Discussion:
Mercedes oil burning cheating to continue
(too old to reply)
s***@yahoo.com
2017-08-29 17:24:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opinion/f1/has-mercedes-beaten-fias-oil-burning-rule-tweak

3 years and counting. How many races would Hamilton have won since 2014 without oil burning. ZERO. Mercedes gave up a new spec ICE to be introduced in Singapore because it is not as big of a gain compared to oil buring. They could not modify their engine which since 2014 was designed around oil burning.
From now until the end of the season only Mercedes will be allowed to burn 33% more oil than every other team on the grid.

Biggest cheats in F1 history who won races due to illegal car technicalities.

1. L. Hamiton (2014-2017)

huge gap

2. M Schumacher (1994).
John
2017-08-29 18:11:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
And F1 has oil consumption specs why?
.
2017-08-29 18:38:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John
And F1 has oil consumption specs why?
Only spurious engineers and other fools in the manner of edmund
are of the brain dead belief that the *burning* of the lubricating
oil used in spark ignition, internal combustion, gasoline engines
results in either power or mileage benefits.
--
My mirror continues its finite yet unbounded journey.
News
2017-08-29 19:36:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by .
Post by John
And F1 has oil consumption specs why?
Only spurious engineers and other fools in the manner of edmund
are of the brain dead belief that the *burning* of the lubricating
oil used in spark ignition, internal combustion, gasoline engines
results in either power or mileage benefits.
Hint: it's not " *burning* of the lubricating oil "
Alan Baker
2017-08-29 21:53:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by .
Post by John
And F1 has oil consumption specs why?
Only spurious engineers and other fools in the manner of edmund
are of the brain dead belief that the *burning* of the lubricating
oil used in spark ignition, internal combustion, gasoline engines
results in either power or mileage benefits.
Does burning oil not turn chemical energy into heat?

Are F1 cars not limited in the fuel (gasoline) flow by the current rules?

If there was an additional fluid they could add to that flow, why would
it not create additional power?
Geoff
2017-08-29 22:30:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alan Baker
Post by .
Post by John
And F1 has oil consumption specs why?
Only spurious engineers and other fools in the manner of edmund
are of the brain dead belief that the *burning* of the lubricating
oil used in spark ignition, internal combustion, gasoline engines
results in either power or mileage benefits.
Does burning oil not turn chemical energy into heat?
Are F1 cars not limited in the fuel (gasoline) flow by the current rules?
If there was an additional fluid they could add to that flow, why would
it not create additional power?
No. It would likely reduce the effective octane of the fuel.

"Add to the flow", as in some cunning injector valve into the cylinder
or fuel supply, as opposed to consumption via piston rings as part of
the normal cylinder lubrication process ?

geoff
Alan Baker
2017-08-30 00:53:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Geoff
Post by Alan Baker
Post by .
Post by John
And F1 has oil consumption specs why?
Only spurious engineers and other fools in the manner of edmund
are of the brain dead belief that the *burning* of the lubricating
oil used in spark ignition, internal combustion, gasoline engines
results in either power or mileage benefits.
Does burning oil not turn chemical energy into heat?
Are F1 cars not limited in the fuel (gasoline) flow by the current rules?
If there was an additional fluid they could add to that flow, why would
it not create additional power?
No. It would likely reduce the effective octane of the fuel.
Why? Oil is harder to ignite than gasoline.
Post by Geoff
"Add to the flow", as in some cunning injector valve into the cylinder
or fuel supply, as opposed to consumption via piston rings as part of
the normal cylinder lubrication process ?
Or something along the lines of a PCV valve, but meant for adding oil to
the incoming air charge.
Geoff
2017-08-30 03:19:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Geoff
"Add to the flow", as in some cunning injector valve into the cylinder
or fuel supply, as opposed to consumption via piston rings as part of
the normal cylinder lubrication process ?
Or something along the lines of a PCV valve, but meant for adding oil to
the incoming air charge.
Apparently extremely well concealed ....

geoff
Alan Baker
2017-08-30 03:21:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Geoff
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Geoff
"Add to the flow", as in some cunning injector valve into the cylinder
or fuel supply, as opposed to consumption via piston rings as part of
the normal cylinder lubrication process ?
Or something along the lines of a PCV valve, but meant for adding oil to
the incoming air charge.
Apparently extremely well concealed ....
Actually, just a re-purposing of things that already exist in the system.
~misfit~
2017-08-30 05:12:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Geoff
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Geoff
"Add to the flow", as in some cunning injector valve into the
cylinder or fuel supply, as opposed to consumption via piston rings
as part of the normal cylinder lubrication process ?
Or something along the lines of a PCV valve, but meant for adding
oil to the incoming air charge.
Apparently extremely well concealed ....
Actually there is allowance made for an ECU controlled solenoid "PCV" valve
in the current F1 specs. I seem to remember that the FIA are disallowing it
from (IIRC) 2018. There exists the ability to use it not just for venting
the crankcase at a rev range desirable for burning off-gassed oil but also
pressurising it at other revs which results in oil going past the rings.

I still think that it's a storm in a teacup but since RBR, annoyed at being
down on power, first raised the issue with the FIA it's become something of
a poisoned chalice. Since the FIA's first directive on the issue other teams
have sought further clarification and it's forced the FIA to make legislate
change. (It also gives sore losers something to blame when their heros get
less than heroic results.)
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
s***@yahoo.com
2017-08-30 11:32:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Geoff
Post by Alan Baker
Post by .
Post by John
And F1 has oil consumption specs why?
Only spurious engineers and other fools in the manner of edmund
are of the brain dead belief that the *burning* of the lubricating
oil used in spark ignition, internal combustion, gasoline engines
results in either power or mileage benefits.
Does burning oil not turn chemical energy into heat?
Are F1 cars not limited in the fuel (gasoline) flow by the current rules?
If there was an additional fluid they could add to that flow, why would
it not create additional power?
No. It would likely reduce the effective octane of the fuel.
"Add to the flow", as in some cunning injector valve into the cylinder
or fuel supply, as opposed to consumption via piston rings as part of
the normal cylinder lubrication process ?
geoff
They are using the oil when off throttle when petrol is normally used but wasted because performance is not important in those situations. It helps create fake fuel efficiency numbers in the race sensors to get around FIA checks (every off throttle moment oil is used while all other teams only burn a bit of petrol) and particularly in qualifying when they can far exceed the 100 kg/h limit.
Bigbird
2017-08-30 18:13:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Post by Geoff
Post by Alan Baker
Post by .
Post by John
And F1 has oil consumption specs why?
Only spurious engineers and other fools in the manner of edmund
are of the brain dead belief that the burning of the lubricating
oil used in spark ignition, internal combustion, gasoline engines
results in either power or mileage benefits.
Does burning oil not turn chemical energy into heat?
Are F1 cars not limited in the fuel (gasoline) flow by the
current rules?
If there was an additional fluid they could add to that flow, why
would it not create additional power?
No. It would likely reduce the effective octane of the fuel.
"Add to the flow", as in some cunning injector valve into the
cylinder or fuel supply, as opposed to consumption via piston rings
as part of the normal cylinder lubrication process ?
geoff
They are using the oil when off throttle when petrol is normally used
but wasted because performance is not important in those situations.
It helps create fake fuel efficiency numbers in the race sensors to
get around FIA checks (every off throttle moment oil is used while
all other teams only burn a bit of petrol) and particularly in
qualifying when they can far exceed the 100 kg/h limit.
You can't help but admire such cleverness, can you.
t***@gmail.com
2017-08-30 18:26:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bigbird
You can't help but admire such cleverness, can you.
Fuck off, useless
.
2017-08-31 13:43:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by s***@yahoo.com
They are using the oil when off throttle when petrol is normally used but wasted because performance is not important in those situations.
Even your fuel injected, daily driver passenger car turns
off the injectors during off throttle, you mental midget.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
It helps create fake fuel efficiency numbers in the race sensors
There are no fuel efficiency sensors, mouth-breather.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
to get around FIA checks
There are no FIA fuel efficiency checks, knuckle-dragger.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
(every off throttle moment oil is used while all other teams only burn a bit of petrol)
No they don't.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
and particularly in qualifying when they can far exceed the 100 kg/h limit.
Complete and total bullshit, just like everything else you've ever posted.

All anyone need do is supply so much as a *SINGLE* example
anywhere where burning of the lubricating oil used in spark ignition,
internal combustion, gasoline engines results in power, efficiency or
mileage benefit. Oil *could* be sprayed in the combustion chamber
to inhibit pre-ignition/detonation (as could water) but wouldn't and
couldn't directly contribute to any of the above stated benefits.
--
My mirror continues its finite yet unbounded journey.
Alan Baker
2017-08-31 16:08:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by .
Post by s***@yahoo.com
They are using the oil when off throttle when petrol is normally used
but wasted because performance is not important in those situations.
Even your fuel injected, daily driver passenger car turns
off the injectors during off throttle, you mental midget.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
It helps create fake fuel efficiency numbers in the race sensors
There are no fuel efficiency sensors, mouth-breather.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
to get around FIA checks
There are no FIA fuel efficiency checks, knuckle-dragger.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
(every off throttle moment oil is used while all other teams only burn a bit of petrol)
No they don't.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
and particularly in qualifying when they can far exceed the 100 kg/h limit.
Complete and total bullshit, just like everything else you've ever posted.
All anyone need do is supply so much as a *SINGLE* example
anywhere where burning of the lubricating oil used in spark ignition,
internal combustion, gasoline engines results in power, efficiency or
mileage benefit. Oil *could* be sprayed in the combustion chamber
to inhibit pre-ignition/detonation (as could water) but wouldn't and
couldn't directly contribute to any of the above stated benefits.
Where do you get this ridiculous idea that someone when oil burns it
produces no energy? The energy density of oil is nearly the same as it
is for gasoline.

Ar
2017-08-29 22:32:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by .
Post by John
And F1 has oil consumption specs why?
Only spurious engineers and other fools in the manner of edmund
are of the brain dead belief that the *burning* of the lubricating
oil used in spark ignition, internal combustion, gasoline engines
results in either power or mileage benefits.
Burning your lubricant oil fouls up the spark plugs / reduces their
efficiency.
Alan Baker
2017-08-30 00:55:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ar
Post by .
Post by John
And F1 has oil consumption specs why?
Only spurious engineers and other fools in the manner of edmund
are of the brain dead belief that the *burning* of the lubricating
oil used in spark ignition, internal combustion, gasoline engines
results in either power or mileage benefits.
Burning your lubricant oil fouls up the spark plugs / reduces their
efficiency.
No. Burning OUR lubricant oil in an engine not designed to burn oil does
so. That's hardly proof that the engineers of F1 engines can't find a
way to burn it successfully.
~misfit~
2017-08-30 02:17:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ar
Post by .
Post by John
And F1 has oil consumption specs why?
Only spurious engineers and other fools in the manner of edmund
are of the brain dead belief that the *burning* of the lubricating
oil used in spark ignition, internal combustion, gasoline engines
results in either power or mileage benefits.
Burning your lubricant oil fouls up the spark plugs / reduces their
efficiency.
Not so much over a few hundred kilometers.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
Alan Baker
2017-08-30 02:22:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Ar
Post by .
Post by John
And F1 has oil consumption specs why?
Only spurious engineers and other fools in the manner of edmund
are of the brain dead belief that the *burning* of the lubricating
oil used in spark ignition, internal combustion, gasoline engines
results in either power or mileage benefits.
Burning your lubricant oil fouls up the spark plugs / reduces their
efficiency.
Not so much over a few hundred kilometers.
And not so much when you've planned for such burning.
~misfit~
2017-08-30 02:18:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John
And F1 has oil consumption specs why?
Because certain team/s made enquires about the subject to the FIA who then
needed to rule on the matter.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
John
2017-08-30 18:09:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
Post by John
And F1 has oil consumption specs why?
Because certain team/s made enquires about the subject to the FIA who then
needed to rule on the matter.
--
Shaun.
"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
And the ruling could have read: Burn as much or as little oil as you want.
~misfit~
2017-08-31 00:01:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John
Post by ~misfit~
Post by John
And F1 has oil consumption specs why?
Because certain team/s made enquires about the subject to the FIA
who then needed to rule on the matter.
--
Shaun.
"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief
has a cozy little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
And the ruling could have read: Burn as much or as little oil as you want.
It could - as the fuel could read burn as much or little as you want.

While not fuel per se oil can add to the power of an ICE in certain
conditions and so if you're going to legislate how much fuel you're allowed
to burn then you really need to legislate other potential sources of power.

You get that right?
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
Bobster
2017-08-31 07:50:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John
Post by ~misfit~
Post by John
And F1 has oil consumption specs why?
Because certain team/s made enquires about the subject to the FIA who then
needed to rule on the matter.
--
Shaun.
"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
And the ruling could have read: Burn as much or as little oil as you want.
What's "oil"?

There is a definition of fuel in the rules. The ingredients must have certain characteristics. There isn't a definition for oil. So suppose that whatever goes into the oil tank lubricates, yes, but also contains stuff that can burn or change the way that the fuel burns.

Now, if you were going to take advantage of that for a whole race, you'd get through a lot of "oil" and there'd be a weight penalty. But maybe you want to use it just in short bursts. Say to get an extra bit of power in qualifying, or to get a momentary boost during the race when it's really, really needed.
geoff
2017-08-29 20:11:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by s***@yahoo.com
http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opinion/f1/has-mercedes-beaten-fias-oil-burning-rule-tweak
3 years and counting. How many races would Hamilton have won since 2014 without oil burning. ZERO. Mercedes gave up a new spec ICE to be introduced in Singapore because it is not as big of a gain compared to oil buring. They could not modify their engine which since 2014 was designed around oil burning.
From now until the end of the season only Mercedes will be allowed to burn 33% more oil than every other team on the grid.
Biggest cheats in F1 history who won races due to illegal car technicalities.
1. L. Hamiton (2014-2017)
huge gap
2. M Schumacher (1994).
Yeah the design the cars eh.

geoff
Bobster
2017-08-30 03:01:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by s***@yahoo.com
http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opinion/f1/has-mercedes-beaten-fias-oil-burning-rule-tweak
3 years and counting. How many races would Hamilton have won since 2014 without oil burning. ZERO. Mercedes gave up a new spec ICE to be introduced in Singapore because it is not as big of a gain compared to oil buring. They could not modify their engine which since 2014 was designed around oil burning.
From now until the end of the season only Mercedes will be allowed to burn 33% more oil than every other team on the grid.
Biggest cheats in F1 history who won races due to illegal car technicalities.
They did?

They may have taken advantage of a loop hole in the rules, but they'd not be the first F1 team to do that.

Do you understand the idea that laws or rules don't get change retrospectively? There are now restrictions on oil use, with more to come in 2018. As long as Merc did not transgress the regulations in real time the cars are legal.
Sir Tim
2017-08-30 07:47:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bobster
Post by s***@yahoo.com
http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opinion/f1/has-mercedes-beaten-fias-oil-burning-rule-tweak
3 years and counting. How many races would Hamilton have won since 2014
without oil burning. ZERO. Mercedes gave up a new spec ICE to be
introduced in Singapore because it is not as big of a gain compared to
oil buring. They could not modify their engine which since 2014 was
designed around oil burning.
From now until the end of the season only Mercedes will be allowed to
burn 33% more oil than every other team on the grid.
Biggest cheats in F1 history who won races due to illegal car technicalities.
They did?
They may have taken advantage of a loop hole in the rules, but they'd not
be the first F1 team to do that.
Exactly, they've just been cleverer than other teams. I mean it's not like
they were knowingly using an illegal floor is it?
--
Sir Tim
~misfit~
2017-08-30 12:55:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sir Tim
Post by Bobster
Post by s***@yahoo.com
http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opinion/f1/has-mercedes-beaten-fias-oil-burning-rule-tweak
3 years and counting. How many races would Hamilton have won since
2014 without oil burning. ZERO. Mercedes gave up a new spec ICE to
be
introduced in Singapore because it is not as big of a gain compared to
oil buring. They could not modify their engine which since 2014 was
designed around oil burning.
From now until the end of the season only Mercedes will be allowed to
burn 33% more oil than every other team on the grid.
Biggest cheats in F1 history who won races due to illegal car
technicalities. They did?
They may have taken advantage of a loop hole in the rules, but
they'd not be the first F1 team to do that.
Exactly, they've just been cleverer than other teams. I mean it's not
like they were knowingly using an illegal floor is it?
It was known for a while amongst the teams that new ICEs introduced from
Monza weekend onwards would have to meet the new oil use regulations.
Ferrari (and a few others) misread it and thought the ruling applied to all
new ICes after the summer break and got very annoyed when they found out
they were wrong and Mercedes had escaped the deadline by a week.

It's just sour grapes. They were both using a similar amount of oil
previously and Ferrari missed the chance to get a jump on the deadline
themselves and so now have to meet the new rules. (Being that the ICE must
use a maximum of 0.9l / 100km instead of 1.2l / 100 km previously.)

The main reason Mercedes took the route they did is because the rule applies
to customer ICEs as well and they have more of those than Ferrari do (at
least 2017 spec PUs). If they'd taken a new ICE later this season them
they'd have to also ensure all of their customer teams had the same new spec
ICE which is next to impossible for them to do. (Or something...)
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
Loading...