Renault reveals 2014 F1 engine

2014 F1 season

Posted on

| Written by

Renault 2014 F1 engine launchRenault have revealed the engine which their teams will use during the 2014 F1 season.

The 2014 season will see teams ditch the existing 2.4-litre V8 normally-aspirated engines for new 1.6-litre V6s with sophisticated energy recovery technologies.

President of Renault Sport F1 Jean-Michel Jalinier introduced the new power unit, named Energy F1: “From next year, one of greatest challenges in F1 will be to maximise energy efficiency and fuel economy while maintaining the power output and performance expected of F1 cars.”

“Renault has pioneered this technology in its road car engine range with the Energy series. Naming the power unit Energy F1 creates an unbroken range, from the Clio through to our competition department.”

Renault engines have powered the world championship-winners for the last three seasons. They will continue to supply reigning champions Red Bull next year as well as Toro Rosso.

The complete engine unit for 2014 will be heavier than the current design, as director of programmes and customer support Axel Plasse explained:

“The current V8 is 95kg, 100kg if you add the weight of the MGU. This increases to 120kg when you include the ancillary parts, such as the radiators and other cooling devices. With the 2014 power unit, the V6 turbocharged engine will be a minimum of 145kg, plus 35kg for the battery. At 180kg, this is a 80% increase over the current units, plus a further 20kg for the ancillaries such as the intercooler and other radiators.

In response to speculation over how the new engines will sound, Renault have released an audio clip of theirs being revved. Deputy managing director (technical) said the engine will retain an appealling sound: “The sound of the engine is the sum of three principal components, exhaust, intake and mechanical noise. On fired engines, exhaust noise dominates, but the other two sources are not trivial and would be loud if the exhaust noise was suppressed and contribute to the perceived sound of the engines in the car.

Renault Energy F1, 2014 F1 engine“All three sources are still present on the V6. At the outset, there is more energy in each combustion event but there are fewer cylinders turning at lower speed and both intake and exhaust noise are attenuated by the turbo. Overall, the sound pressure level (so the perceived volume) is lower and the nature of the sound reflects the new architecture.

“The car will still accelerate and decelerate rapidly, with instant gearshifts. The engines remain high revving, ultra high output competition engines. Fundamentally the engine noise will still be loud. It will wake you from sleep, and circuit neighbours will still complain. The engine noise is just a turbocharged noise rather than a normally aspirated noise: you can just hear the turbo when the driver lifts off the throttle and the engine speed drops.

“I am sure some people will be nostalgic for the sound of engines from previous eras, including the preceding V8, but the sound of the new generation power units is just different. It?s like asking whether you like Motorhead or AC/DC. Ultimately it is a matter of personal taste. Both in concert are still pretty loud.”

2013 and 2014 Renault F1 engines compared

RS27 (2013)Energy F1 (2014)
Displacement 2.4 litres 1.6 litres
Rev limit 18,000rpm 15,000rpm
Pressure charging Normally aspirated, pressure charging is forbidden Single turbocharger, unlimited boost pressure (typical maximum 3.5 bar abs due to fuel flow limit)
Fuel flow limit Unlimited, but typically 170kg/h 100kg/h (-40%)
Permitted Fuel quantity per race Unlimited, but typically 160kg 100kg (-35%)
Configuration 90??? V8 90??? V6
Number of cylinders 8 6
Bore Max 98mm 80mm
Stroke Not regulated 53mm
Crank height Min 58mm 90mm
Number of valves 4 per cylinder: 32 4 per cylinder: 24
Exhausts Twin exhaust outlets, one per bank of cylinders Single exhaust outlet, from turbine on car centre line
Fuel Indirect fuel injection Direct fuel injection
Number of power units permitted per driver per year 8 5
Energy recovery systems
MGU-K rpm Unlimited (38,000 rpm) Max 50,000 rpm
MGU-K power Max 60kW Max 120kW
Energy recovered by MGU-K Max 0.4 MJ/lap Max 2MJ/lap
Energy released by MGU-K Max 0.4MJ/lap Max 4MJ/lap
MGU-H rpm >100,000rpm
Energy recovered by MGU-H Unlimited (> 2MJ/lap)

2014 F1 season

Browse all 2014 F1 season articles

Image ?? Renault

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

94 comments on “Renault reveals 2014 F1 engine”

  1. Anyone wanna take an educated guess of the torque figure? I’d love to know!

    1. Back of an envelope calculation, around 350 N.m (260 ft.lbf). It doesn’t include the electric motor. It’s around 50-75 N.m (20%+) more than the current engine.

      1. oh god……can pirelli cheese tire withstand it??

  2. So when do we get to hear it?

      1. I hope it sounds better than that trackside. Every year the first car round gives me goosebumps, this won’t.

        1. I think it sounds better than I thought it was going to TBH. One thing is for sure, it will be certainly be interesting come testing 2014… just hope someone broadcasts something!

        2. Agreed. The clip sounded like a slow fat car farting on excess burritos and beer.

      2. That sounds nice maybe better

        1. f14ever&evenlonger
          22nd June 2013, 1:29

          here is a direct comparison between Renault’s 2013 and 2014 engine:

          so…any opinions?

      3. The link is not working, i hope they didnt remove that. I wanna hear the preview!

      4. seems the Renault website is crashing from attention, here’s a youtube link

      5. Aditya (@adityafakhri)
        21st June 2013, 16:41

        am I the only one who think that really like WRC car’s sound? :S

        1. The engines are very similar so I don’t see why not. I though I was going to like it bbut I don’t, it sounds too soft, it lacks that scream so common in the V10’s. Having criticized the engine sound I think there’s a lot more to listen when the cars are in motion, sounds always sound different in motion.

          1. I love it myself, of course, yeah, can’t make to many judgements just yet, but I think it’ll be good. :D

      6. Bah..sounds like Formula 3 or Formula Renault T_T

    1. Sexy unit. Sounds better than I thought but still doesn’t compare to a screaming v10 @ 20k rpm.

      1. Turbo is almost as big as the block. love it!

      2. No V10 engine in F1 ever reached 20.000 rpm. The V8 in 2006 did.

        1. /watch?v=nX2L-kS7ZL8

          1. Roald is right. V10s never reached 20k RPM, they reached maybe 19500 if we’re being nice whereas the V8s did rev over 20000 rpm in 2006. Cosworth had theirs at 20k rpm before 2006 started.

            All the video shows is a V10 engine… uploading the same video saying V10 25000 rpm does not make it so.

  3. Some notes and news: a colleague from BBC TopGear has already heard the Merc V6 sound, and said that nobody is going to be disappointing, but take into account that it will just be different.
    Some fundamental math about sound:

    A while ago I made an analysis from Vettel’s lap from Monza – the result was 1200 Hz at full rev (18,000 RPM). The math is simple: 18,0000 rpm are 300 rps per cylinder, with 4 stroke engine = 150 ignitions per second, x 8 cyl = 1200 ignitions per second (1200 Hz.) Note that both exhaust pipes’ sound interlace.
    The race revs that we’re likely to see are around 13,000 (my average guesstimate), which would mean, following the math from before = 750 Hz. That’s not really bad at all, still, it won’t be V12, we better forget about them being reintroduced.
    The 4 cylinder would have been awful, however.

    Full graph analysis with audio evidence is likely to be presented here, if there’s a room for that.

    1. Full graph analysis with audio evidence is likely to be presented here, if there’s a room for that.

      Would love to see that!

    2. @kiril-varbanov Thanks! One question though :why do you take the13k rpm figure? As you take the 18k for the V8 you should take the 15k for theV6, no?

      1. @montreal95 The rev limit is 15.000 rpm, but thanks to the fuel flow limit these engines won’t rev that high. They’ll be in the range between 10.000 and 12.500.

        1. Hopefully that is not true! The more revs the better sound!!

        2. @roald But isnt it possible to use the full 15k limit on a single qualifying lap for example? Please forgive my lack of technical understanding

          1. @montreal95

            Basically, what the fuel flow limit is, is regulating how much fuel can be sent into the engine at any one time.

            So, unfortunately, the teams won’t be able to exceed this limit, which means because they can’t put more fuel into the engine, they won’t be able to reach 15k revs.

            Of course I’m sure they’ll be an uproar when someone works out how to get around it.

          2. The maximum RPM possible has nothing to do with the fuel flow rate. An engine can still rev to 15,000rpm with much less than maximum fuel flow.

            RPM is directly related to road speed, as the engine is directly connected to the road when the car is in gear. If they didn’t use the top 2000rpm of the allowed rev range, they would be much slower on the straights. The top range of engines (particularly turbo engines) is where the most power is produced, so there is a major performance loss if they short shift at say 13,000pm.

            The fuel flow limit basically governs how much power the engine can produce. Fuel requires a certain proportion of air to be mixed with it in order to combust. The ratio of air to fuel is called “mix” by the teams, so when they adjust mix settings, they are adjusting this. A mixture with a higher than optimal proportion of air is “lean,” and a higher than optimal proportion of fuel is called “rich.” When teams are in fuel saving mode, they run the engine lean.

            With forced induction (turbos) the teams can control how much air is intaking. This is controlled by regulating the pressure the turbo produces, and is called boost. More pressure = more air = more fuel (to achieve a certain mix) = more power. Less pressure = less air = less fuel (otherwise the engine would be running rich) = less fuel consumption and less power.

            The reason he gave 13,000rpm as an average RPM is because the cars are not at their full RPM all the time. If the limit is 15000, and the next highest gear drops the engine speed back to 11000, the average of those two is 13000.
            You only ever hear an F1 engine close to the RPM limit for any significant length of time when they are in 7th gear approaching the end of a straight. When they hit 15,000rpm, a limiter cuts in and cuts ignition, which means no combustion, which makes no power, which makes the engine speed drop back to below the RPM limit. This flicks on and off much more rapidly than a road car, and it makes a somewhat ugly noise.

            /wall of text

  4. Finally we see what they are going to look like! It looks very mean! I likes!

  5. It’s always good to see F1 become a greener sport. :)

  6. One exhaust outlet might be a big challenge to get downforce from?

    1. Ryan Fairweather
      21st June 2013, 12:36

      That was the point in the single exhaust outlet. To stop the teams clawing down force from it. I think the rules even state the outlet must be behind the axle centreline to reduce any influence on the diffuser. It cannot influence the beam wing as it will no longer exist next year.

      1. Ah I see. Better late than never I guess and it would cost a lot, again, to develop into what it was like before if it had 2 outlets in similar positions. But it will no doubt be developed anyway.

    2. If I’m not mistaken the 2014 regs essentially make it impossible to use the exhaust as a means to generate downforce. At the very least they are aimed at making it impossible.

    3. Article 5.8.2 of the technical regulations states that there must be “no more than two outlets”
      So, that basically means two exhausts.

      They haven’t included the exhaust pipes in the photos, and as there is only one turbo permitted by regs, only one pipe can come from the turbine. It doesn’t rule out the exhaust being split and ejected on both sides of the car.

      1. I htink other rules forbid that an exhaust is split later. Not to mention that with the Turbo taking much of the energy out of the exhaust flow, there will be far less use from it, even if one would succeed to guide it towards the diffusor.

  7. That’s quite an impressive intercooler!

    The pictures show energy recovery components, I thought the teams were building their own. Do they have a choice to take or leave the engine manufacturers units?

  8. Having been born and raised during the V10 era, it’ll be hard to match that. I’ve heard that audio preview and… well… it’s different. Vacuum cleaner-like.

    At least Gran Turismo sounds will be accurate now… :P

    1. It sounds like a GP3 car. I am going to give the clip the benefit of the doubt with regards to the quality of the sound card on my laptop not reproducing the sounds correctly, but it’s a long way away from the “rumble” of a V8 engine :(

      1. @voisey V8s already sound rubbish for me.

        1. I agree. The V8’s are boring. The power delivery is too linear, and they sound so restricted with the 18000 rpm limit. At least the 2014 engines will be a handful to tame, considering the turbo torque. It will take a lot of throttle control, so in my opinion 2014 has the potential to show the talent of the drivers a lot more.

      2. I have a pretty decent sound system on my desktop. It does sound a lot closer to a road car. What I don’t like is that the pitch is sort of medium tone. It’s not the high-pitched scream of past F1 engines, nor is it the low-pitched roar of something like a muscle car.

        1. Well it’s hard to say what conditions we hear that engine in. To me it sounds like it’s just revving with no load. I think it will sound a lot more evil, when it is on the test bench, or in the car, and it’s ears are twisted to tha maximum ;)

  9. I like the way that sounds.

  10. Brilliant. “Green” technology delivering an 80% weight increase, at double the cost, and sounds like a vacuum cleaner f@rting. What’s not to like?

    1. That’s exactly what I thought.It won’t sound the same or interesting on track.We can only pray now that this thing won’t be too slow on track.

    2. Yeah f1, the pinnicle of motorsport, should stick to 20 years old technology, because it sounds better. Like you logic bro

      1. Not convinced it sounds better neither… I like lower pitched motor sounds too.

      2. Still…what would be wrong with some V12’s from 2013 :(?

        1. Not a lot of car manufacturers are still making V12 engines for their cars. I remember reading an article, unrelated to the F1 rules change, which stated most car manufacturers are focusing their development on small engines with a powerful Turbo, or Hybrid/Electronic. I’m not against the latter in production or even supercars, but I think the technology isn’t advanced enough for F1.

          As much as I’d like to see a more open engine format, I think costs (initial development costs aside) and road-relevance are major factors in F1 engines today.

          1. @npf1 Well out of the big 3 engine providers, two of them make V12s. Mercedes and Ferrari, but you are correct most manufactures are trying to stay lower in engine size.

  11. F1 needed new engines badly, can’t wait to see them in racing. For me v8 sound was awesome, but after so many years with them i like the change. Of course nothing will sound as good as v10 (except ferrari v12 :D) but unfortunately this is the price for progress.

    1. @vecho I agree, especially with all the tech in WEC Championships and Le Mans showing how it can be done they needed this to stay relevant.

  12. I went onto Youtube looking for old F1 turbo sounds, and this 2014 engine sounds awfully similar to their 1980s version

    1. I know :D

      I think it sounds good :D

  13. As an engineer myself I’m very excited of the new engine formula, to see how different manufacturers will solve the same problems and how drivers manage to get the most out of them.

    But I can’t help but think that F1 is missing something by restricting the regulations this much, also putting an engine freeze means that subsequent cars will be going faster because of aerodynamics not because of the engine, something irrelevant to the general public.

  14. Why the hell is it so heavy??!! An 80% weight increase is crazy!! And what is the minimum weight requirement of the car with the driver in 2014??

    1. Extra weight is due to the ERS systems been a part of the engine, Think the Gearbox & Turbo will also be a part of the engine package.

      Thats why most in F1 are referring to them as new units rather than new engines.

      1. are the cars gonna weigh more as well?

        1. @ripudaman07z Yes, an increase from 640 to 660 kilograms.

          1. @roald the minimum car weight is actually increasing to 685kg. See article 4.1 of the 2014 technical regualtions 0


  15. Its a very flat sound it doesn’t have the high pitch sound people have been use to. we have to remember that this is just Renault’s engine and Ferrari and Mercedes engines could sound completely different.

    1. With bore, stroke, “V” angle, number of exhausts, max rpm’s, boost pressure etc. all being produced to a set of regulations; it’s extremely likely that they are all going to sound quite similar.

  16. I think it sounds pretty good.

    Sounds a bit like the Indycar engine’s & having spent some time around Indycar the past 2 years thats not really a bad thing as the current Indycar V6 Turbo’s sound great at the track & the fan reaction to them has been nothing but positive.

  17. Sounds like a Champ Car V8. I for one, welcome our new turbo era with open arms.

  18. Sounds like next door neighbors whipper snipper!


    1. ha ha
      They should muz it up with a funky BOVs…

  19. The sound is from a test bed, and they always sound a bit more sterile.
    We haven’t heard the car on the over-run and off throttle, either.
    We don’t know if there will be any difference in the sounds between manufacturers. The V8s sounded the same because they had pretty much reached the optimal specification under the regulations, so everybody was doing everything the same.

    I’ll reserve judgement until I hear one on the track being raced.

    1. +1 to that.

  20. Would like to see some comparative hp and torque figures. Even if estimated, since the engine manufacturers likely don’t want to be to forthcoming.

  21. 5 “power units” for 21 races ? Hmmmm.

    1. The way the engines were before the rules changed to 1 engine per weekend and so on, engines were basically designed to fall apart after the finish line. This meant you could stress them far beyond non-racing engines.

      I didn’t like the rules at first, but to me, it seems that having to build and F1 engine, but making it last much longer, provides more relevant data to engine builders than making it last until the finish flag.

  22. Just looking at the placement of the intercooler. In the case of a side impact crash, would they not have to replace the engine? With the number units per year going down to four, would that not be a trouble point? I mean if Massa had his two crashes at Monaco this year, next year, he would have been out two engines by now.

    1. Oh sorry, they will have five units next year, oversight on my part.

    2. I don’t think the intercooler (and radiator – which is on the other side, not shown) are considered part of the engine.
      The intercooler is also connected to the engine via the intake plenum and the turbo compressor, which would also be replaceable items.

  23. I wonder if the FIA will intervene if there is a performance gap between the three engines. What if one engine manufacturer simply designs a better internal combustion engine the other two? What if one engine is producing 640 bhp (475 kw) but the other is churning a whisker over 700bhp (522 kw)? And that’s before the extra power of the ERS is added into the power train.

  24. Quite like the way that sounds, Kinda similar to the current Indycar V6 Turbo units although the F1 units will rev higher & have the ERS.
    Also bear in mind that the sound was recorded on the dyno, When out on track actually been driven it will likely sound even better.

    I think we will hear a lot of bitching from people in early 2014, But once the racing starts Im betting a lot of that will die down. I remember the same back in 2006 when the V8’s came in, It was the death of F1 & people were never going to watch ever again because of how crap the cars were going to sound.

    All that talk soon died down when the racing started & now some of those same people think the V8’s they protested about 7yrs ago should remain.

  25. OmarR-Pepper (@)
    21st June 2013, 17:10

    Regarding the asymmetry, Grosjean crashes your left side and the party is over.

  26. I always thought the new engines would sound great, I hate the current V8s! I also thought by going to V6s they’d sound like IndyCars. I’m so glad my predictions were right, they do sound like IndyCars and they sound brilliant! I love the new sound!

    To me, the V8 and even the later V10s just sound a a bit fake and annoying. I love the real sound a car makes, and this new noise seems to be real. I love it!

  27. Honestly, i dont like the way it sounds. I dont care if it sounds like wrc, champ car or anything. F1 sound is F1 sound, there’s no substitute for it. Ive heard the current v8s on real life, and this is just not f1 for me, oh well, i may just have to get use to this.

  28. I really wasn’t looking forward to it, but, I’m happy to say it sounds quite “pleasing” to my ears!

    I am a bit too young to have seen the turbo era, so this will be a great induction to turbo racing at the pinnacle of single seater racing.

  29. For those of you “Nostalgic” for past V12 and or high reving V10’s etc.. I suggest watch the Grand Prix with an MP3 soundtrack of your choice.

  30. Great, just what F1 needed, a motor that sounds like an Indy car or “Old” champ car. I guess I’ll have to wait until the car is under load to make final judgement, but if this is progress, whats next, all battery power? That’ll almost be as cool as the Audi diesel tire and wind noise mobile! What brought me to F1 was the sound of a vehicle that was nearly as ferocious as a fighter jet. If F1 loses the spectacle of sound, IMO they’re losing one of their greatest attributes that attract people to the sport.

  31. While I’ve trained myself to be able to hear multiple layers in music, the video’s audio seems too chaotic for me to really get a good idea what the engine sounds like.

    If anything, the teams could stop by eBay and get some ‘sports’ exhausts to spice up their sound.

  32. While the move to the v6 turbo spec will be exciting from a technical standpoint, if anyone believes that the new engines are going to sound remotely as good as the engines from the 90s/early 2000s, then they are fooling themselves.

    For example, have a look at this video, and in particular pay close attention at 0:45:

  33. after hearing it, it´s ok I guess. I would just like it if it had more revs, I don´t mind the tone but, the lack of revs is sort of anti-climatic

  34. Many people commenting on the engine sounding flat are forgetting that the engine is probably stationay and you are not getting any Doppler effect, i have a feeling that will make them come alive

    1. @memorablec
      you might be right but even a v8 or v10 on a bench is quite close to what is heard at a track! I just feel that if it reved a bit more it would sound awesome. I like the sound it´s just the peak note that it produces which I personally do not like.

  35. Why this engine has only 1 radiator bolted on?
    And how many cc’ is it?

    1. It’s an intercooler. It cools air from the turbo before it goes into the engine.
      The radiator would be on the other side. It’s not shown, because they would have to include all the plumbing associated with it.

      As for how many cc the engine has, the answer is 1600cc.

      1. Thanks

  36. Does anyone know what the compression ratio is? Or an educated guess. Also the boost of the turbo.

Comments are closed.