The Principality of Monaco enjoys the few days of tranquility between the Formula E E-Prix held last Saturday and the Formula 1 Grand Prix scheduled for next weekend. For the first time in history, the two categories shared the same track, with the only exception of a slight modification to the port chicane in the configuration used by the electric world championship. Monte Carlo therefore offered a ground of comparison to those who have long been waiting for the opportunity to compare the performance of the two classes of single-seaters.
It was pointed out by many that the Formula E in qualifying turned out to be over 20 seconds slower than the Formula 1, with lap times also higher than the Formula 2. A more in-depth analysis, however, highlights the non-existence of such a comparison, since the differences originate from important technological limitations and from a concept of motorsport at the radically opposite basis between the two championships. The distorted vision arises from the interpretation of Formula E as an electric version of Formula 1, but the differences on the sporting, ideological and performance level itself go beyond the simple difference in terms of propulsion technology.
Congenital limits
The evident gap in performance on the flying lap stems from the limits of electric propulsion at present, the development of which has yet to reach full maturity, as opposed to the combustion engine technology which has advanced thanks to its central use in the automotive industry for over a century. In particular, the main difference lies in the specific energy, i.e. in the amount of energy associated with a kilogram of substance used as an energy source, which, in simple terms, is represented by fuel or the battery pack.
The fossil fuels used in combustion cars have a specific energy that varies according to the chemical composition, but maintaining a conservative approach aimed at thinking in terms of orders of magnitude, it can be said that it is greater than 10 kWh / kg . By obtaining from the regulation the weight and capacity data of the batteries used in Formula E, it is obtained instead that the electrochemical cells present in the electric single-seaters boast about 185 Wh / kg , therefore a specific energy value about 50 times lower than that of the more traditional thermal cars.
Formula E would therefore have to use batteries tens of times heavier than the fuel tank used in Formula 1 to be able to count on a comparable amount of energy. Weight is a strong limiting factor for performance, so much so that, even with much lower energy availability, net of the different efficiencies between electric and thermal engines, the current Formula E single-seaters weigh 903 kg against the 752 kg of Formula 1 (with driver on board and fuel excluded), a difference of 151 kg equal to about 20% more.
The performance limitation becomes necessary in order not to further impact on the already critical consumption and weight. On the one hand, the increase in performance would entail a further increase in weight, not only related to the necessary strengthening of the car for safety reasons. On the other hand, resistance to running and therefore consumption increases quadratically with speed, as well as being dependent on longitudinal accelerations. Similar considerations are therefore one of the reasons behind the different maximum power values between the two categories, with Formula E stopping at 250 kW against the approximately 735 kW of Formula 1, a value equivalent to the declared 1000 horsepower of the current power units and almost three times higher than that of electric single-seaters.
Similarly, the aerodynamics of full-electric cars is the result of an extremely simplified design, born from the need to limit energy expenditure as much as possible and which has led, among other factors, to the fairing of the wheels, which has always been the source of one of the greater contributions to aerodynamic drag at forward movement. It is no coincidence that the leaders of Formula 1 are considering extending the use of active aerodynamics starting from 2025, with the aim of increasing its efficiency so as not to cause excessive weight gain due to the greater future relevance of the component of the power units.
Finally, the current Formula E cars are fitted with tires that are visually smaller than those used in Formula 1 and equipped with a grooved tread to be able to adapt to all weather conditions, factors which, combined with the difference in compound, severely limit mechanical grip. Tires, weight, aerodynamics, power and energy availability therefore reveal the inconsistency of the comparison between two disciplines no less different from each other than the marathon and the 100 meters.
Slower Formula E, but not inferior
The congenital inferiority of performance and the other peculiarities of Formula E lead to a legitimate division of the public, a natural consequence of the differences between tastes and performance inclinations, but they have no basis if taken as an example of the alleged poor technical level of the championship. In spite of the external appearance, the regulation of the electric world provides great freedom in the design and construction of powertrains , which includes motor generators, inverters, transmission, rear suspension and more.
In spite of the investments lower than those of Formula 1, the high level of engineering of the series is testified by the difficulties of the Federation in controlling and keeping up with the manufacturers who are always ready to exploit the gray areas of the regulation. There are several examples in recent years of debates about the use of more or less legal tricks in power control and delivery software, as well as the use of alternative energy recovery systems to the main one. Increasing technical competition has led to an inevitable escalation of costs, with the parties involved increasingly inclined to introduce a budget cap to stop the phenomenon.
Like any other category in motorsport, Formula E is not exempt from criticism and therefore cannot be classified in white or black, but its judgment falls into the infinite gray scale in the middle , more or less shifted towards one of the two. extremes depending on personal inclination. Furthermore, the analysis of the differences between the two championships, more than for a comparison between the different performances of the cars, proves to be a useful tool to highlight the limits and potential of the two series.
The Monte Carlo E-Prix was one of the hardest-fought competitions in the history of motorsport in the Principality , with numerous overtaking and changes of position at the top of the standings, including the winning move of winner Da Costa to take the lead in the last lap. All of this derives in part from the various variables artificially inserted by the Formula E regulations, such as Fanboost and Attack Mode, as well as the strong strategic component which, by forcing energy to be regenerated in braking, facilitates overtaking.
At the same time, however, the spectacle in the narrow streets of Monaco benefited from the characteristics of the cars such as the small size, the non-existent aerodynamic sensitivity that facilitates close chases and longer braking distances. The Formula E race in Monte Carlo therefore becomes a testimony of how performance is not necessarily synonymous with entertainment. While not being able to fully replicate these elements, as they would alter its distinctive nature, Formula 1 can exploit similar considerations to reflect on how to revive competition and comparisons on the track, currently dependent on the presence of the DRS.
The great differences between Formula 1 and Formula E do not therefore constitute evidence of the inferiority of one or the other category, but outline a diversity which, as in every sphere, from social to nature, becomes to be protected as a source of enrichment. Precisely due to its unprecedented nature, Formula E stands as something alternative and not a substitute for long-standing motorsport, offering fans a different spectacle that at the same time takes nothing away from those who, by personal inclination, legitimately distance themselves from it.
Leave a Reply