2010 Engine supply rules

[andyps]

I thought I had read in various places including on here recently that manufacturers were restricted to supplying a maximum of two teams with engines, an exception having been made for Mercedes to supply Brawn for this year to keep the team going. Having just read this - http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/77985 - it seems that the rules allow supply of up to four teams, meaning Mercedes may be supplying Red Bull in addition to their existing teams in 2010. When did that change?

That announcement also links well to Williams considering getting out of their Toyota contract as there would presumably be Renault engines available to them for next year.

[flemke]

Wasn't the change part of the new CA?

I wonder about the meaning of "supply". Are McLaren "supplying" engines to themselves, or does "supply" relate only to third parties?
Also, one would like to know whether the limit applies to Cosworth.

[andyps]

It could be in the CA - I was away when the news of it was released so didn't get to read much about it. I thought there had been recent comments about the two teams though. My understanding was that as Cosworth are not a "manufacturer" (although what else they could be described as, I don't know) and therefore were exempt from the 2 team rule. Something to do with them not being a car manufacturer I guess, and therefore less of a thorn in MM's side.

Whilst typing my post I did wonder about the word supply - I guess in the way of F1 the engine manufacturers do supply their own teams.

[flemke]

andyps said:

It could be in the CA - I was away when the news of it was released so didn't get to read much about it. I thought there had been recent comments about the two teams though. My understanding was that as Cosworth are not a "manufacturer" (although what else they could be described as, I don't know) and therefore were exempt from the 2 team rule. Something to do with them not being a car manufacturer I guess, and therefore less of a thorn in MM's side.

Whilst typing my post I did wonder about the word supply - I guess in the way of F1 the engine manufacturers do supply their own teams.

The company that makes the Mercedes engine is Mercedes High Performance Engines, in Brixworth. It is owned by Daimler AG, which owns 40% of McLaren, but it is totally different from McLaren. What is the problem with letting Ferrari, Mercedes or Cosworth supply as many teams as they like?

There is a company owned by Red Bull that designs and builds F1 chassis (only; that's all it does). Because it is a different corporate entity from whatever the Red Bull racing entrant is called, the FIA counts it as being independent. Because it is "independent" of any entrant, it is allowed to supply chassis to more than one entrant. This transparent ruse is what has enabled Red Bull and Toro Rosso to run the same chassis, whilst Prodrive was not allowed to do exactly the same with the McLaren chassis, because McLaren the "entrant" built its own chassis.

Ultimately all this crap just diminishes F1's interest and credibility.

[andyps]

flemke said:

valid points, followed by:

Ultimately all this crap just diminishes F1's interest and credibility.

Which is why it has to be hoped that Vatanen gets the vote this year to get rid of these stupid Mosley rules.

[llewop]

andyps said:

It could be in the CA - I was away when the news of it was released so didn't get to read much about it. I thought there had been recent comments about the two teams though. My understanding was that as Cosworth are not a "manufacturer" (although what else they could be described as, I don't know) and therefore were exempt from the 2 team rule. Something to do with them not being a car manufacturer I guess, and therefore less of a thorn in MM's side.

Whilst typing my post I did wonder about the word supply - I guess in the way of F1 the engine manufacturers do supply their own teams.

I checked the (recently published, updated) 2010 FIA regulations; they say '2 teams' if you are a car manufacturer (so Cosworth exempt as they don't make road cars!) - and the way it is written it does mean 'including your own team if a car manufactuer'; a better example being Toyota/Renault; Merc engines as stated by Flemke are a different kettle of fish!

The quote of '4 teams' is news to me, but could be it comes from the CA?? If so, and the news about RB is true, hopefully also means Brawn will keep MB engines for the future. But it does mean that RB are serial 'engine tarts' - having previously wriggled their way from Ferrari to Renault when Renault seemed a better bet, pushing the Ferrari engine supply across to Torro Roso. If Cosworth come in with a blinder of an engine (huge IF!!!) I could see them trying to wriggle that way next!

[spend]

Isn't it about time Williams got a decent bite of the cherry engine wise? I would hope then that they got the fourth Merc ahead of Red Bull (unless by any chance Dave Richards gets an entry - seems to me like his past efforts would warrant allocation of the fourth Merc engine?)

[zac510]

Surely Williams would only jump if the Renault engines are free or Toyota cancelled their side of the contract. You'd hardly say the Renault is a superior engine, given that they are all so similar.

Edited by zac510 on Tuesday 25th August 20:08

[Allyc85]

andyps said:

That announcement also links well to Williams considering getting out of their Toyota contract as there would presumably be Renault engines available to them for next year.

Nakakjima to be dropped for next year then?

[andyps]

llewop said:

andyps said:

It could be in the CA - I was away when the news of it was released so didn't get to read much about it. I thought there had been recent comments about the two teams though. My understanding was that as Cosworth are not a "manufacturer" (although what else they could be described as, I don't know) and therefore were exempt from the 2 team rule. Something to do with them not being a car manufacturer I guess, and therefore less of a thorn in MM's side.

Whilst typing my post I did wonder about the word supply - I guess in the way of F1 the engine manufacturers do supply their own teams.

I checked the (recently published, updated) 2010 FIA regulations; they say '2 teams' if you are a car manufacturer (so Cosworth exempt as they don't make road cars!) - and the way it is written it does mean 'including your own team if a car manufactuer'; a better example being Toyota/Renault; Merc engines as stated by Flemke are a different kettle of fish!

The quote of '4 teams' is news to me, but could be it comes from the CA?? If so, and the news about RB is true, hopefully also means Brawn will keep MB engines for the future. But it does mean that RB are serial 'engine tarts' - having previously wriggled their way from Ferrari to Renault when Renault seemed a better bet, pushing the Ferrari engine supply across to Torro Roso. If Cosworth come in with a blinder of an engine (huge IF!!!) I could see them trying to wriggle that way next!

Thanks for that - you have confirmed what I had understood from various things I had read, but I didn't have time today to read find the correct section in the 2010 regs. It does raise a really interesting point though, as it seems the teams are working to a different set of rules to those published by the FIA if the 4 teams are approved by the CA. Oh, the joys of F1 regulations!!

[flemke]

spend said:

Isn't it about time Williams got a decent bite of the cherry engine wise? I would hope then that they got the fourth Merc ahead of Red Bull (unless by any chance Dave Richards gets an entry - seems to me like his past efforts would warrant allocation of the fourth Merc engine?)

I don't know what to think about Williams and their engine supply.
Some of their choices have been made out of necessity, but they let BMS get away four years ago, and it's not obvious why they couldn't have gone for the Merc a year ago, instead of Force India's getting it.

[spend]

flemke said:

..and it's not obvious why they couldn't have gone for the Merc a year ago, instead of Force India's getting it.

I suspect that there may generally be 6 months private negotiations behind closed doors before any of us get a sniff of these events? So our understanding of time & events can be pretty skewed / screwed?

I still find it intriguing that Ferrari & McLaren are persevering with KERs this season, when reason would seem to dictate that moving closer to next years spec would be the wise direction since neither are in the hunt this year?

[flemke]

spend said:

flemke said:

..and it's not obvious why they couldn't have gone for the Merc a year ago, instead of Force India's getting it.

I suspect that there may generally be 6 months private negotiations behind closed doors before any of us get a sniff of these events? So our understanding of time & events can be pretty skewed / screwed?

I'm sure that you are right about that, although I don't see that it would have made a critical difference. A year ago FI were running the Ferrari engine and were contracted for '09 as well. Whenever they realised that they would benefit from the Merc engine, Williams had enough information to come to the same realisation. Although they have been contracted to Toyota for awhile, they are currently trying to get out of that contract for next year, and Toyota have indicated that they would not stand in the way, so presumably they would have had similar flexibility back when they needed to make the decision (and recall that Brawn only got approval to use Merc engines in March of this year, so Williams should have had some options until fairly recently).

[skinny]

spend said:

I still find it intriguing that Ferrari & McLaren are persevering with KERs this season, when reason would seem to dictate that moving closer to next years spec would be the wise direction since neither are in the hunt this year?

KERS is still in the regulations for next year i believe... it's only a gentlemans agreement amongst FOTA that they won't use it in 2010, i can see that changing