhaust system will change it for the better:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dv6VQUYBl04&autoplay=0

    Thought for the day - what's more ridiculous, having F1 cars that sound like mopeds racing or trying to stop F1 cars from sounding like mopeds by putting small trumpets on the exhausts?

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Lincolnshire
    Name
    Matt
    Posts
    1,173

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nosevi View Post
    What I don't get is the claim that V8s are a thing of the past so they had to change to V6s.
    I dont know so, but my guess is that V6 turbos were a compromise.

    Ferrari would want to retain V8's so that the car division and can draw a link between Road and Race.
    Historical Teams - Williams, Mclaren, etc, would want an engine spec that appealed to mass production car companies - who themselves would want to draw a parallel. (arguably this is what drew Honda back)
    Merc might have been stuck in the middle - wanting to be seen as developers of new tech, but have "big cars" to sell too.
    Smaller teams would just want plenty of choice - and hence the more manufacturers the better.
    F1 would probably want to be technical innovators and also need "ammo" to counteract "Green Credentials" accusations (though interestingly I read on Joe Saward's blog that spectators to the Tour de France use more fuel than F1)

    Again, another guess, but without the "big engine" car companies, we'd have had 1.6Litre 4 or 5 Cylinder non-V engines as the "link" to the road cars in the dealers is easier to make for marketing bods.


    As for the sound, I know I sound like a broken record, but I dont dislike it.
    You can certainly, from the in car, hear a lot more detail. (tyre noise under braking, lateral grip being broken and traction being lost on power and the cars bottoming)
    Radio is clearer too.

    OK, I'd like it "louder" - but I also look upon these cars as giving "hope". My red car has a 3.4Litre V8 - its lovely, and has a good chunk of power, even m'Truck sounds purposeful on throttle, like I'm making progress.. but the marketing messages from road makers are all about "Eco" and "fuel economy" and "Green" and steering us all to 1 Litre screamers or Hybrids. (and I might be pushing this a bit far, but then the next logical step is if driving is no fun, then pass it over to a machine and get a google autodrive etc.)

    And until the start of the season my perception of "hybrid" was - slow. ie "We've removed most of the (proper) engine and added a supplmenental "eco" donkey engine " . And this wasnt a future I was looking forward to.
    Now, F1 has shown me (as has the La Ferrari) that "hybrid" power can ADD power, making more power. And thats a good thing.
    (OK, if I'd thought hard enough, its what Audi and Toyota have been doing in sportcars)

    And if the only compromise attached to that future is that clever engineers have managed to extract such an enormous ammount of the waste energy from the exhaust that its a bit quiet, I can live with that.
    Yeah, not much sounds better than a big V engine on full chat... but I atleast have some hope!

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Name
    GQ
    Posts
    742

    Default

    That reminds me, must get my electric planer sharpened!

  4. #14
    Nosevi's Avatar
    Nosevi is offline There's an outside too? Where? Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Lincolnshire
    Name
    Pete
    Posts
    10,846

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Quigs View Post
    That reminds me, must get my electric planer sharpened!
    Not sure how legit it is but it's what's being banded around online at the moment. Obviously it's on a 'bench' so an exhaust of some type will change it a tad.

    Quote Originally Posted by J70 View Post
    Again, another guess, but without the "big engine" car companies, we'd have had 1.6Litre 4 or 5 Cylinder non-V engines as the "link" to the road cars in the dealers is easier to make for marketing bods.
    But herein lies the snag. I just don't think F1 should try to align itself with the next Renault Clio or Honda Civic. I know that's where the money is but I think it's a mistake. I think it should be aligning itself with the Merc SLS AMG, Ferrari 458, McLaren P1 and cars of that ilk. The V6s were brought in on the 'assumption' that it was/is the future. The fact is the powers that be (the FIA) are trying to make that the future, not reacting to a future that many high performance car buyers want to see. It's a little like a fashion show where they display the 'fashions' for the coming season - they are trying to drive those fashions not showing people what they will be.

    The idea given by the FIA for dropping the litreage and going to a V6 was to more closely align the F1 engines with the road cars of manufacturers. The FIA as in Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile. 3 manufactures - in what way does it more closely align itself with Ferrari and to a slightly lesser extent Mercedes (ok their bottom of the range engine is a 1.6 but it's hardly the norm for a Merc). It aligns itself with Renault (and tempts the likes of Honda). I can almost live with the fact that it's ended up as a massive home goal with Renault engines struggling.

    The fact is you don't have to lose cylinders in order to be 'hi-tech'. LaFerrari is reasonably modern - it has a 6.3 litre V12. And going to a small capacity V6 does nothing to align the sport with the cars most petrol heads actually dream of owning, it aligns it with the mass produced cars of the engine manufacturer who just happens to be based in the same country as the sport's governing body.

    The change was totally self serving IMO and was equally unnecessary. Yes F1 needs to drive innovation but it doesn't need to try to force a future on performance car enthusiasts that most don't want to see.

    As an aside I was a tad disingenuous to BE in a former post - I hadn't realised he was so anti the change and in fact threatened to sue the FIA over breach of contract if they insisted in bringing in the small capacity V6s. So maybe I agree with him more than I thought.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Lincolnshire
    Name
    Matt
    Posts
    1,173

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nosevi View Post
    The change was totally self serving IMO and was equally unnecessary.
    If by that you mean doing work to ensure the continuance of the sport - then it probably was.

  6. #16
    Nosevi's Avatar
    Nosevi is offline There's an outside too? Where? Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Lincolnshire
    Name
    Pete
    Posts
    10,846

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by J70 View Post
    If by that you mean doing work to ensure the continuance of the sport - then it probably was.
    The sport wasn't in any danger of folding, it doesn't need to legitimise itself to the green vote - F1 fans by and large don't really care how fuel efficient the F1 cars are. Regarding the change in engine, the majority of the established engine manufacturers didn't want it, the cost has been huge to the smaller teams, the spectators (by and large) didn't want it, more countries want a Grand Prix than there are races to hand out...... Not entirely sure where you're coming from. We may have to agree to disagree on this one- you're not about to convince me it was a step in the right direction.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Lincolnshire
    Name
    Matt
    Posts
    1,173

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nosevi View Post
    Not entirely sure where you're coming from.
    Engines.

    Or more precisely engine manufacturers.

    Roll back 5years or so when these regs were muted, Toyota had not long since gone having spent a fortune with little to show, Renault had the Singapore crash thing still haunting them, and later as recession hit, I wouldnt be suprised if boards of directors at both Renault and MB challenged the logic of "staying in", especially in the recent past when there would have been domestic pressures demanding commitment to keep spending on "twiddly bits"
    In fact, I'd even say that over the last 5 years I wouldnt have been at all suprised if F1 dropped down to just 2 engine manufacturers - and both of those would need someone to beat, and be less motivated themselves if there was only 1 other to beat.

    And then, if you consider the tech itself:

    1. The teams (I bet) like it in the respect that with it being "in tune" with the world, they will be devloping technology they can sell on. Arent Williams selling KERS tech? And Mclaren, electronics? I wouldnt be suprised if all the teams are selling on developed or spin off technology.
    2. The organsisers (I bet ) like it the respect that its drawn Honda out to play, increasing the engine manufs to 4, plus lots of other reasons.
    3. The big car companies will find it more attractive as smaller turbo engines, particularily hybrids are things they sell on a Monday.
    4. And arguably the fans will like it if it , as historically happens with big regulation changes, shakes the field up - which is already proving to be the case, and hopefully we are in a for a Brawn-esque season as everyone claws back MB's advantage.

    Am not saying all of that is right (as in accurate or even correct) , but I do think the change was in part driven by the need to get more engine manufacturers on board, or atleast make it more attractive for others to join.

  8. #18
    Nosevi's Avatar
    Nosevi is offline There's an outside too? Where? Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Lincolnshire
    Name
    Pete
    Posts
    10,846

    Default

    I just think we fundamentally disagree over a need, and in particular the need to appeal to high volume manufacturers of 'ordinary' motors. I don't know BE that well but what I do know is that, if he was dead set against it, then there was no financial need for the safe continuation of F1. He may be a tad 'odd' in some people's eye's but he knows which side his bread is buttered and if he threatened to sue the FIA over brining in the engine changes then financially at least it wasn't required.

    I agree with the need for the teams to sell on technology and to innovate but ironically I don't think having ever tighter regulations, to the point where some parts of the power train are now utterly tied down in the regs, is the way to go. What you do is you say to the teams "Right you've got 2 litres (to pick a number). No forced induction but make it a V6, V8, V12....... straight 4 for all we care. And use whatever power recovery you can come up with but the car has to generate it after the lights go out. Go and see what you can come up with." You might have a MB-esque start where one team hits on a better combo than the rest but you'd get innovation and progression in a Darwinian sense rather than trying to push a set agenda. If you want to expand F1 getting a US team on board, possibly followed by others, is also a far more sensible option. That may bring in the US public but making the cars small capacity turbo units is not the way to go about that.

    I know this thread is entitled "Pathetic Noise" but ironically that's not what I think the problem is, I think it's a by-product of the problem (and actually don't mind it as much as some, just think it's 'wrong' that you can pitch up to an F1 race and the car you parked in the car park is louder than the ones in the pits). I think the problem is F1 trying to appeal to the 'Green vote' and the mass car producers. When you go and buy your Honda Civic you may be 'bothered' about fuel consumption. When you go and buy your F12 or P1 you couldn't really give a damn. Those are the sort of producers that are going to put F1 tech in their road cars first, it'll filter down to the Honda Civics all in good time.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Surrey
    Name
    Mallard
    Posts
    1,141

    Default

    IMHO it's the right way to go.
    As a global sport which attracts so much advertising and investment it has to be true to it's ethos as being the technical pinnacle of motor sport. If you go the other way, low cost (relatively) V8's then F1 would compete with Indycar which is relevant to the US but not to the rest of the world.
    I think that the new generation of supercars have made a step jump with the incorporation of F1 technology which must be a big plus for the companies and their contributing partners, many of which are based in England.
    Big naturally aspirated V8's and larger are becoming a thing of the past.
    The modern F1 power trains are showing what we will be driving in the not to distant future which demonstrates that F1 is relevant and therefore will bode well for the future of F1 financially.
    I personally see nothing wrong with the noise made by F1 cars and have got used to it.

  10. #20
    Nosevi's Avatar
    Nosevi is offline There's an outside too? Where? Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Lincolnshire
    Name
    Pete
    Posts
    10,846

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mallard View Post
    Big naturally aspirated V8's and larger are becoming a thing of the past.
    This is the only bit I don't quite 'buy' - are they? And I mean are they right now? People in places like the FIA are trying to make it a 'fact' by repeatedly saying it but practically every single high tech, high performance, prestige car manufacturer in the world is still using "Big (at times) naturally aspirated V8's and larger." as the basis for their high performance cars. Can you see a day where Ferrari's flagship car, the F12 replacement perhaps, is powered by a 2.4L turbo charged V6? I hope not. And if the top of the market doesn't go that way, why does F1 have to? I just don't see why F1 has to be relevant to a normal hatchback on the shopping run. I'd much prefer it was relevant to the likes of Ferrari, Bugatti, Lamborghini, AMG models of Merc, Aston Martin etc, none of whom look like they're about to ditch the V8s and larger.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. NOISE
    By elt in forum Technical Q & A
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 24-04-2013, 06:42 AM
  2. Noise
    By Rickware in forum Ferrari Talk
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 05-04-2013, 01:31 PM
  3. Noise levels
    By Gordon WR in forum Meets, Cars & Coffee
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-01-2011, 02:21 PM
  4. noise nuisance... ??
    By ferrariboy in forum Ferrari Talk
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: 18-05-2008, 08:44 AM
  5. creaking noise
    By marlin in forum Ferrari Talk
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 16-04-2007, 09:57 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •