I'm sure you could !!! Nuclear powered "ELECTRICITY" stations lad, wise up son. As for use in F1 I'm sure fossil fuels could be found, manufactured until the end of time.
It seems a bit perverse to be opposed to something because it is more efficient. The quietness of the new F1 power units reflects the fact that less energy is being wasted. Now all that sound energy that was being barked out into the atmosphere is being used to make the engine more powerful. If you could have a car that produced the same power as your Imprezza does but used 30% less fuel, you'd use it, wouldn't you? It would be very perverse to say "I like my car because it is less efficient" or "I like the fact that I feel I am being politically incorrect" while you spend 50% more on fuel than you need to. Making F1 cars more efficient is not just about political green agendas, it is also about reflecting that the engine technology of the future is about smaller capacity, energy recovery and electric motors. They are the future, political correctness or not.
I understand the green view for the mass market, but Formula 1 is what, 22 cars, fortnightly for just two thirds of the year? Influencing India, China and America to lead the way with green cars is the way forward, not 22 race cars on a weekend. That said, when the industry is supported by massive oil sponsors, who need to be seen to be making headway in going green, it is no surprise that F1 has to represent that. Hopefully the racing will be brilliant though. So far it looks great- emphasis on driver skill is huge now we have the torque and power, and especially racecraft. If we ditch DRS, and add a bit of volume we will be set fair for an amazing era of F1 IMO.
All for Nuclear energy, just a bit impractical for F1 Fossil fuels are the past, F1 needs to get with the times and either come in line with road car engineering or go one step better (whatever that may be). You can still enjoy your 19th century motoring through the historic F1 racing series!
I don't think it's so much F1 needing to be green (it's been carbon neutral for years anyway), but that the manufacturers need relevant technologies to take away from the sport. NA V8's aren't relevant to many mass-manufactured cars, whilst turbos and energy capture are seen as the way forwards. If F1 can be a proving ground for technologies that manufacturers have a desire/need for, it makes F1 more attractive to them. Whilst perhaps the most iconic, Ferrari are the only engine manufacturer who can reasonably justify V8 R&D. F1 hasn't pulled in any new engine manufacturers yet, but it's more likely with this formula than the previous one, and diversity will help the sport. Fully agree about the racing though. From the little we've seen, the skill in driving the cars is much more obvious, and I'm particularly enjoying being able to hear things that are going on beyond the engine. If the broadcasters can up the noise levels slightly, I think it could be a cracking spectacle.
Piss people off like me? What a weapon. You've drawn a conclusion about me based on my screen name but have no idea why I chose that name, who I am, nor what I stand for. All I'm saying is that these kind of cars are the future, so live with it, or do one.
Tbh the difference between F-e and F-1 is F-1 generates its electricity power through recovery (Kinetic and Heat energy) alongside an efficient Fossil fuel engine. Its about 30% of the engine fuel usage is recovered. Alongside the 2014 cars using 35% less fuel in the first place. F-e has its cars charged up so its fuel is created from fossil fuels being burnt to produce it. In the UK only 3% of energy is currently renewable though most are higher...even China. The Indy Car series last year were running cars with 85% biofuel which is made from plant matter (That damn Rapeseed!!). So Which is the most 'Green' and which is the most Environmentally Friendly?? And which is the best economical choice?
Sebastian Vettel has hit out at the sound of the 2014 Formula 1 cars. Having watched from trackside at the Australian Grand Prix following his early retirement, he reckons the current cars sound terrible. "It is s**t," declared Vettel when asked what he thought about the noise of the V6 turbo engines. "I was on the pitwall during the race, and it is better [quieter] than in a bar! "I think for the fans it is not good. "I think F1 has to be spectacular - and the sound is one of the most important things. "I remember when, although I don't remember much because I was six years old, but we went to see the cars live in free practice in Germany, and the one thing I remember was the sound. "[I remember] how loud the cars were, and to feel the cars through the ground as it was vibrating. It is a shame we don't have that anymore."
The point engine sound critics are missing The sale of rose-tinted spectacles must have gone through the roof in Formula 1 circles in recent days. Such has been the outpouring of derision from fans, the sport's promoters and some circuit owners about the current cars' lack of sound, you'd have been forgiven for thinking the sport had left an era of brilliance to return to the dark ages. It's clear some think that having a new competitive order in F1, cars that are faster in a straight line and more sideways in the corners, machinery that allows rookies to match their more experienced rivals, and technology that's got car makers and sponsors excited again, are unimportant. Instead, those shouting the loudest think F1 is ruined solely because we no longer need to wear earplugs to drown out the noise of the engines. It seems they would have much preferred to stick with the V8s. But if we pause for a moment and consider what would have happened to F1 if the new regulations had been ditched, the answer is simple: we would be in a whole heap of trouble right now. For a start, carrying on with the V8s would have prompted an engine crisis. As car makers push on with selling products that are more environmentally friendly, the ever-increasing expenditure on an F1 using frozen-spec V8 engines with no relevance to road cars was becoming ever harder to justify......
When were degrading Pirelli tyres ever road relevant? Sometimes I wonder if the FIA and FOM are just trying to bullshit themselves.
I feel the tyre issue is a left over from another age of F1, it is no longer required. I'd be happier with bigger differences and no forced changes. Really offer up slow and steady Vs flat out maniac
Yea, I'm not against the current formula as far as the racing or technologies are concerned, its just to bloody quiet, maybe we could use some of the stored energies to power an amp or two. And OH yes, ditch DRS for sure. I can see that feature being transferred to road cars, would work well with the tailgate brigade on the M1.
So Button says stop whining or leave eh? Does that include the fans and track organisers that agree with Vettel as well then... Me thinks that was not a smart thing for Jenson to get involved with.
Now you've upset Alonso! [h=1]Fernando Alonso 'uncomfortable' about F1 engine noise situation[/h]Fernando Alonso feels uncomfortable discussing the merits of Formula 1's new regulations, because of the potential for disgruntled fans to turn their ire on him.
Ferrari don't want their driver to isolate themselves with the vast fans they have so Alonso is proving the smarter driver and stuck to the script. Jenson inadvertently opened pandora's box by pretty much saying if you don't like the engine noise, leave. McLaren and FOM will not like that kind of attitude by Jenson inadvertently sticking his middle finger at people like Ernie for example.
