Deep_blue wrote:
There´s something I really still don´t understand quite well:
"The minimum weight limit has been raised to compensate for additional power unit weight"
So basically they are saying that the new 1.6L turbo V6 will be heavier than the current 2.4L V8 current engines? At the same time I don´t think the fuel economy can be THAT different, I don´t think it can be more than a 3% or so, so why botter in making a new, heavier, less powerful engine, I still don´t get it.
It could be different if there weren´t blow and RPM restrictions so tight and engines could put more Hp than current ones, but sadly it´s not the case
The key words are "power unit", not power plant. In almost every case, a smaller displacement engine with 25% less cylinders and designed for the same task should be smaller and lighter. That part is true. But there are a lot of additional equipment that figures into the "power Unit" equation. KERS will be doubled in capacity, and they will be able to use it more. So that entails a larger battery, motor/generator, and associated increases in strengthening the drivetrain. Then there is the added turbo, with it's HERS system, more equipment and mass.
The end result will be that the entire power unit will be slightly heavier, but be more efficient, and allow the emerging technology of KERS, HERS, and associated controls to compensate for (even replace) the lost cylinders and displacement.
But many of the reasons for the change are political. The FIA has to at least appear to have "greener" engines to quell the sharp criticism of some parties supporting a greener earth. Most of the manufacturers (and I am strongly opposed to allowing manufacturers any sway in the rules) can match up the new engine format with their production cars. When you are running a V-10 there is no link with your production car, while a small V-6 is a lot more representative. Of course, all this is a kick in Ferrari's jewels, they cater to exotic, multi-cylinder engines.