Talk:Formula One engines

Formula One B‑class High‑importance

This article is part of WikiProject Formula One, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to Formula One, including drivers, teams and constructors, events and history. Feel free to join the project and help with any of the tasks or consult the project page for further information.

View the task list
Discuss the project
Help out with Portal:Formula OneFormula OneWikipedia:WikiProject Formula OneTemplate:WikiProject Formula OneFormula One

B

This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

List of

Why isn't this "List of .Formula One engines"? Since it's only a list. ;Bear 06:48, 2004 Apr 9 (UTC)

Agreed. I would move it, except that I don't think this page is necessary at all, and it should be merged with either History of Formula One or the various teams' pages. Ðåñηÿßôý | Talk 18:06, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I've moved this page to List of Formula One engines, though I maintain that the list is unnecessary. The information is relevant but would be vastly more useful in the context of the History of Formula One, where the various formulae could be connected with drivers, events and years.

If the list is to stay a list, I would like to know if someone intends to write an article on each of these engines. Presumably such articles are possible and encyclopedic; however, the list is meaningless without articles to link. Ðåñηÿßôý | Talk 04:30, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I will prefer this article without the "List of", as it was. It's possible to write an interesting piece on these engines, not just a link list. --Marc Lacoste 15:25, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Forgotten?

This list seems to me to be useful, regardless of whether there's a full article for each engine. It needs linking from other pages though. I was interested to read it, but came across it entirely by accident. Some of the info could be worked into History of Formula One and Formula One Regulations, with links to this as a comprhensive list. It should also be linked from all F1 engine constructors' articles, etc. Spute 10:24, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I will link to it from relevant articles I pass by. --Marc Lacoste 15:19, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Date error?

Should '2018' read '2008' in the section about future engines?

Ganglandboss (talk) 03:00, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, they put a ten year ban on engine development, that's right. I don't know if the speculation about a new engine in 2011 should still be there, though. Bombadier337 (talk) 00:21, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stroke length

Great article, but this statement is incorrect:

"A shorter stroke enables the engine to produce a higher rotating speed at a constant mean piston speed but also increases the speed at which the piston must travel in each revolution."

Shorter stroke means the piston travels LESS distance per rev. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brawn fan (talk • contribs) 15:41, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What I meant to say is: Shorter stroke means the piston travels LESS distance per rev, therefore less speed per rev. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brawn fan (talk • contribs) 15:47, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Toyota engine?

Shouldn't the Toyota engine be included in the table at the bottom of the page? Ladislaus (talk) 15:47, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The table lists engines which have won at least one Grand Prix, which Toyota haven't. DH85868993 (talk) 15:46, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cosworth engine?

Same question as the Toyota one, but Cosworth engines should be on the list as they have won races, both rebadged, and on their own... Laylaholic (talk) 21:26, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:F1 convention is to refer to the individual engine types which scored those victories (DFV/DFY (155 wins, 1967-1983), HB (11 wins, 1989-93), Zetec-R (8 wins, 1994), CR-1 (1 win, 1999), RS1 (1 win, 2003)) as "Fords". (Note, however, that not all engines made by Cosworth are referred to as "Fords" - for example, the engines used by Minardi and Jaguar in 2003 and 2004 are referred to as "Cosworths"). Plus there's at least one reliable source (FORIX) which lists "Ford" with 176 wins (unfortunately it's a subscription site, so I can't just provide a link). DH85868993 (talk) 00:57, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So does grandprixstats.com. DH85868993 (talk) 13:30, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ford engines have always been built by Cosworth in Northmapionshire. Ford has had an association with them for a very long time (i.e. the Sierra and Escort have Cosworth in the name) but they have remained independent throughout. Mercedes I would say is correct because of the fact they bought Ilmor outright. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PabloTeK (talk • contribs) 10:40, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mercedes did not own Ilmor before the year 2000. Check out badge engineering. There is a market for naming rights.

Offenhauser in F1?

It does not make sense to list this engine among the Formula One engines. What would be the supporting data to do so? —Preceding unsigned comment added by RolandOEL (talk • contribs) 19:36, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's actually a list of World Drivers Championship race wins per manufacturer, and therefore includes the 1950-1960 Indianapolis 500s, which were all won by Offenhauser-engined cars. I've retitled the section and added a footnote to clarify. DH85868993 (talk) 03:08, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cosworth in F1

Now that Cosworth is back in F1 (this time badged as themselves), Ford shouldn't be used anymore and should stay changed to Cosworth as is technically correct. Ford have never built F1 engines on their own and instead used rebadged Cossie units despite what was written on the cars. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PabloTeK (talk • contribs) 10:45, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See badge engineering. Auto giants have always invested in outside development and paid for the badge. Ford paid for their badge, just like TAG, Petronas, Acer, European and Fondmetal. To call those 176 wins other than a Ford is stealing stats.

Feed free but the subject is F1 engine manufacturers, Ford have only ever paid for their name to be used, they've never owned Cosworth nor have they ever even built their own engines so how can they be called a manufacturer when they blatantly aren't? Cosworth were THE main manufacturer in F1 for many years during the turbo era where the normally aspirated producers ran off and were always referred to by that name. Murray Walker seldom-called them Ford engines as they clearly weren't. Mercedes have actually owned a considerable stake in Ilmor since before they worked with McLaren so their naming rights are somewhat valid. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.164.227.92 (talk) 19:10, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What about Prost-Acer? Acer is an IT company. PAID for the badge man, PAID. Engine identity is not dependent on the ownership or location of the factory. It depends on naming rights. Are you just a nostalgic Cosworth fanboy trying to beef up records before the 2010 season. Do you even know Fondmetal or European?

Made it Ford Cosworth for the cosworth fans, as opposed to just Cosworth. :-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.161.213.212 (talk) 12:48, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm being factually correct. Acer is irrelevant for this discussion because they never won anything with Prost GP. The title is manufacturers so it's who manufactured the engine which in the case of them making a win Acer would be Ferrari because Acer have never even built an engine. Cosworth built the engines so should be accredited with building them! OF course I know who Minardi and Fondmental are, two backmarking teams of utter disinterest to the conversation because they never won anything themselves...

Also, I prefer Honda engines myself to anyone else so your point is invalid. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.80.224.6 (talk) 22:46, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For your info, the naming rules applies to engine winners and to non-winners as well, that is why it is called a rule. Ford it is. See this source [1] Convinced? I already said factory location or ownership is irrelevant. It belongs to naming rights. You are deliberately ignoring the point. Please change your mind.

This argument seems a little like the blind leading the blind. Ford and only Ford is the way. This goes well beyond simple naming rights, as FoMoCo fully-funded the development of most of the engines that bear their name. Ford commissioned Cosworth to design and build the DFV and its successors, as well as other engines such as the HB. These were not rebadged Cosworth engines. Using this season as a parallel, are HRT cars referred to as Dallaras? No. Lazy colloquialisms aside, the first season that Cossie entered for themselves was 2000. And for the information of one of the myriad anonymous contributors up the page, yes, Ford did own Cosworth for quite a few years until relatively recently. Pyrop e 13:44, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Every DFV that ever won a GP had the word "Ford" writ large upon the cam covers. It was only the DFX and variations on the them which were differently-badged, first as "Foyt" and then as Cosworth. Mr Larrington (talk) 11:45, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

the 1980's era crappy turbos are back

yuc. just what we want... what nobody wants. CorvetteZ51 (talk) 11:48, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]