Quote:
Originally Posted by Viffermike
Right: regs which have always been there regarding engine displacement and other parameters since formula racing's genesis. (That's what the "formula" refers to, after all.) Thing is, technologies "forced" on the teams are only forced on them because larger automotive culture -- from consumers to governments -- deem them worthy of use in what is, along with WEC, the two most important developmental racing leagues on the planet. Those manufacturers have always (emphasis added again) resisted changes in the regs, with little exception.
There is no better example of this previous to hybridization than the turbo craze in the 1980s. Think about the era globally then, in all aspects.
Then turbos were banned in F1 in the early 1990s. Think about the era, in automotive terms, globally then, in all aspects.
Then, turbos were reintroduced to F1 a few years ago. Think about the era globally then, in all aspects.
The same thing applies to powertrain hybridization. At the risk of repeating myself again: It is inevitable.
Oh, c'mon. The sport would see all sorts of madness well beyond engine regs if there were unlimited design changes. A safety-related example, in one word: Lauda.
So Koenigsegg runs in those circuits? Bugatti? Hell: Honda? (OK: Bad example since the NSX isn't quite a hypercar. I digress). You're wrong: it's because hypercars exist to do one thing and one thing only: to make the latest go-fast technology, typically available on non-street-legal racing cars, available on street-legal cars for those with the funds and the ego to afford them. Sure, part of the marketing is to tie them to current racing tech; that's a given since that's where much of the tech comes from (unless you're K-egg or Pagani, etc.). But racing is the chicken, and hypercars are the egg (pun not intended). It isn't the other way around.
Hey: I agree. We'd all prefer all that. But electric is progressing, just like turbos, pneumatic valvetrains, stressed aluminum, carbon fiber, ceramics, active aero, etc. all have in the past. They only progressed because the automotive world wanted it. And the automotive world, by necessity, needs an alternative to big displacement and fossil fuels.
|
I understand that electrification is inevitable. I am just saying that it is not an ultimate performance enhancer in its current guise, the battery technology just isn't there.
Whe the turbo era went nova in the 80s, turbos were used to increase performance, nothing else. Turbo era in F1 - power was spiraling out of control and they banned it ultimately for safety. It bears No comparison to what is happening now. Now electrification in F1 is used to make it more socially acceptable, and they are scrambling like mad to get the performance level up and make the cars more exciting.
Just because it is happening doesn't mean it's better for performance. And if the next M3 cannot take a weekend at the track, I'll just switch over to a model with track car and tame daily driver, at which point BMW can go to hell for all I care.
And BTW, Bugatti doesn't do hybrids.
