The Quiet Revolution of Formula E Electric Car Racing

pbahra writes One of the greatest emotional triggers at any auto-racing event is the noise. In Nascar, it is the earthshaking growl of V8 American muscle. In Formula One, it is the chest-rattling wail of 15,000 rpm. To some the sound is repellent. To others it is like an opera. But what if there is no sound at all? Welcome to the quiet world of Formula E, a global racing series for electric cars, which debuts this month in Beijing.

Comments

quiet = powerful

[globaljustin]

I think the idea of cars that go >200mph that barely make a sound is pretty badass...

in other areas of "badass stuff" like planes, the stealth is unquestionably considered "badass"

there's no reason that "badassness" can't carry over from planes to cars

Re:quiet = powerful

[bjwest]

Unfortunately these cars won't do 200MPH...

Neither did the Grand Prix cars in the beginning. Racing and its popularity helped guide the auto industry to where it is now. I can only hope that electric car racing will do the same for the innovation in the electric market.

Re:quiet = powerful

[mjwx]

A lot of car makers left F1 in the past, Mercedes has returned, but Honda, BMW and Toyota have left. Honda will be back but only because of the V6 synergy and Nissan does have a relationship with Renault but unfortunately that's not going to probably equate to something you and I would drive for a long time. Motor Racing does help drive innovation but in a sport where the FIA have virtually done away with any concept of innovation, it'll be difficult to see how this new formula will enhance the sport or spur innovation in day to day cars. Fans are leaving, sponsors are worried and that means no money and a dead series coming soon.

Pretty much. Most motorsports are so bogged down with rules about how much power an engine can have, minimum and maximum sizes, transmission specifications, length of the tie rods and so forth that no real innovation can be done, it's all about shaving 0.01 of a second off a pit stop (and most people will never be able to handle a high flow fuel pump so no advantages there).

The old Group A and B rally cars used to see a lot of innovation as people modified production cars but those days are long gone as well. Most innovation either comes from the labs of motoring giants or tiny workshops who sell new designs and modifications to motoring giants.

Re:quiet = powerful

[Christian Smith]

A lot of car makers left F1 in the past, Mercedes has returned, but Honda, BMW and Toyota have left.

Only because they were having their ass handed to them on a plate. Toyota achieved literally nothing in their F1 stint, BMW did get some wins, but weren't competitive enough to justify the investment. Honda ditto, but left at the wrong time (the post-Honda Brawn team won the 2009 championship with the Honda designed car.)

And there are other racing series, which may be more road relevent. The Audi R18 e-tron has a Diesel hybrid drivetrainm with flywheel based energy storage. Very road relavent and innovative in the field.

Motor Racing does help drive innovation but in a sport where the FIA have virtually done away with any concept of innovation, it'll be difficult to see how this new formula will enhance the sport or spur innovation in day to day cars. Fans are leaving, sponsors are worried and that means no money and a dead series coming soon.

It's not all about innovation. It's also about the grunt work of refining what you have. That's why Mercedes are dominating even the other identically powered cars. They've done the best job within the rules defined.

And there are lots of ways to innovate in chassis and aerodynamic design. The current crop of F1 cars have a very diverse array of front end designs.

And lets be honest, most F1 innovations don't translate to road cars anyway. The biggest influence of F1 and other motor racing has been in the engine management and fuel injection areas. Racing aerodynamics? Moot. Suspension design? Not applicable to most road cars. Sequential gearboxes? Came from bikes anyway. Tires? Irrelevent unless you only want your tires to last a week.

Re:quiet = powerful

[Virtucon]

Only because they were having their ass handed to them on a plate. Toyota achieved literally nothing in their F1 stint, BMW did get some wins, but weren't competitive enough to justify the investment. Honda ditto, but left at the wrong time (the post-Honda Brawn team won the 2009 championship with the Honda designed car.)

Yes it has to make good financial and business sense if a company is going to be in any racing series. If you look one key reason BMW left.

Premium [brands] will increasingly be defined in terms of sustainability and environmental compatibility. This is an area in which we want to remain in the lead. In line with our Strategy Number ONE, we are continually reviewing all projects and initiatives to check them for future viability and sustainability. Our Formula One campaign is thus less a key promoter for us.
Norbert Reithofer

It was because they felt F1 wasn't relevant to their business and wasn't green enough. Okay, I'll agree to that but motor racing isn't about green, it never should be about green and being eco-friendly. It's racing FFS! If you come in it looking for butterflies and rainbows you're in the wrong sport.

And there are other racing series, which may be more road relevent. The Audi R18 e-tron has a Diesel hybrid drivetrainm with flywheel based energy storage. Very road relavent and innovative in the field.

And the FIA for F1 says storage is electric, Williams helped design the flywheel technology you mention and has quite a few patents around it however they can't use it in F1 and they're an F1 team. Again, teams can't innovate even on ERS design, it's mandated that it be this way because some bureaucrats thought it best.

It's not all about innovation. It's also about the grunt work of refining what you have. That's why Mercedes are dominating even the other identically powered cars. They've done the best job within the rules defined.

And there are lots of ways to innovate in chassis and aerodynamic design. The current crop of F1 cars have a very diverse array of front end designs.

And lets be honest, most F1 innovations don't translate to road cars anyway. The biggest influence of F1 and other motor racing has been in the engine management and fuel injection areas. Racing aerodynamics? Moot. Suspension design? Not applicable to most road cars. Sequential gearboxes? Came from bikes anyway. Tires? Irrelevent unless you only want your tires to last a week.

Agreed, they've done a great job but so have other teams but the rules like homologation for power units means that technology freezes for six years. Sure, gear ratios (twice a year) and fuel maps can be changed but if you did it right to begin with, that's a huge advantage but now that leaves everybody struggling because they can't innovate to compete. The only other area is Aero within a defined set of parameters, again, defined by the FIA and with cost reduction initiatives simulator time, wind tunnel time is all governed which means your racing to a budget, not producing the best thing you can. No team has infinite resources but it would be nice to see differences in the cars and different schemes, like maybe flywheel recovery in ERS but that's a pipe dream. What this leads to is conservative designs instead of leading designs for the sake of reliability vs ultimate performance. That makes it like a deranged pinewood derby.

Re:Put me squarely in

[Shatrat]

You should check out MotoGP next spring as well. It's got all the noise and power of F1, but with actual overtaking.

Re:Actually...

[Shinobi]

Wait, seriously...

Are you saying that a year with MORE overtakes, FEWER processions etc, and due to the reduced downforce are actually more difficult to drive than previous years cars, is boring, because they sound different?

Because, let me tell you, I was at Hockenheim, and those cars are still damn loud when you're there in person. Loud enough that I used my Peltors.

Re:F1 is no longer screaming at 15k

[BitZtream]

For sound, you go to Top Fuel drag races, or, even louder, air shows(The 16 Spitfire low-altitude flyby at Duxford in 2010 for example... Made any F1, Nascar or Indycar race seem tame, no matter what engines you wanted to compare with)

Let me guess, you're one of those guys that think music is better if its louder ...

Loud doesn't impress me. The sound of a turbo blow off value in something like a Toyota Supra as it cycles through the lower gears in just a couple seconds is for more sexy than any top fuel dragster, and thats just out of the factory.

The sound of a Audi turbo diesel in an LMP1 car running at Road Atlanta for Petit Le Mons or at Le Mons is far sexier than the roar of a top fuel dragster where you can rest assured that before the end of the day, part of the sound you are hearing from the dragster is one or more pistons vaporizing and coming out the exhaust. With the Audi turbo diesels you hear more of the turbo blow off and transmission noise than you do of the engine and they do it for 24 hours straight in one piece, and they spend their entire time at the top of the field and in the winners circle or at the minimum on the podium.

Don't get me wrong, TF dragsters are impressive powerful beasts, but they are hardly sexy.

The larger engines are not 'dead ends'. They are too big for the sanctions put in place on F1 to keep the costs and more importantly, the speeds down. If you can make a V6 as fast as a restricted V8, then you've just saved some weight when means faster acceleration. It doesn't mean the V8 is maxed out, its just restricted so theres no point in trying to go any faster with them. With a V6 doing the same, you can almost certainly carry less fuel and less engine weight as well as lower rotating mass. All of these things add up to faster lap times due to better acceleration and braking.

F1, Indy, Champ, all those style of cars has been working to reduce top speeds for the last 10 years at least, probably longer.