The Incredible Evolution of Formula 1 Horsepower | Track Evolution

[@Driver61]

We love a good graph, here at Driver61! What should we plot next? Don't forget to subscribe! We'd love to hit that big 700k before the end of the year!

[@oncameramastery]

How about a graph of average race overtakes throughout the years? 🤔🏎️

[@derTommy]

I would be very interested in a detailed explanation what engineers can read from telemetry data and how they can you use it to improve during a weekend. A lot of plot potential I think.

[@oncameramastery]

@@importanttingwei7747 2021 formula 1 technical regs article 5.1.9 defines the valve spec, but there is no definition for the valve closure mechanism so teams are free to use pneumatic valve springs.

[@ruan13o]

Cornering speeds would be really interesting. Either compare over time like this video or against other race series.

[@dani02_mmd]

Fastest series (lap times) outside of F1 over the years

[@LatinoGamer96]

Nice to finally see the man behind the voice, nice one Callum !

[@AbdulAhad-oq6lz]

somehow scott always manages to put in a line about him driving formula 1 cars

[@franzlemar2250]

Deserved flex imo

[@elvincitore1512]

You would be flexing too if you drove an F1 car .

[@Rentta]

@@elvincitore1512 That's something anyone can do here in Finland as long as you have driving license and 1800€ burning a hole in your pocket.

[@elvincitore1512]

@@Rentta Well , Finland is fucking awesome , in my country , there isn't even a national karting championship .

[@james-om8le]

Anyone can do it you can pay to drive and old Jordan in the uk

[@EyesOfByes]

Imagine a qualifying lap with unrestricted engine/fuel setup with todays F1 cars 😳 2000bhp?

[@gunsandcommissions]

Probably pretty easily 2k.

[@FRONTI3R_yt]

It might launch the driver to the air if the brakes are too hard…

[@AnIdiotAboard_]

These engine will explode in UNRESTRICTED mode, they wouldn't even make it to T1, as soon as the driver jumped on the gas it would rip itself apart. There designed to produce the roughly 1250 bhp no more and no less. A simple 100 Bhp upgrade would destroy the gearbox, the diffs, the shafts, probably break a crank shaft or 2. People obsession with unrestricted is beyond me, there not designed to un-restricted regulations, there designed to do there 6 races and be done. Please stop with this imagine that or imagine this, you'll never see it.

[@Donnerwamp]

@@AnIdiotAboard_ My guess is that having unrestricted qualifying means they design the car for qualifying and just tune the engine down to race spec, similar to how they did it in the 80s. Or some teams will keep running like they do now and try to win in the race as they might squeeze some weight out that helps them in the race. It'd be interesting for sure, but I doubt it'll be possible with the current safety dogma.

[@AnIdiotAboard_]

@@Donnerwamp You cant just shove more fuel and air thru these engines, they will simply break. In QUALLY mode, its maximum power and maximum deployment, the engines couldn't even handle unrestricted hybrid systems, let the harvest and use energy as they see fit they still explode, break gearbox;s etc, they ain't designed for it

[@devtrivedi4766]

* can only use 3 engines * Bottas : Hold my engines

[@anhuman7022]

Merc: here you go bottas, we want you to finish behind Norris so here is another engine

[@Phenom98]

I love how the excess of the 80s extends to almost all aspects of culture. 1400hp in 1984? Damn! No wonder my dad says back in those days the year 2000 seemed like so far away, futuristic and exciting. Who knew what was gonna happen if things were progressing at that rate?

[@crusherbmx]

Your dad's description is bang on! We aren't actually in awe of current technology, we're disappointed in it.

[@geminiamocassanelli6425]

Che cazeda

[@eoinoconnell185]

The hp was so extreme that taking a corner at high speed could result in the driver going unconscious (extreme downforce aerodynamics were also being experimented with). It was an era where drivers were getting killed every race. Great TV, but not something we need to return to.

[@BigBird629]

im not nostradamus but i know, a LOT more drivers wouldve died

[@ryanjayi.villorente4642]

Niki Lauda to his mechanic : "Are you using magnesium parts?".... The rest is history.

[@wahyudyatmika5119]

@Scom Tott Thirty years ago, Niki Lauda told us ‘take a monkey, place him into the cockpit and he is able to drive the car.’

[@gokhansenaolivia]

yeah Magnesium just like 1955 Le Mans

[@nepicness]

I like how they’re making the F1 cars more fuel efficient when it takes 5 team semi trucks, planes, and 20+ full time on track staff to keep it running, but all that matters is that the race car uses a lil less fuel.

[@enyaliosares4301]

I hope you realise how dumb this statement is. Because F1 is a sport yes. Entertainment yes. But above all that it’s the largest fast testing ground for everything car related and beyond (see covid19 respirator thing) so yes, the cars are going the be more efficient and that eventually translates to real life.

[@nepicness]

@@enyaliosares4301 I do see that. I've heard that about many things including magnetic suspension that was introduced in F1 which didn't go mainstream, though there were plenty of other things that did. It doesn't seem right that they are limiting it to only V6TH vehicles. Why not V10, v12, v8, I4, I6 with turbo or not and hybrid or not on any one of those configurations. They could all have the same fuel or air restrictions. I would rather see the F1 be the fastest cars in the world than the fastest green cars in the world. If hybrid is faster than by all means use it, but if it's not, then they shouldn't be forced to use it. But right now they aren't given a choice.

[@Donterrific]

@@enyaliosares4301 Bro its racing who the fuck cares about fuel efficiency

[@thatcher9690]

@@Donterrific you are not allowed to fill up during the race so they need to have the engines fuel efficient enough to last the whole race

[@NazriB]

Lies again? Gamble Bet

[@astroch]

Wait, i always thought it was only Scott. So this was never your voice? For a full minute i thought it was Scott dub over this guy's image

[@unthenner5519]

Yeah what the fuck. I thought he'd had a stroke or something.

[@unthenner5519]

So there's been two people with the exact same voice all along? And they're not even related? How…? What!?

[@Joe-wj7ku]

@@unthenner5519 brothers?

[@unthenner5519]

@@Joe-wj7ku Not even related. Nope they're not brothers, their surnames are different.

[@olliebonugli8881]

Un Thenner They don’t sound alike though?

[@oncameramastery]

425bhp in a 50s car must have been terrifying!

[@Jejking]

It must have been indeed! Also don't forget about the surroundings and at times the terrible state the tracks were in, including haystacks as barriers. Absolutely mental.

[@oncameramastery]

@@Jejking totally mad... love it! 😊

[@callmeshaggy5166]

The chassis was basically a bathtub in both weight and safety

[@bapr3887]

@@oncameramastery 30s racing cars from Audi and Mercedes have almost 650bhp, so 450bhp 20 years later is mediocre. Audi has supercharged V16 engine in their mid engined grand prix car. This must have been terrifying.

[@hmdwgf]

At Reims-Gueux in France, a circuit made up of straights the Alfas were doing 200 mph on closed-off public roads only 7 m (22 feet) wide. And on top of that- there were no seatbelts, the drivers didn’t wear helmets, and there was no protective bodywork on either side of where the driver sat, who had the driveshaft spinning between their legs, with a manual gearbox that had a selector that was backwards and upside down from a normal one! (Manual gearboxes today are like this: 1 3 5 2 4 6 And the Alfa’s was like this: 4 2 3 1 Yeah. And the gas pedal was on the left ahe clutch on the right.)

[@petarkostesic8570]

well the first few seconds were a proper WHAAAT? moment, bit by the end of the video you were natural to me in this role as Scott. good job!!

[@josedacunhafilho]

I had the good fortune to see the Brabham BT 52 and 53 racing in 5 races between 1983 and 1984, and on qualifier mode the BMW engine was a monster. It blew thundrous balls of fire through its pipe, and everyone was in awe after it drove by on a hot lap. It was incredible to consider all that power came from a stock 4 cylinder block with 1,500 cc.

[@y_fam_goeglyd]

Lovely to meet you, Callum! A fascinating look into the power of these beasts. It has always amazed me that with such "small" engines, so much HP is generated. Today's engines' figures are mind blowing!

[@alexjenner1108]

3:50 "For the rest of the '50s the teams settled on either inline 4s and 6s". This ignores significant race winners like the Mercedes-Benz W196 (straight-8), the Lancia/Ferrari D50 (v8) and later in the decade, the Ferrari 246 F1 with the first championship winning V6 engine in formula one (1958 drivers championship for Mike Hawthorn).

[@kruzihbv]

7:55 pneumatic valve springs still use cams, just instead of a metal spring they use air pressure to reseat the valves, that's why rpm went so nuts so quickly - something to do with resonant frequencies being set up inside the spring and breaking it, dropping the valve :)

[@Eden-NoEye]

Thank you I was looking for that, that part of the video is extremely misleading.

[@zipsuma6971]

Not the first time he says misleading and wrong things

[@alexjenner1108]

Thank you. People don't seem to get that one of the big limitations back then, was closing the valves in a high revving engine. Cams worked fine for opening them, but closing valves was the problem. Perhaps you can use smaller lighter valves, but that means less power unless you have more valves. There is a reason why the teams went from v12 to v10. With pneumatic systems closing valves at high rpm, maybe you don't need the extra size and weight of the v12 any more and a v10 with slightly larger valves (but less of them) becomes a better option.

[@t3h51d3w1nd3r]

The H16 isn't essentially two V8s its two flat 8s. I love the way the English media has digs at Ferrari for getting round the fuel flow limit but never say anything about Mercedes burning oil or having dimpled wheels that act as an aerodynamic device.

[@Matty.Hill_87]

2 v8s would have been closer to a radial engine

[@widodoakrom3938]

Interesting

[@jeffreytam7684]

Announcing power figures also would allow other teams to compare aero packages. A lot of the back and forth with Merc and Redbull this season seems to be based off of comparatively different wing levels and downforce setups. If either engine manufacturer published credible power numbers it would allow the other team to get a better idea of drag amounts on the other car, given its power and top speed.

[@diggernator]

Great video - my understanding (from an old Shell engineer that I worked with) was that Shell/BMW collaborated with the use of an old German aviation fuel recipe from WWII that boosted the M12's HP from around the 1,000 hp mark to over 1,400 with the real figure never disclosed

[@DonLee1980]

the thing is, very few people understand that engines are rated at max power, but say little about the power curve band. Current F1 engines are programmed to get maximum power given a certain fuel flow, inspite of whether the engine is reving at 12k, or 9k. meanwhile an old traditional turbo engine could get 1400hp, but only a small proportion of the time when it's rowing thru its gears.

[@BAndersen-ee1xy]

I would really like to see the evolution of car weight and of power to weight ratio. Also, how did the power of the 3.0 Cosworth V8 evolve. I would love to hear from someone who may have been involved in the development.

[@lucylovitt9583]

Keith!

[@bloqk16]

Having lived in that era when the Cosworth DFV debuted, and this is only based on what the print media back in the 1960s reported on, the Cosworth 3 liter DFV came from the development of the 1.5 liter, four-cylinder, race engine Cosworth designed and made for F2 cars in 1966. One of the features that made the DFV prominent with its power was from the angle of the engine's intake and exhaust valves, as it elevated the performance of the combustion chamber to a higher level than other engines of similar size, which equated to high horsepower; or in international circles, high kW for a 3 liter V8 engine. I also read that the DFV engine's fuel injection system was mechanically timed, as opposed to free-flowing, which may have contributed to the engine's robust performance. Again, the above was from recollections of the print media of the era. I say that because of the revelations I've read and heard about, in the past decade on the behind-the-scenes goings-on in motorsports in the 1960s, has brought to light many things that were kept quiet back then.

[@nicholasweiss4662]

One Question came to mind when you told about the turbine powered car. How exactly do you calculate the displacement of a Motor that has no Piszons? Were they limited to a 3.5L burn chamber instead, or did they just simply get around the displacement rule because technically the Engine had zero displacement in the traditional sense and was thus below 3.5L?

[@funkyuk1]

Nice to see you Callum. You present superbly. Top work fella 👍🏼

[@Harry-rj6kh]

The racing in F 1 in the early 60s was just as exciting when Cosworth was only pumping out around 200 HP as it was in the 80s when the engines were producing 900 or more. The days of the Lotus and the sharknose and the Vanwalls were numero uno.

[@pauloaz496]

9:00 a wild GIGARENAULT appears

[@ShionShinigami]

Renault claimed those numbers last year, not 2014. Edit: the engines used from 1966 onwards had 3 liters, not 3.5 liters. Edit 2: the rev limit of the 2.4 liter engines was introduced in 2007. In 2006 there was no rev limit. Mercedes claimed to have the highest reving engine in 2006 with 20232 revs per minute.

[@thegregdavieschannel]

Was it Merc or cosworth who claimed the highest rpm? From memory I thought it was cosworth although I could be wrong. If your looking for a real blast from the past, Honda were building 50cc race engines that could reach 22k rpm with conventional valve springs.

[@hetspookjee]

Great video and love to see more videos done by you. Very happy to see the growth of the channel into a wider format. If I could coin a topic I'd be curious to see how brakes have developed over time. There are so many variations, and for some reason the latest cars - despite their weight - are able to reach truly astonishing figures in decelleration. In any case, I'll stay tuned for more. Thank you Callum.

[@killerful]

Good job Callum! Nice video.

[@jzxtrd337]

Coolest, most amazing and interesting engine F1 ever produced was the BRM V16, 1.5L - 400-600hp, thing sound phenomenal and still has a impressive power figure even for today's standards.

[@hexgraphica]

Power alone doesn't mean that much, as in the 70s they almost had 1 hp for every kilo (530\600). You'd need to calculate the power to weight ratio, but instead of power you put sort of a work done by the engine throughout the usable power band, so that a car that comes alive 2000rpm before it dies will result slower than a car with same peak power but a broader power band.

[@anggabudi5619]

i play in basic simulator rfactor, 1980 car great in acceleration and top speed, but bad at overall cornering speed/stability compared than 2005 F1 for example. maybe tires and brake is different technology , but if we put same tech in brake and tires, 1980 car is beast. Or 2021 car just run it in low fuel tank, you will get same equivalent result. what bad in current gen car f1 is fuel weight (because no refueling), the car bigger and lazy because power to weight ratio(just like you mention)

[@The52car]

Weight by year would be an interesting graph as well. I suppose we could also deduce by looking at the 'lap time by year' chart they did in another video.

[@antonioakiki3716]

Nothing a cvt cant fix

[@jackiecs8190]

Power to weight is important for acceleration, powering out of a corner and early on straights. Later on the straight, however, as the car reaches closer to its top speed, weight plays less of a factor and it’s the ratio of power to drag that dominates.

[@Peasmouldia]

We now need a video on the evolution of the fuel that went along with all this. Those turbos were running on thinned down hairspray! You had to be there for the smell of those motors. Best sounding motor of all was the Renault V10. Back in the 90s teams would test for the 'Hock near my home at Keevil airfield. As soon as they fired up a motor, people who recognized that distinctive wail would be drawn there from literally miles around. Happy days.. Nice video, Ta.

[@rickcrane6123]

The engine spec for 1966 was raised to 3.0 liters and I think later (1980's) was raised to 3.5 for non turbo engines.

[@kipsned]

Brilliant set of videos! Thank you

[@johnjones928]

1966 saw a 3.0 L max normally aspirated, (not 3.5) 1.5 max supercharged. and the H16 was two FLAT 8's stacked one on the other.

[@tomnewham1269]

My favourite F1 engine from the 60’s would have to be the Repco V8. It was designed and built in Australia at the request of Jack Brabham and he won a World Championship using that engine.

[@mirrorblue100]

Black Jack!

[@colehartel7206]

It was a modified Oldsmobile engine from the US, so only partly designed in Australia. Still, it was impressive how they managed to get the jump on all their competitors when the sport went back to 3.0L engines, and won two championships with it before the Ford-Cosworth DFV came along and changed everything.

[@jamesbarisitz4794]

Terrific video man! Some of those engines deserve a standalone story. 👍

[@jerryj.2346]

Love the analysis and story telling. What a journey through time

[@jchamber73]

Excellent video. And thanks for turning me on to the huge Rhodia dot grid notebook.

[@TheColinChapman]

8:02 „....than they could do with a traditional cam system.“ All formula one cars with piston engines had and have cam systems, only the valve springs were and are pneumatic.

[@runescapebanker]

These timeline vids are perfect, I will watch more,, thanks!

[@jaydawson7305]

Love your work mate. High quality and informative content

[@BobSaint]

80s are the last crazy years of motorsport. 1500+ HP in F1, and that off-road lunacy called the Group B.

[@NLBassist]

Great vid and a great job, Callum!

[@patrickcannady2066]

That Brabham BT52 has to be one of my favorite F1 cars ever

[@dfekety]

Hey Callum! Good to see you in a video, and hope you keep up the good work dude!

[@chillikoala]

Thanks for the video - it was very interesting. A critical piece of information missing that led to the ban of turbos in 1989, was political influence from the ever growing concerns of competitors in the mid-80s - particularly from Ferrari - that they couldn't compete with Honda's engines. Honda demonstrated that theirs was the engine to have across many teams. This influenced restrictions to be put in-place for turbo-charged engines, including reduced boost pressure (as you mention) and the reduced size of fuel tanks. After Honda produced an even more powerful engine in the FW11, despite these restrictions, the FIA imposed further boost and fuel tank size restrictions for 1988 to further disadvantage the use of turbo engines. Not only did Honda produce a more powerful and reliable engine than its competitors, but crucially, it was more fuel efficient and this was key to the dominance of the McLaren Honda MP4/4. This was the final nail in the coffin and turbos were banned for 1989, as we all know.

[@manueldelbrouck1462]

I think there is a small error in your description of the engine from the '60 and '70s, the maximum displacement was 3.0L, and not 3.5L as mentioned. The 3.5L came later...

[@speeder-scout4541]

Good job, Callum, well done. 👍

[@Tymonello]

thank you for bringing us so much of F1 history!

[@Fin_nish_usr]

Great job, Callum.

[@geniegb]

Good start there. Keep up, mate!

[@ATLfletch]

Well, I was wondering for a while who the hell I was watching but I'm glad you finally introduced yourself at the end. Nevertheless, a very good informative and enjoyable breakdown of the topic. This has become one of my favorite race channels and I think your analysis and explanations of the science and racecraft are top-notch.

[@danielbermingrud3655]

Hey! Great voice, great video, hope to see more "from you" :)

[@oncameramastery]

Great vid BTW, it's fascinating to see each era's progression!

[@owensaucyn5237]

I believe 1966 was the advent of 3 liter engines, not 3.5l.

[@Gizfreek]

I simply love this format, your videos with all the details and technical knowledge are absolutely fantastic!

[@bobbygray2566]

Great video Callum. :)

[@Traah221]

Wait, a LIMIT of 4 Bar (58 PSI) of boost? LIMIT?! In 1987? Sweet mother of mercy those engines were run on the ragged edge of failure.

[@absolutdani]

Wtf I thought I clicked on another creator! Great video! See you around here Callum!

[@realkilju]

Nothing in the universe will ever beat the v10's sound

[@Dimpet-xw9gg]

FACTS

[@alexjenner1108]

3:15 "this was because turbos were banned". no one was using turbos in formula one or any other form of road racing back in the early 1950's and it would have been superchargers in the Tipo 158/159 Alfa Romeo and similar cars. The regulations might have used the words "forced induction" which covers both.

[@RomanShopa]

The graph should start from 1946, not 1950. That was the year the first F1 race was held.

[@jk844100]

Yes but 1950 was the first world championship. For most that’s where F1 started on it’s road to what it is now.

[@flavioc5389]

That Nelson Piquet’s Brabham BMW is not only super powerful but also the most beautiful F1 car of all times.

[@marcusfranconium3392]

Its kind of scary that the early cars had actualy quite some horse power for their day but the cars where fire bombs on wheels with in the center a driver .

[@GrandPrixYannick]

Really interesting subject, great video. Love to see something like this but in terms of recorded top speed each year.

[@dy7296]

7:57 Uhm... actually pneumatic valves still use cams and camshafts the only difference is that "normal" valvetrain systems use springs to close the valves. Using springs for closing valves are cheap and reliable, but they suffer a problem called valve floating, where the springs cannot close the valve fast enough under very high revs. Pneumatic valves simply used gas-filled pressurized cylinders to close the valves instead.

[@littlenismo]

If you ever needed proof the 80s was actually the best decade in human history...

[@mansikkamies9146]

Coffins on wheels haha

[@blxtothis]

.“Aerospace engines in the war”, What, they were using V1 Pulse-jet and V2 Rocket engines?

[@Leynad778]

6:35 This doesn't seem fully correct. They had two sets of qualifying tyres that could do up to 2 laps full speed, so the engine had to last fast 4 laps. Otherwise the two sets of tyres doesn't make sense😉 And the 1500 hp is probably a myth while the true figures were more close to 1200 hp according to a german F1-engineer. Refueling was prohibited during the race and so the real figures were rather lower, more like 600 hp to even have a chance to see the chequered flag.

[@lucylovitt9583]

I'm so old I recall being at Silverstone on the first Thursday session with that Renault tea pot.

[@mitchrich6]

Nice idea on the split turbo.

[@ivanjulian2532]

Some factually incorrect statements in this video unfortunately. Eg; at 4:30 the engine capacity introduced in 1966 was 3.0 litres, not 3.5 litres. The year 1989 is when the 3.5 litre formula was introduced. Also, the massive horsepower wars of 1986 did NOT coincide with the dangers of ground effects. Cars with ground effect bottoms were banned at the end of 1982. In 1983 the only way to get downforce was to use massive wings and THAT is why the massive horsepower war came into play. More horsepower meant bigger wings.

[@ivanjulian2532]

Also, the pneumatic valve return system was innovated by Renault not in 1991 onwards.... it was first introduced by Renault in the Senna Lotus Renault of 1986 when the engines were still 1.5L turbos. And they're not actuated pneumatically, they still use cam shafts and cam lobes. They use pneumatic pressure instead of springs to return the valves, which in turn eliminates valve bounce. Renault sat out 1987-1988 and then they introduced their famous normally aspirated V10 in 1989.

[@amaccama3267]

G'day nice video dude.

[@Frostfly]

I would LOVE to see a series using 750cc engines with superchargers.

[@andrewrichardson4715]

The BMW engine pictured at 7:00 is in the BMW Museum in München, while not disputing the commentary as the guidance is roughly accurate, the associated plaque that is at the bottom right hand side of the picture reads that when introduced in 1981 it was capable of 630-790 BHP @ 11,000 RPM. From intensive development in the following years culminating in the 1985 performance of: 1100 BHP at 4,4 Bar boost strictly for short periods of time only.

[@robertpsotka3525]

Very informative. Go Max

[@pjludda4323]

You know what?... I REALLY wished F1 went back to almost a WEC kind of rules for it's engines. Give a displacement and let the teams choose a form of energy recovery, maybe set a max HP figure, but have them go ham with it... Now THAT'S actual innovation!

[@RallyNavigatorOnline]

Good job new guy!

[@dylansmit3883]

The switch in 1966 was from 1.5 to 3.0L, not 3.5. The 3.5L formula wasn't introduced until 1987 and lasted until 1995. Strange how basic stuff like this is overlooked.

[@KayJblue]

Your voices sound the same lol, I was shocked when it switched and it wasn’t Mr. Mansell.

[@bloqk16]

Wait a minute!! At @4:34 in this video, in 1966 the engine displacement was *3 LITERS,* not 3.5. One of the reasons for the raise of engine displacement was that the sports cars of that era, such as the FIA Group 6 sports cars of Ferrari and Fords, were getting faster than the F1 open wheel racers with the 1.5 liter displacement engines; where up to that time, F1 prided itself with being the top-tiered international race series . . . but to have those cars lapping slower than sports cars? Unthinkable!

[@sultanabran1]

for the turbo era, mercedes also had the pre ignition chamber in the ICE which all the other teams didn't have. hence their significant advantage in 2014 and following years. i heard from another f1 fan that bernie was behind that tech getting to the other teams so they can catch up.

[@davidjosh5640]

Hollister t-shirt really cements the euro vibes. Havent seen someone from california in one of those since ‘06

[@twilightsuzuka6252]

What about the BRM engine from the late 40s/early 50s that made 600 hp ?

[@wapartist]

The videos of that BMW Bennetton running literally look twitchy it is such a violent power delivery. Almost looks like an RC car

[@toddb930]

Nice description on the power progression in F1. I'm glad I listened to the end to learn that this wasn't Scott. 🤔 Had me fooled.

[@olliebonugli8881]

But he doesn’t look or sound like Scott though?

[@toddb930]

@@olliebonugli8881 I thought he sounded like Scott. 🤪

[@bloqk16]

The Lotus F1 turbine car spoken about @5:07, according to AUTOCAR magazine says otherwise, as that car made its F1 debut in 1971, yet, this YT video says 1967? I followed F1 racing in 1967, Lotus was nowhere near dabbling with a F1 turbine car, as they were busy with melding the Lotus 49 with the Cosworth DFV V8. Lotus did design and build the model 56 for Indy racing in 1968, but engine restrictions ruled it non-competitive for 1969 in Indy Car racing. A couple of years later Lotus came up with the model 56B for F1. Check it out for yourself online. I consider AUTOCAR magazine a credible source.

[@adriancox-thesantjordigolf3646]

Good Callum.

[@stevengao9568]

Changed people...

[@RSA169]

9:49 the other limit you should mention is the fuel flow rate limit, even though the ICE is allowed to reach 15k rpm, we never see it go above 12k due to the fuel flow rate limit.

[@that.guy11]

That and with the power/torque curves of the 1.6L hybrids, revving to 15k rpm would be pointless anyway

[@presspl4y]

Haidihooo Callum!

[@c10wiremantawwallace13]

F1 in the 1980 was the very best time to be watching the sport evolve as drivers struggled to cope with the power of qualifying engine tune with max power settings. It hooked me in a big way but today its just boring to watch the homologation rules they have now. All the cars look the same except pain jobs.

[@wernerheenop]

Great Video. But why miles and Horsepower? Why don't you use metric units in your videos?

[@andrewrichardson4715]

The British use both Imperial and Metric for various meausrement techniques. In these instances Imperial are used e.g. we use 60mph rather than 100kmh

[@walmartevample6438]

Great vid

[@toomanyuserids]

As I recall the BMW turbo fours used junkyard iron production blocks that were left outdoors to season (rust)

[@micahkiyimba8641]

More amazing content. Thanks

[@boncheung4315]

Anyone remembers the brm v16? 600hp from 1.5 liters

[@luiscarlosvieira3966]

...transition from 3.0 V10 to 2.4 V8 was in start of 2005 season (not 2006 or 2007) ... Alonso was champion in 2005 with a 2.4 V8... V10's kept running but with some restrictions.... Another issue... with time the BMW 4L is gaining power... back in the 80's, the max power was +1200HP (some would guess 1250) ... years later, some start saying 1300... and .... now is +1400... one day it will get 2000HP.... if cars had +1400HP, they would achieve +400 kM/H in qualification... and that never happened...not even close...

[@alfredlukasek8644]

Great work.

[@kevinhawthorne5257]

Good Video!

[@pabauza]

Ok, who is this man?