FIA Standard Engine

FIA Standard Engine

Author
Discussion

rohrl

8,742 posts

146 months

Monday 26th October 2015
quotequote all
Back in the day the Cosworth DFV was effectively a "standard engine". Any car builder who could cobble together a chassis was free to stick a DFV in it and try their hand at F1.

If Cosworth could build a modern equivalent maybe we might see a proliferation of new garagistes and a return to the days of pre-qualifying.

Vaud

50,607 posts

156 months

Monday 26th October 2015
quotequote all
rohrl said:
Back in the day the Cosworth DFV was effectively a "standard engine". Any car builder who could cobble together a chassis was free to stick a DFV in it and try their hand at F1.

If Cosworth could build a modern equivalent maybe we might see a proliferation of new garagistes and a return to the days of pre-qualifying.
You mean a bit like GP2? wink

rohrl

8,742 posts

146 months

Monday 26th October 2015
quotequote all
Vaud said:
rohrl said:
Back in the day the Cosworth DFV was effectively a "standard engine". Any car builder who could cobble together a chassis was free to stick a DFV in it and try their hand at F1.

If Cosworth could build a modern equivalent maybe we might see a proliferation of new garagistes and a return to the days of pre-qualifying.
You mean a bit like GP2? wink
No, like F1.

Unless these aren't F1 cars.









Vaud

50,607 posts

156 months

Monday 26th October 2015
quotequote all
rohrl said:
No, like F1.

Unless these aren't F1 cars.
I was being tongue in cheek.

There is a formula with a stock engine that is affordable. It's GP2 and is close too F1.

Prequalifying, etc is a return to a bad era. What sponsor would invest if they don't even get a fraction of airtime? We've gone done a one way street from the garagistas. Adding a standard engine won't help that much when so much cost is also in aero, etc. I'd like a few more teams, but not prequalifying. And many of those teams were frankly, rubbish and and embarrassment to the sport then.

Scuffers

20,887 posts

275 months

Monday 26th October 2015
quotequote all
rohrl said:
Back in the day the Cosworth DFV was effectively a "standard engine". Any car builder who could cobble together a chassis was free to stick a DFV in it and try their hand at F1.

If Cosworth could build a modern equivalent maybe we might see a proliferation of new garagistes and a return to the days of pre-qualifying.
your premise is entirely wrong

DFV was never a std engine, it just happened to be the best available in an open market.

Also, each teams DFV was what they could afford, that did not make them all the same.

finally, all this talk of Cosworth, the bit that made F1 engines simply does not exist any more, to start it up again will require a huge bag of cash and time.

Wombat3

12,195 posts

207 months

Monday 26th October 2015
quotequote all
The engine manufacturers have too much control now - but that's because the FIA handed it to them on a plate by coming up with this ridiculous and far too expensive engine/power unit formula. It has been idiotic.

And what other manufacturer would try and get involved in the current formula now when Merc & Ferrari will be so far ahead? The risks are greater than they have ever been - just ask Honda who look like incompetents at the moment when clearly they are not, they have been building competitive race engines for decades.

The only people who will object to a much simplified standard engine being available are Merc. Ferrari will not care, they will just build what they need to build to be competitive. Renault would probably be happy to go back to a simple ICE formula with basic KERS or even no KERS.


Janesy B

2,625 posts

187 months

Monday 26th October 2015
quotequote all
Would it not be more sesnsible to have standard turbos and energy recovery systems and the manufacturers can do whatever they want to the engine?

Scuffers

20,887 posts

275 months

Monday 26th October 2015
quotequote all
Janesy B said:
Would it not be more sesnsible to have standard turbos and energy recovery systems and the manufacturers can do whatever they want to the engine?
that's pointless.

the reason renault and Honda are doing crap is that it;s not about building an engine any more, the rest of the powertrain are the dominant factors.

Derek Smith

45,704 posts

249 months

Monday 26th October 2015
quotequote all
Wombat3 said:
The engine manufacturers have too much control now - but that's because the FIA handed it to them on a plate by coming up with this ridiculous and far too expensive engine/power unit formula. It has been idiotic.

And what other manufacturer would try and get involved in the current formula now when Merc & Ferrari will be so far ahead? The risks are greater than they have ever been - just ask Honda who look like incompetents at the moment when clearly they are not, they have been building competitive race engines for decades.

The only people who will object to a much simplified standard engine being available are Merc. Ferrari will not care, they will just build what they need to build to be competitive. Renault would probably be happy to go back to a simple ICE formula with basic KERS or even no KERS.
At present, the suggestion from Ecclestone is that there will be a standard engine. Also that the two formulae will run side by side. If this means that there will be a single manufacturer then Ferrari might not be chuffed. Further, for the standard engine to become valuable it will have to have more power than the current engines. Merc, Ferrari, Renault and Honda won't be amused.

That the present situation is against the interests of the sport is unlikely to be argued against. That Merc, Ferrari, Renault and Honda might now feel their investment is at risk is exactly the same.

My suspicion is that the demand for a single supplier comes not from some FIA calculation of what is best for the sport. I reckon the purchaser of the rights has made a demand, one that Ecclestone is unable to refuse.


Wombat3

12,195 posts

207 months

Monday 26th October 2015
quotequote all
Derek Smith said:
Wombat3 said:
The engine manufacturers have too much control now - but that's because the FIA handed it to them on a plate by coming up with this ridiculous and far too expensive engine/power unit formula. It has been idiotic.

And what other manufacturer would try and get involved in the current formula now when Merc & Ferrari will be so far ahead? The risks are greater than they have ever been - just ask Honda who look like incompetents at the moment when clearly they are not, they have been building competitive race engines for decades.

The only people who will object to a much simplified standard engine being available are Merc. Ferrari will not care, they will just build what they need to build to be competitive. Renault would probably be happy to go back to a simple ICE formula with basic KERS or even no KERS.
At present, the suggestion from Ecclestone is that there will be a standard engine. Also that the two formulae will run side by side. If this means that there will be a single manufacturer then Ferrari might not be chuffed. Further, for the standard engine to become valuable it will have to have more power than the current engines. Merc, Ferrari, Renault and Honda won't be amused.

That the present situation is against the interests of the sport is unlikely to be argued against. That Merc, Ferrari, Renault and Honda might now feel their investment is at risk is exactly the same.

My suspicion is that the demand for a single supplier comes not from some FIA calculation of what is best for the sport. I reckon the purchaser of the rights has made a demand, one that Ecclestone is unable to refuse.
I don't see how they could stop the others making an engine to the same specs as the new "standard" if they wanted to. They will also never mandate that Ferrari can not construct its own engines or make it so that they can not compete to win.

Ferrari & Merc (and Renault) have learned plenty from the current formula that they can adapt to road car use as they see fit, so it will not be a wasted investment. I also very much doubt any of them would shed a tear over moving back to something much simpler (and cheaper) for the future.

The bottom line is that the Hybrid power units are far too expensive and difficult to get right at this point. They are a barrier to entry to other manufacturers, they are loading the small teams up with huge additional costs & they are killing the competition. The fans don't care about them & they hate the noise they make.

The sooner F1 forgets about being "politically correct" & gets rid of them the better off it will be IMO.


SteveSteveson

3,209 posts

164 months

Monday 26th October 2015
quotequote all
It's not about "politically correct" its about matching what is on the road. Gone are the days of V12 engines in supercars. Everyone is moving to smaller, lighter, FI hybrid engines in road cars. F1 must match that. No point in building a V12 NA F1 car then trying to sell V8 turbo hybrid on the back of race wins.

Scuffers

20,887 posts

275 months

Monday 26th October 2015
quotequote all
SteveSteveson said:
It's not about "politically correct" its about matching what is on the road. Gone are the days of V12 engines in supercars. Everyone is moving to smaller, lighter, FI hybrid engines in road cars. F1 must match that. No point in building a V12 NA F1 car then trying to sell V8 turbo hybrid on the back of race wins.
irrelevant and rubbish.


SteveSteveson

3,209 posts

164 months

Monday 26th October 2015
quotequote all
Scuffers said:
irrelevant and rubbish.
Thank you for those insightful words of wisdom. Please do explain how you got to such a conclusion, as Mercedes, Renault and McLaren disagree with you.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/26656258
http://uk.motorsport.com/f1/news/analysis-why-hybr...

Scuffers

20,887 posts

275 months

Monday 26th October 2015
quotequote all
laughable marketing guff...

So the next Zonda will be a 1.6T will it?

your mistaking marking fluf with reality.

Nobody buys their next car based on who wins F1

Inertiatic

1,040 posts

191 months

Monday 26th October 2015
quotequote all
The tech is scalable FFS

SteveSteveson

3,209 posts

164 months

Monday 26th October 2015
quotequote all
No, they don't buy them, but they do want to see something vaguely related to what they are buying. It's about selling the concept of the layout being acceptable for performance cars. Few people are buying the exact group set or frame that the Tour de France winner used. They are buying carbon bikes and 11x2 groupos even though it may not be the best thing for them. People are buying lower, stiffer cars because that is what they see on track, even though a road is very different. Same with F1, racing means people perceive that as a better choice, rightly or wrongly. If the teams did not want them they would have stopped it, as they did with I4's that were suggested originally.

The issue is not that I'm mistaking marking fluff with reality but that your mistaking your opinion for fact. If your going to deny facts put in front of you then there is not much I can do.

rohrl

8,742 posts

146 months

Monday 26th October 2015
quotequote all
Scuffers said:
laughable marketing guff...

So the next Zonda will be a 1.6T will it?

your mistaking marking fluf with reality.

Nobody buys their next car based on who wins F1
The McLaren F1 had a 6.1l naturally-aspirated engine, the P1 has a 3.8 turbo with electric motor. The Zonda had a 7.3l naturally-aspirated engine, the Huayra has a 6.0l turbo. The Ferrari 458 had a 4.5l NA, the 488 a 3.9 turbo.

The trend is clearly towards smaller capacity turbo engines. Even among supercars.

If the likes of Mercedes, Renault and Honda believed that "Nobody buys their next car based on who wins F1" they wouldn't be spending millions of pounds a year doing it. The saying "Win on Sunday, Sell on Monday" has been around for a very long time.

Scuffers

20,887 posts

275 months

Monday 26th October 2015
quotequote all
OK, take out the increasing level of emissions regs and you think they would be going this way?

CO2 marketing guff at governmental level, why should F1 pander to this?

rohrl

8,742 posts

146 months

Monday 26th October 2015
quotequote all
Scuffers said:
OK, take out the increasing level of emissions regs and you think they would be going this way?

CO2 marketing guff at governmental level, why should F1 pander to this?
Why should we take out the emissions regs? They exist whether we like them or not. F1 exists in the world we live in, not some fantasy world.

Scuffers

20,887 posts

275 months

Monday 26th October 2015
quotequote all
rohrl said:
Why should we take out the emissions regs? They exist whether we like them or not. F1 exists in the world we live in, not some fantasy world.
they exist right now, who know what's coming next?

why should F1 care?