Originally Posted by frnk
Originally Posted by HeilSvenska
It's pointless. If they really wanted to give cars "power to pass", they'd just lower the power restrictions that nearly all race cars are stifled with.
"1) Passing in the race"
Lowering power restrictions AKA airflow restrictors do the same.
|
Sorry to respond to such an old post but this remark confused me.
While I agree with the overall sentiment, the idea that reducing power restrictions on the engines would give a "power to pass" effect is, well, wrong. "Power to pass" is about a power differential between the two cars battling, if you reduce the power restrictions then it stands to reason that both cars would increase in power but the difference between the power of the two engines would be unlikely to change.
KERS may provide an interesting dynamic, it has already been established through years of modern F1 that 1 degree of rear wing or an extra 20 BHP may make all the difference when attempting to separate two outstanding drivers in two outstanding machines. Although the input from KERS may be minimal, Formula 1 has always been about making maximum gains from a minimal advantage. |
I agree that HeilSvenska's post is confusing. I finally took it to mean remove restrictions other than the displacement of the engine, and perhaps leaving the supercharging ban on. Given enough money some teams will be able to make more power than others, hence have power to pass. Then again maybe that's not what he mean.
The maximum power that can be released at a rate greater than 2KW is 60 joules. That roughly translates to 15 horsepower for a bit more than 2 seconds. You could do 20 horsepower for something less than 2 seconds.
Of course if the other driver has KERS they may be able to respond in kind and avoid the pass. Efficiency here is important though.