Read Our FAQ Before Posting

I am interested in what you think as it is quite unclear for me.

U-shaped lines have typically been used by smooth drivers like Jenson Button, Alain Prost and Sergio Perez. They seem to have better tyre management in races maybe because of how their smooth inputs load the tyres up laterally and don't scrub them so much. The U-shaped line also prolongs the period in which drivers are using the lateral load of the tyres, so it is less harsh on them.

But then when I look at the V-shaped lines it also seems like they are good for tyre management.

V-shaped lines mean that the driver brakes in a straight line, rotate the car quickly mid-corner and then gets a straight exit. Since there is less lateral load on the tyres, (more longitudinal in fact) is it easier on the tyres than a U-shaped line? George Russell, Lewis Hamilton (I think) and Robert Kubica used this line during races to preserve tyres.

So which one is better on the tyres?

Denny Hulme in 1974

This might be the wrong forum to ask this but does anyone have the Court Citation or a link to the Court Judgement for the Arrows Grand Prix International v Shadow Racing Cars case at the beginning of 1978 season? If there even was a written one.

1 - How many hours do the drivers spend in the car training and practicing? Hours that are of course not qualify and race sessions?

2 - How many hours do they spend training/practicing on the inhouse sim?

3 - How is the driver training breakdown during the season? Considering physical training, circuit training, sim, getting used to the car etc. I mean more of a breakdown of their routine with everything during the season, not just what they do at gym for example.

Edit: Also considering pre-season testing and whatnot. Tests and practices outside of the official season.

Thank you guys!

and if teams all use the same material?

Good morning F1Technical!

Please post your queries as posts on their own right, this is not intended to be a megathread

Its Wednesday, so today we invite you to post any F1 or Motorsports in general queries, which may or may not have a technical aspect.

The usual rules around joke comments will apply, and we will not tolerate bullying, harassment or ridiculing of any user who posts a reasonable question. With that in mind, if you have a question you've always wanted to ask, but weren't sure if it fitted in this sub, please post it!

This idea is currently on a trial basis, but we hope it will encourage our members to ask those questions they might not usually - as per the announcement post, sometimes the most basic of questions inspire the most interesting discussions.

Whilst we encourage all users to post their inquiries during this period, please note that this is still F1Technical, and the posts must have an F1 or Motorsports leaning!

With that in mind, fire away!

Cheers

B

Hey everyone,
I’m working on an exciting project where I’m using the Mercedes M120 V12 as the base for a custom high-revving engine (aiming for 9-10k RPM) to drop into a formula-style car. While the engine from the Honda/McLaren MP4/6 is an inspiration, I’m not trying to replicate it exactly—I just want to build a modern, high-revving V12 with similar characteristics. I’m reaching out to the community for help and advice on how to get there.

My main questions:

1. Bore/Stroke Modification – The M120 has a bore/stroke of 91.5 mm × 92.4 mm, while the MP4/6 Honda V12 had a bore/stroke of 90.0 mm × 45.8 mm. I’m aiming for something closer to the MP4/6, but with a more modest rev range of 9-10k RPM. What would be the best way to modify the stroke while ensuring the engine remains reliable and performs well at higher RPMs? I’m thinking custom crankshaft work will be needed, but I’d appreciate any insights or experiences with similar modifications.
2. Upgrades and Custom Parts – I know a lot of upgrades will be needed to get this engine revving higher than its stock capabilities. Some upgrades I’m considering include:
   • Pistons and rods
   • Upgraded valves and stronger valve springs for reduced weight and higher rev potential
   • ECU tuning for high RPM control
   • Strengthening the bottom end to handle the added stress
   • High-performance intake and exhaust systems for better airflow

Has anyone here built high-revving V12s or worked with the M120 engine before? I’d love to hear your thoughts on machining, part choices, and anything else I should be considering for this build.

Again, I’m not trying to hit 13.5k RPM like the MP4/6, but I do want a strong, high-revving V12 that can handle 9-10k RPM in a formula-style car.

Thanks in advance for any advice or suggestions!

Maybe a similar question has been posted before, IDK. But I just want to know, as car manufacturers why don't McLaren make and use it's own engine. Why do they get their engines from Mercedes? Although although Aston Martin team was rebranding, but even they can produce an engine. So, why don't they? Will Audi also be a customer team, getting engine's from Merc, or will they use their own?

I have been watching the 2007 season, spa race and saw the two Ferraris comfortably ahead and also separated from one another and realised this was such an ideal scenario for a double stack in modern formula 1. But then again I realised double stacking was probably not a thing with all the complications involving refuelling and whatnot.

So I was wondering, when did we technically have the first double stack in formula one? If it was before 2009 (?before refuelling ban), when was the first modern no refuelling era double stacking too?

I searched for the answer for quite a while, tried to even recall all the seasons I’ve watched back, but to no success. So now it turns out here, hopefully someone can help me figure it out, thanks!

Edit: as of this edit, for those not wanting to scroll through the comments, the oldest pitstop we found on broadcast was a Ferrari pitstop in Malaysia 2001 (thanks to u/tHe_jAcKaL68), but apparently Benetton pulled it off a lap earlier (thanks to u/TheScarecrow__). It is very likely that there was some wet race in the 80s whose broadcast we don’t have, where they double stacked and we now have no way of knowing. However if you would consider it, thanks to u/dasneul for reminding me, there was “double stack” for a driver swap in 1956 to allow fangio to win the race and the title after a car failure on his end.

I seem to vaguely remember this, but Mclaren and Williams both used Mercedes engines during 2014 but Mclaren got outpaced by Williams as the season progressed. I read articles at the time that Mclaren's Mobil 1 engine oil was not compatible with the Merc V6 unit. How accurate was this information?

And also, is a similar effect on engines are seen now? Or are Works team and customer team uses the same engine oil to prevent what happened back then.

I’ve been rewatching the 2013 season of F1 and I’ve noticed when drivers engineers call them in to box they tell them to use up all their KERS. Is this just to run a faster in-lap and use up their tires more or a safety matter?

Hello everyone, over the last few races, Mercedes drivers have been complaining about the seat back heating up. I'm wondering how this relates to the fuel temperature in the tank (which is located behind the driver's seat) and, as a result, how it affects engine performance.

I’ve been trying to find information on my own and draw conclusions from scientific publications regarding fuel. If anyone has knowledge on this subject and can help me understand this relationship, I would be grateful. :)

Viscosity and surface tension are parameters that characterize gasoline in terms of flow. They change with temperature variations. It turns out that the volumetric flow rate of gasoline flowing from the nozzle increases by 1 to 1.5% for every 5°C increase in temperature within the range of 0 to 30°C. This is caused by a reduction in viscosity. The increase in temperature, in turn, reduces the density of gasoline, which partially compensates for the increase in volumetric flow rate. Overall, the increase in volumetric flow rate prevails, resulting in the air-fuel mixture being enriched as the temperature rises.

However, these studies concern pure gasoline. As we know, current F1 cars run on E10 fuel, which is a mixture of 90% gasoline and 10% ethanol.

E10 fuel contains 10% ethanol, which has a lower energy density than gasoline, meaning it delivers less energy per unit volume. To achieve the same power output as with pure gasoline, the engine must burn more E10 fuel.

Ethanol has a higher heat of vaporization than gasoline, which means it cools the combustion chamber better. This may allow for a higher compression ratio, which in turn can increase engine power. However, it requires the delivery of a greater amount of fuel, leading to a higher volumetric flow rate.

A higher volumetric flow rate means that the car consumes more fuel per unit of time. In the case of E10, due to the lower energy density of ethanol, the car will need more fuel to maintain similar power. On the other hand, a higher volumetric flow rate means burning more fuel, which generates more heat (seat heating for the drivers?).

https://preview.redd.it/odmhnqwc7ird1.png?width=1800&format=png&auto=webp&s=f3fa0e2f27c07043abe1dbcd165ad6c6f49f823c

So Danny out of F1 and I decided to watch back the 2021 Italian GP and let's be honest they was faster than Mercedes that weekend Qualified 2-3 and even before Max and LH Collided they still faster than Mercedes so I wonder what happen to Mercedes that weekend?

F1 punters seem to make many claims such as 'FP2 is the most relevant running' and regularly hint at a universal practice programme schedule that the teams follow, e.g. FP1 = collect tyre deg data, FP2 = race Sims, FP3 = qualy Sims. However I've never seen any real discussion, features or documentation on this programme. Does it exist? Do all the teams use the various FP sessions for specific, universally agreed car configurations or are they all free to do what they want in each FP?

I just realized that looking back at F1 throughout history, the technology has been miles behind other fields of engineering. The F4 Phantom fighter/bomber first flew in 1958 with radar, guided missiles and supersonic speed. F1 cars at that time were literal bathtubs with skinny wheels and no technology other than a V12 and drum brakes. NASA went to the moon in 1969, yet F1 only realized they can use wings on cars in 1968? Why was that?

pretty much the title and is is easy to buy it ?

thanks

I want to know how are they able to replace the car overnight, and also how many backup are given for the seasons.

Major and minor crash cost? How does it affect a team financially?

Thank you

When doing wind tunnel testing with the 60% scale models on the rolling road wind tunnels you'd think these modern ground effects cars with the extremely low pressure areas formed the floor would end up pulling the belt of the rolling road up into the floor of the car. I am sure that there is very little slack on these bands, but the forces must me immense. How do they the floor surface in place?

Good morning F1Technical!

Please post your queries as posts on their own right, this is not intended to be a megathread

Its Wednesday, so today we invite you to post any F1 or Motorsports in general queries, which may or may not have a technical aspect.

The usual rules around joke comments will apply, and we will not tolerate bullying, harassment or ridiculing of any user who posts a reasonable question. With that in mind, if you have a question you've always wanted to ask, but weren't sure if it fitted in this sub, please post it!

This idea is currently on a trial basis, but we hope it will encourage our members to ask those questions they might not usually - as per the announcement post, sometimes the most basic of questions inspire the most interesting discussions.

Whilst we encourage all users to post their inquiries during this period, please note that this is still F1Technical, and the posts must have an F1 or Motorsports leaning!

With that in mind, fire away!

Cheers

B

And would it increase or decrease the lap times?

As the subject says, i keep wondering why all the tracks on the calendar are made in a way you lose about 22-26 seconds per pit stop.

I feel like if we had a specifically designed pit exit that would cut part of the circuit (imagine Suzuka with the pit lane exit leading straight to T5-T7), we could have the pit-stop time loss reduced heavily. Let's say to 5-10 seconds.

AND with that smaller pit-stop time loss, drivers could push the tyres more because it's easier to put on a new set, so we could see less resource management in a race and more racing on the limit.

So, why are no tracks designed like this? (i understand that this design could lead to time advantage for slower series - well, we could make several pit lane exits that are used depending on the series)