is F1 on its knees

[Eric Mc]

F1 has always had minor teams. I would prefer a fuller grid with some no-hopers rather than a thin grid of only potential winners or "grandees".

The "no-hopers" provide a bit of humour, a bit of variety and can be the learning ground for new drivers and technicians.

Bernie's sole criteria for F1 are completely money based. No other factors are worthy of consideration in his world view.

If it continues in this vein, not only will we end up with thin grids, we may end up with no grids.

[anonymous-user]

DJRC said:

BE is concerned because in 3 seasons or whatever Marussia/Manor and Caterham have done fk all. Bianchi picking up a cpl of points at Monaco is neither here not there. Olivier Panis managed to win in Monaco with a dog of a Ligier/Prost thing.

And yet he has to pay them millions. To continue to do fk all. There starts and ends Bernies problem with them.

As to the spectre of he show well ho hum so what? F1 has changed engine and drive train regs on a regular basis over the yrs. The trouble now is that bloody stupid 1.6ltr world engine bks that the FIA presumed would drag all the manufacturers in across the board. Or VAG, GM and Ford in other words.

The hybrid stuff is here to stay, this is tech manufacturers want to show off. Just have to find a way to show it all off now.

Bernie was instrumental in writing the Concorde agreement which included allowing teams to skip races and have the funds distributed in the manner they are. If he didn't like the terms he had the opportunity to change them to suit his vision.

To now complain that he has to honour the terms is a ridiculous position, should that be what he is doing.

With regards to Panis, the car wasn't a dog on that day in that environment, (through the season it was a decent midfield runner) it was a well suited car to the conditions and environment, and like Bianci, Panis deserved the result as he kept the car out of the barriers and went quickly enough.

[RYH64E]

DJRC said:

The hybrid stuff is here to stay, this is tech manufacturers want to show off. Just have to find a way to show it all off now.

I don't see the manufacturers referring to the actual figures for the economy of these new engines, maybe because they've spent 100s of millions of pounds developing engines that return maybe 6 mpg* over a race distance as opposed to about 4 mpg for the old (cheap, loud and high revving) engines? Doesn't sound too impressive in hard numbers, is a 1 or 2 mpg saving worth it? 6mpg isn't exactly green imo.

• Assuming 100kg of fuel @ .755 kg/l and a 190 mile race

[Scuffers]

exactly, same bullst rhetoric that gave us formula E, all that's done is boost the revenues of Aggreko!

[rdjohn]

I also expect some significant fuel saving comes from the "lift and cruise" and "make the tyres last" driving style.

Real racing is more about being the "the last of the late brakers"

[DJRC]

RYH64E said:

DJRC said:

The hybrid stuff is here to stay, this is tech manufacturers want to show off. Just have to find a way to show it all off now.

I don't see the manufacturers referring to the actual figures for the economy of these new engines, maybe because they've spent 100s of millions of pounds developing engines that return maybe 6 mpg* over a race distance as opposed to about 4 mpg for the old (cheap, loud and high revving) engines? Doesn't sound too impressive in hard numbers, is a 1 or 2 mpg saving worth it? 6mpg isn't exactly green imo.

• Assuming 100kg of fuel @ .755 kg/l and a 190 mile race

No, but it allows them to make the link and that's all they need, the tenuous link.

[StevieBee]

Eric Mc said:

The "no-hopers" provide a bit of humour, a bit of variety and can be the learning ground for new drivers and technicians

It's easy to forget that the likes of Torro Rosso started life as Minardi, Red Bull as Stewart Grand Prix and Mercedes can trace is lineage back to Tyrrell. The links may be vague now but there does exist the potential to progress. Whose to say that Maonor don't end up as the factory Audi team in five years?

Throwing billions doesn't always work either; see Toyota for more information.

And take away Manor and McLaren become the 'new' Manor.

[RYH64E]

DJRC said:

No, but it allows them to make the link and that's all they need, the tenuous link.

Tenuous? Flying 100s of tonnes of equipment and thousands of people to the other side of the world, then spending 3 days driving round in circles becomes 'green' becuse the cars are achieving as much as 6mpg? Hardly a marketing man's dream, especially for Renault who seem unable to make their engine last a full race, or Honda who couldn't even get their engine to complete a full lap last week.

[London424]

RYH64E said:

Tenuous? Flying 100s of tonnes of equipment and thousands of people to the other side of the world, then spending 3 days driving round in circles becomes 'green' becuse the cars are achieving as much as 6mpg? Hardly a marketing man's dream, especially for Renault who seem unable to make their engine last a full race, or Honda who couldn't even get their engine to complete a full lap last week.

It's not like they had these regs foisted on them...they lobbied and said they'd quit the sport without the change!

[HustleRussell]

entropy said:

Not just F1. I'm often amazed how soft the suspension looked on the cars in the 80s be it Group C Porsche 956, Group A Sierra Cosworth, etc. NASCAR these days is like watching slot cars.

Suspension is supposed to move about, some body roll is not an undesirable trait for mechanical grip and traction.

The difference is that nowadays one of the main jobs of the suspension is to provide a stable platform for aero, and in F1 aero trumps all.

[Conian]

rdjohn said:

Real racing is more about being the "the last of the late brakers"

and having more power than the car needs... without electrics helping out

[Chrisgr31]

DJRC said:

BE is concerned because in 3 seasons or whatever Marussia/Manor and Caterham have done fk all. Bianchi picking up a cpl of points at Monaco is neither here not there. Olivier Panis managed to win in Monaco with a dog of a Ligier/Prost thing.

And yet he has to pay them millions. To continue to do fk all. There starts and ends Bernies problem with them.

As to the spectre of he show well ho hum so what? F1 has changed engine and drive train regs on a regular basis over the yrs. The trouble now is that bloody stupid 1.6ltr world engine bks that the FIA presumed would drag all the manufacturers in across the board. Or VAG, GM and Ford in other words.

The hybrid stuff is here to stay, this is tech manufacturers want to show off. Just have to find a way to show it all off now.

Problem is you need some backmarkers as otherwise a major manufacturer would be at the back and they would not be acceptable to them so they would pull out.

I havent seen these new cars live, but have no objection to the new engines and they do appear to be of more relevance to road cars.

[dr_gn]

H

RYH64E said:

DJRC said:

The hybrid stuff is here to stay, this is tech manufacturers want to show off. Just have to find a way to show it all off now.

I don't see the manufacturers referring to the actual figures for the economy of these new engines, maybe because they've spent 100s of millions of pounds developing engines that return maybe 6 mpg* over a race distance as opposed to about 4 mpg for the old (cheap, loud and high revving) engines? Doesn't sound too impressive in hard numbers, is a 1 or 2 mpg saving worth it? 6mpg isn't exactly green imo.

• Assuming 100kg of fuel @ .755 kg/l and a 190 mile race

6mpg rather than 4mpg ? Errrr isn't that a 50% increase?

Fair enough, I couldn't give a toss about fuel economy in f1, the sound is st, I've not watched a full race for ages, and I'll never attend a hybrid GP, but you cannot say that the engineering isn't impressive. Misguided in it's application maybe, but still impressive.

[Scuffers]

London424 said:

RYH64E said:

Tenuous? Flying 100s of tonnes of equipment and thousands of people to the other side of the world, then spending 3 days driving round in circles becomes 'green' becuse the cars are achieving as much as 6mpg? Hardly a marketing man's dream, especially for Renault who seem unable to make their engine last a full race, or Honda who couldn't even get their engine to complete a full lap last week.

It's not like they had these regs foisted on them...they lobbied and said they'd quit the sport without the change!

that's not entirely true

the origins are in the pipe dream of a 'world engine' for all motorsport dreamed up by Spankie.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/72422

[RYH64E]

dr_gn said:

6mpg rather than 4mpg ? Errrr isn't that a 50% increase?

Fair enough, I couldn't give a toss about fuel economy in f1, the sound is st, I've not watched a full race for ages, and I'll never attend a hybrid GP, but you cannot say that the engineering isn't impressive. Misguided in it's application maybe, but still impressive.

The point that I was trying to make is that driving round in circles at 6mpg isn't going to save the planet, especially when you've flown half way round the world to do it.

However impressive the engineering may be (and neither Renault nor Honda are impressing anyone at the moment), it not only adds nothing to the show it actually detracts from it. The technology is invisible, if we weren't told it was there we wouldn't know whether or not the engines had something called MGU-K or MGU-H or KERS, nor would we know or care if the engines returned 4, 5 or 6mpg, but even the most casual viewer must be aware that the engines sound st, that lift and coast isn't exciting to watch, and that the Renault engine has an unfortunate tendency to blow up.

[rdjohn]

But in all fairness he did recognise the need to save money and not increase engine costs 5-fold.

I think it was PURE, who fell at the first hurdle, who came up with the PU concept. They thought the could supply every team. A load of Pollocks.

[Scuffers]

rdjohn said:

But in all fairness he did recognise the need to save money and not increase engine costs 5-fold.

I think it was PURE, who fell at the first hurdle, who came up with the PU concept. They thought the could supply every team. A load of Pollocks.

think about that for a moment,,,


if saving money was the object, please explain how we have ended up with the most expensive powertrains ever by some margin?

you only have to look what happened to the 3 new teams he brought in (actually 4 if you remember!), along with Cosworth, that went well.

[London424]

Scuffers said:

that's not entirely true

the origins are in the pipe dream of a 'world engine' for all motorsport dreamed up by Spankie.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/72422

I was just going off these reports about Renault.

http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/f1/f1-engine-deb...

I read it as the other teams were happy as they were but Renault, and by implication Redbull stamped their feet.

[Scuffers]

London424 said:

Scuffers said:

that's not entirely true

the origins are in the pipe dream of a 'world engine' for all motorsport dreamed up by Spankie.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/72422

I was just going off these reports about Renault.

http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/f1/f1-engine-deb...

I read it as the other teams were happy as they were but Renault, and by implication Redbull stamped their feet.

that's not wrong, just later in the evolution of the idea.

Renault actually have created the problem that they are now suffering, pushing though the turbo engines, only to be comprehensively out-spent and out-developed by Merc and not Ferrari.

they were short-sighted and stupid to push it.

[revrange]

Scuffers said:

that's not wrong, just later in the evolution of the idea.

Renault actually have created the problem that they are now suffering, pushing though the turbo engines, only to be comprehensively out-spent and out-developed by Merc and not Ferrari.

they were short-sighted and stupid to push it.

Spankie also thought that cost control would have come in with it, controlling the expenditure