Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 5.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

What, going with an engine manufacturer that would have to staff up with all new people to develop an engine for F1? They will make a good engine, but have no idea about KERS etc...but I cant see an engine making that big a difference to McLaren who will need o make the package work.

I really hope someone picks up Cosworth and continues with it as a going concern. he name has far too much history to fade away. Hopefully the stories about the new engines not being use din 2014 get put to bed the next day or three in FIA and F1 discussions and the likes of Cosworth can sign people up for their engines.

kers is the teams responsible, i'm not sure what that has to do with honda.

i don't think honda will be as 'in the dark' as people think, they have been running engines in indy for a few years now engines that are similar to whats coming in 2014 for f1.

so you could say that honda are better prepared then any of the current engine suppliers for 2014.

i with you on Cosworth, i hope they come back better with some new owners.

Cosworth are killing Honda in Indycar. Thet even tried to get the A/R housing on their Borg Warners changed and still get spanked. And RBR and Caterham who use their system are the only ones to the best of my knowledge that use their own KERS. Even then RBR's Kers is a development of the Renault system

I can't see Honda being a big powerhouse since they've been out of the sport for 5 years (by 2014). If anything Cosworth should come good, since they have current turbo experience with Indy and current F1 experience

I can't see Honda being a big powerhouse since they've been out of the sport for 5 years (by 2014). If anything Cosworth should come good, since they have current turbo experience with Indy and current F1 experience

and cosworth helped design the bw efr turbos (i think i read that somewhere). :unsure:

+1 for cosworth?

Williams have their own KERS which has now won Le Mans but its not what is used in its F1 cars. It uses the Renault system

Also see Homo is having a sook about Vettel being luckier than him as he had a dominant car when he has won his WDCs, where he didnt ?!?!?!? LOL, he had the class of the field car in his first season and second season and only lucked into his only WDCl since which his maturity as a driver hsa goone backwards. He was a fair chance in 2010 with races where the McLaren was as dominanat as RBR and Ferrari at certain tracks. It helps when you dont run into people and lose points. If Alonso or Vettel was in the McLaren in 2010 they would have won the WDC in a McLaren

Enjoy Mercedes and racing Force India and STR farkwit!

I can't see Honda being a big powerhouse since they've been out of the sport for 5 years (by 2014). If anything Cosworth should come good, since they have current turbo experience with Indy and current F1 experience

Success is usually tied to budget. Sure there are exceptions on the down side - eg Toyota in F1, anything properly badged as a Ford in F1 (ie that wasnt a DFV), Hondas third attempt etc etc. But given how good Honda have been at engineering (historically anyway - wouldn't give you 10 cents for any of their current offerings) you have to like their chances better than Cosworth. I love Cosworth to bits but unless someone is going to stump up real cash (and why would they?) I cant see them returning to the head of the field.

Anyway here is hoping someone will again built a decent turbro road car. Aside from Ford in Oz anyway.

p1 Times

01 Sebastian Vettel Red Bull 1:27.619 22 laps

02 Jenson Button McLaren 1:27.929 0.310 22 laps

03 Fernando Alonso Ferrari 1:28.044 0.425 24 laps

04 Lewis Hamilton McLaren 1:28.046 0.427 25 laps

05 Mark Webber Red Bull 1:28.175 0.556 22 laps

06 Nico Rosberg Mercedes 1:28.447 0.828 25 laps

07 Felipe Massa Ferrari 1:28.542 0.923 24 laps

08 Michael Schumacher Mercedes 1:28.993 1.374 23 laps

09 Daniel Ricciardo Toro Rosso 1:29.204 1.585 24 laps

10 Kimi Raikkonen Lotus 1:29.291 1.672 24 laps

11 Valtteri Bottas Williams 1:29.691 2.072 26 laps

12 Paul di Resta Force India 1:29.760 2.141 23 laps

13 Kamui Kobayashi Sauber 1:29.802 2.183 18 laps

14 Nico Hulkenberg Force India 1:29.850 2.231 19 laps

15 Romain Grosjean Lotus 1:29.895 2.276 19 laps

16 Pastor Maldonado Williams 1:30.041 2.422 26 laps

17 Jean-Eric Vergne Toro Rosso 1:30.401 2.782 23 laps

18 Vitaly Petrov Caterham 1:30.630 3.011 24 laps

19 Giedo van der Garde Caterham 1:30.896 3.277 20 laps

20 Esteban Gutierrez Sauber 1:31.212 3.593 29 laps

21 Charles Pic Marussia 1:31.903 4.284 22 laps

22 Narain Karthikeyan HRT 1:32.125 4.506 24 laps

23 Timo Glock Marussia 1:32.369 4.750 19 laps

24 Pedro de la Rosa HRT 1:32.859 5.240 13 laps

http://www.planetf1.com/news/3213/8195217/Vettel-Tops-The-Times-In-First-Practice

Red Bull faces alternator switch by the United States Grand Prix

Red Bull will have to switch away from the safety of its old-spec alternators by the United States Grand Prix at the latest, AUTOSPORT has learned.

In the wake of the double alternator failure that Sebastian Vettel suffered at the Italian GP, Renault reverted its teams back to a 2011-specification to ensure there were no repeat problems.

However, with not enough of the old batch to last the entire season, Renault has continued work on a new version to make sure it has something ready for the final races.

Renault's head of track operations Remi Taffin told AUTOSPORT that the French car manufacturer was now happy that it has a version that should not suffer the same problems that have struck this year, and its teams would have to switch across imminently.

"The alternator has been changed and modified," he said. "We had a new version we tested in Singapore, and another one in Suzuka. We ran that one again in Korea - and will do so here in India as well.

"As well as that, we were running it on the dyno and that will become the specification that we will introduce this year when we need it. But we also have other specifications that are coming from R&D that are focused on 2013."

Taffin said that there is enough of the 2011 specification to last teams through the next two races, but that a switch over to the latest version would be needed for Austin.

"I think at the latest, and obviously it depends on the mileage we do, it should be the United States," he explained.

"Obviously it is not going to be for all teams, but we don't know for who yet."

Although Red Bull may feel reluctant to move away from the guaranteed reliability of the older version because of its championship situation, Taffin said the final decision about what the team does will be made by Renault alone.

When asked how Renault will decide when teams have to switch to the new version, Taffin said: "To be very honest it is a very difficult answer, because it is not any more just a technical issue. There are personal feelings about what should be run, and there are bad memories and things like that.

"So even if we have gone through all the validation process, when you discuss about introducing a new spec of alternator - people say, 'stop, should we not just keep with the old one'.

"The key point is where is the shift point from a 2011 unit with too much mileage on, to the new spec?

"But we will take the decision as always, because for any internals of the engine you cannot really leave that to the teams. It is not because they are not technically speaking OK to do that, but there is too much of an inside [emotional] feeling."

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/103710

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
×
×
  • Create New...