FIA Standard Engine
Discussion
HarryFlatters said:
amgmcqueen said:
How are these current V6 Turbos in any way pushing the boundaries of technology?
In simplistic terms, if the engines were not pushing the boundaries of technology, Renault and Honda wouldn't have f
ked up.andburg said:
No I think you misunderstood my intention.
Bernie wants a cheaper engine to run alongside, my idea was instead of the 2.2 running alongside the current PU as it would gives a budget option without developing a new power unit.
Its pointless anyway, Merc reportedly offered the idea of a slightly lower spec engine cheap to its customers and every one rejected it. Teams would rather pay full whack for the best engine because its cheaper to gain 0.5s a lap from an engine than it is from aero!
I disagree that Ecclestone wants a cheaper engine per se. He wants F1 to be saleable, which is a different premise.Bernie wants a cheaper engine to run alongside, my idea was instead of the 2.2 running alongside the current PU as it would gives a budget option without developing a new power unit.
Its pointless anyway, Merc reportedly offered the idea of a slightly lower spec engine cheap to its customers and every one rejected it. Teams would rather pay full whack for the best engine because its cheaper to gain 0.5s a lap from an engine than it is from aero!
RB threatening to pull two teams and only one team coming in means a £billion or two off the price. Clutter the grid with cars and everything is rosy. It will be sold before we find that either the new engine will struggle to keep up, or have an advantage over the established teams and so make a farce of the whole proceedings.
As you point out, there was a cheaper option offered by Merc but RB turned their noses up. If this new engine is to tempt them, then it would have to be at least as powerful.
kambites said:
For me, F1 has always been primarily a technical competition between teams, engine suppliers and (until recently) tyre suppliers; I really couldn't really care less about the driver's championship. If people want to watch drivers in equally matched cars racing against each other there's plenty of series that offer that. If teams don't want to be involved in a sport where a poor engineering decision puts them at the back of the grid, they should go and race in a spec series.
I couldn't agree more.Derek Smith said:
So where's this press release, to be published Monday or Tuesday?
You mean this one, which has been on the FIA website since Monday?http://www.fia.com/news/fia-formula-1-world-champi...
thegreenhell said:
Derek Smith said:
So where's this press release, to be published Monday or Tuesday?
You mean this one, which has been on the FIA website since Monday?http://www.fia.com/news/fia-formula-1-world-champi...
Says nothing though. Here it is, and as a press release, I assume it doesn't go against the H'market prohibition of quoting.
FIA press release said:
The FIA has studied cost reduction measures for teams participating in the FIA Formula 1 World Championship which were not conclusive, including:
- a global cost ceiling,
- a reduction in costs via technical and sporting regulations,
- an increased standardisation for parts.
The FIA, in agreement with FOM, suggested the principle of setting a maximum price for engine and gear box for client teams at the last Strategy Group meeting.
These measures were put to the vote and adopted with a large majority.
However, Ferrari SpA decided to go against this and exercise the right of veto long recognised under agreements governing F1.
In the interest of the Championship, the FIA has decided not to legally challenge Ferrari SpA’s use of its right of veto.
Therefore the FIA will initiate a consultation with all stakeholders regarding the possible introduction of a client engine, which will be available as of 2017. Following this consultation a call for tenders for this client engine, the cost of which would be much lower than the current power unit, could be undertaken.
Supported by FOM, the FIA will continue in its efforts to ensure the sustained long-term development of the Championship and look for solutions enabling it to achieve this. It asks all of the teams to make a positive contribution to the success of this approach through proposals and initiatives in the interest of the Championship and its continuation over the long term.
It is not what I thought Ecclestone promised.- a global cost ceiling,
- a reduction in costs via technical and sporting regulations,
- an increased standardisation for parts.
The FIA, in agreement with FOM, suggested the principle of setting a maximum price for engine and gear box for client teams at the last Strategy Group meeting.
These measures were put to the vote and adopted with a large majority.
However, Ferrari SpA decided to go against this and exercise the right of veto long recognised under agreements governing F1.
In the interest of the Championship, the FIA has decided not to legally challenge Ferrari SpA’s use of its right of veto.
Therefore the FIA will initiate a consultation with all stakeholders regarding the possible introduction of a client engine, which will be available as of 2017. Following this consultation a call for tenders for this client engine, the cost of which would be much lower than the current power unit, could be undertaken.
Supported by FOM, the FIA will continue in its efforts to ensure the sustained long-term development of the Championship and look for solutions enabling it to achieve this. It asks all of the teams to make a positive contribution to the success of this approach through proposals and initiatives in the interest of the Championship and its continuation over the long term.
Derek Smith said:
I disagree that Ecclestone wants a cheaper engine per se. He wants F1 to be saleable, which is a different premise.
RB threatening to pull two teams and only one team coming in means a £billion or two off the price. Clutter the grid with cars and everything is rosy. It will be sold before we find that either the new engine will struggle to keep up, or have an advantage over the established teams and so make a farce of the whole proceedings.
As you point out, there was a cheaper option offered by Merc but RB turned their noses up. If this new engine is to tempt them, then it would have to be at least as powerful.
Does it mean that much off the price? After all you get rid of teams that are paid a significant amount of prize money and replace them with teams that are paid none, therefore more profit! RB threatening to pull two teams and only one team coming in means a £billion or two off the price. Clutter the grid with cars and everything is rosy. It will be sold before we find that either the new engine will struggle to keep up, or have an advantage over the established teams and so make a farce of the whole proceedings.
As you point out, there was a cheaper option offered by Merc but RB turned their noses up. If this new engine is to tempt them, then it would have to be at least as powerful.
Chrisgr31 said:
Does it mean that much off the price? After all you get rid of teams that are paid a significant amount of prize money and replace them with teams that are paid none, therefore more profit!
If we only knew. As some may have suspected, I keep a folder for Ecclestone's habits as exposed in the press, and all I can say is that despite it being massive, I don't know 1% of what he gets up to.
Derek Smith said:
If we only knew.
As some may have suspected, I keep a folder for Ecclestone's habits as exposed in the press, and all I can say is that despite it being massive, I don't know 1% of what he gets up to.
If you knew any more than 1% of what BE gets / got up to Derek you'd need a bloody big shed to store it all in!As some may have suspected, I keep a folder for Ecclestone's habits as exposed in the press, and all I can say is that despite it being massive, I don't know 1% of what he gets up to.
Derek Smith said:
thegreenhell said:
Derek Smith said:
So where's this press release, to be published Monday or Tuesday?
You mean this one, which has been on the FIA website since Monday?http://www.fia.com/news/fia-formula-1-world-champi...
Says nothing though. Here it is, and as a press release, I assume it doesn't go against the H'market prohibition of quoting.
FIA press release said:
The FIA has studied cost reduction measures for teams participating in the FIA Formula 1 World Championship which were not conclusive, including:
- a global cost ceiling,
- a reduction in costs via technical and sporting regulations,
- an increased standardisation for parts.
The FIA, in agreement with FOM, suggested the principle of setting a maximum price for engine and gear box for client teams at the last Strategy Group meeting.
These measures were put to the vote and adopted with a large majority.
However, Ferrari SpA decided to go against this and exercise the right of veto long recognised under agreements governing F1.
In the interest of the Championship, the FIA has decided not to legally challenge Ferrari SpA’s use of its right of veto.
Therefore the FIA will initiate a consultation with all stakeholders regarding the possible introduction of a client engine, which will be available as of 2017. Following this consultation a call for tenders for this client engine, the cost of which would be much lower than the current power unit, could be undertaken.
Supported by FOM, the FIA will continue in its efforts to ensure the sustained long-term development of the Championship and look for solutions enabling it to achieve this. It asks all of the teams to make a positive contribution to the success of this approach through proposals and initiatives in the interest of the Championship and its continuation over the long term.
It is not what I thought Ecclestone promised.- a global cost ceiling,
- a reduction in costs via technical and sporting regulations,
- an increased standardisation for parts.
The FIA, in agreement with FOM, suggested the principle of setting a maximum price for engine and gear box for client teams at the last Strategy Group meeting.
These measures were put to the vote and adopted with a large majority.
However, Ferrari SpA decided to go against this and exercise the right of veto long recognised under agreements governing F1.
In the interest of the Championship, the FIA has decided not to legally challenge Ferrari SpA’s use of its right of veto.
Therefore the FIA will initiate a consultation with all stakeholders regarding the possible introduction of a client engine, which will be available as of 2017. Following this consultation a call for tenders for this client engine, the cost of which would be much lower than the current power unit, could be undertaken.
Supported by FOM, the FIA will continue in its efforts to ensure the sustained long-term development of the Championship and look for solutions enabling it to achieve this. It asks all of the teams to make a positive contribution to the success of this approach through proposals and initiatives in the interest of the Championship and its continuation over the long term.
Ferrari blocked our cap on engine/gearbox prices, so we're going to threaten to introduce a standard engine in the hope they back down and let us introduce a price cap.
Otispunkmeyer said:
SteveSteveson said:
Not being able to race due to non supply of engine? I didn't know anyone had ever had that situation. Red bull might not have an engine, but only due to them refusing the one on offer. Is it me or are Red Bull becoming the new Ferrari when it comes to trying to bully everyone when they don't get their way.
What they need is "the loaner" (a la The Mask), a smokey old bint of an engine that you must use if you find yourself stuck up st creek without an engine. 
aeropilot said:
Otispunkmeyer said:
SteveSteveson said:
Not being able to race due to non supply of engine? I didn't know anyone had ever had that situation. Red bull might not have an engine, but only due to them refusing the one on offer. Is it me or are Red Bull becoming the new Ferrari when it comes to trying to bully everyone when they don't get their way.
What they need is "the loaner" (a la The Mask), a smokey old bint of an engine that you must use if you find yourself stuck up st creek without an engine. Toad's a tw4t.
€12M is just stupid for the current engines, effectively he's asking Merc/Ferrari/etc to just write off the development money.
Let's not forget the FIA set these rules, the manufactures have committed the development costs (against X years of sales etc) so for the FIA to turn round and say cut your income by 50% is simply laughable.
€12M is just stupid for the current engines, effectively he's asking Merc/Ferrari/etc to just write off the development money.
Let's not forget the FIA set these rules, the manufactures have committed the development costs (against X years of sales etc) so for the FIA to turn round and say cut your income by 50% is simply laughable.
Scuffers said:
Toad's a tw4t.
€12M is just stupid for the current engines, effectively he's asking Merc/Ferrari/etc to just write off the development money.
Let's not forget the FIA set these rules, the manufactures have committed the development costs (against X years of sales etc) so for the FIA to turn round and say cut your income by 50% is simply laughable.
I take your point, but there is a view that with only 3/4 suppliers it's a dysfunctional market and open to prove abuse as well as anti-competitive behaviour. No cartel, but a dysfunctional oligopoly.€12M is just stupid for the current engines, effectively he's asking Merc/Ferrari/etc to just write off the development money.
Let's not forget the FIA set these rules, the manufactures have committed the development costs (against X years of sales etc) so for the FIA to turn round and say cut your income by 50% is simply laughable.
Which may be why Bernie is not throwing his toys out of his pram at an EU investigation?
Vaud said:
I take your point, but there is a view that with only 3/4 suppliers it's a dysfunctional market and open to prove abuse as well as anti-competitive behaviour. No cartel, but a dysfunctional oligopoly.
Which may be why Bernie is not throwing his toys out of his pram at an EU investigation?
they should have thought about this before introducing the new PU regs then!Which may be why Bernie is not throwing his toys out of his pram at an EU investigation?
IMHO they need to just live with them till the end of the PU regs cycle.
4 makers is not a monopoly, it's 1 more than we had last year and there are only 10 teams (and who knows how many next year?)
to make it add up, they really need 4 teams per engine, so can we have 16 teams please? this would be the only way to bring the unit cost down.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff