Noisier & cheaper engines from 2021
Discussion
Vaud said:
April 1 news?
That was the thought that went through my mind. This is what everyone wanted so the FIA pushing for it was obviously nonsense.Calling the bloke with the lived in face and a girly name 'Toad' is a bit harsh. Compared to his predecessor he done a lot for the lower formulae and other race types. I thought he would not shine at his role - although of course I didn't expect him to plumb the depths of the chap he replaced - so I'm pleasantly surprised. He fulfilled my low expectations and went further.
Far too easy to tell what the regulations will be. Far as Mercedes goes, provided they think they can win they will be there, I forget the figures they released but from a marketing perspective F1 was worth it for them. if they can get the same benefit but spend less doing it they aren't going to drop out. Granted, not as a team but they did pretty well with the V8s didn't they.
I don't see how any of this means VW are involved. If you remember they were pushing for 4 cylinder engines that everyone else didn't want. They decided not to get involved (again) and the V6 format was settled on pretty quickly.
It will be interesting to see what they settle on. Meantime, as Brawn is forward thinking they could just drop the fuel flow limit (because, honestly who the hell cares) and mandate a (say) 6 speed gearbox. That should make things more interesting and wouldn't cost that much.
I don't see how any of this means VW are involved. If you remember they were pushing for 4 cylinder engines that everyone else didn't want. They decided not to get involved (again) and the V6 format was settled on pretty quickly.
It will be interesting to see what they settle on. Meantime, as Brawn is forward thinking they could just drop the fuel flow limit (because, honestly who the hell cares) and mandate a (say) 6 speed gearbox. That should make things more interesting and wouldn't cost that much.
Crafty_ said:
Far too easy to tell what the regulations will be. Far as Mercedes goes, provided they think they can win they will be there, I forget the figures they released but from a marketing perspective F1 was worth it for them. if they can get the same benefit but spend less doing it they aren't going to drop out. Granted, not as a team but they did pretty well with the V8s didn't they.
I don't see how any of this means VW are involved. If you remember they were pushing for 4 cylinder engines that everyone else didn't want. They decided not to get involved (again) and the V6 format was settled on pretty quickly.
It will be interesting to see what they settle on. Meantime, as Brawn is forward thinking they could just drop the fuel flow limit (because, honestly who the hell cares) and mandate a (say) 6 speed gearbox. That should make things more interesting and wouldn't cost that much.
Good points. I can't see Merc leaving just because there's a new engine formula. However, there are bound to be other restrictions included, perhaps making the engine available to three teams, or even anyone who wants it up to a specified limit of engines. I can see the regs being a lot more restrictive as well, making engines all but 'one model'.I don't see how any of this means VW are involved. If you remember they were pushing for 4 cylinder engines that everyone else didn't want. They decided not to get involved (again) and the V6 format was settled on pretty quickly.
It will be interesting to see what they settle on. Meantime, as Brawn is forward thinking they could just drop the fuel flow limit (because, honestly who the hell cares) and mandate a (say) 6 speed gearbox. That should make things more interesting and wouldn't cost that much.
They already have to supply engines to other teams - I think the limit is 4. I forget the ins and outs of it but they need a good reason to refuse if I recall.
Unless you specified exact measurements for the internals, cam profiles, a chamber size and shape etc engines will always be different. Brawn has suggested a spec engine on the basis that it could be made available to all teams to make it cheaper to compete - maybe someone like Judd would re-appear to do that. I think this would really be for new entrants. They (sort of) tried this before with Cosworth and everyone dumped it for a better engine and then moaned how much F1 cost...
Unless you specified exact measurements for the internals, cam profiles, a chamber size and shape etc engines will always be different. Brawn has suggested a spec engine on the basis that it could be made available to all teams to make it cheaper to compete - maybe someone like Judd would re-appear to do that. I think this would really be for new entrants. They (sort of) tried this before with Cosworth and everyone dumped it for a better engine and then moaned how much F1 cost...
Many years ago Keith Duckworth suggested that the only engine regulation you needed was to limit fuel flow.
If you also added a lowish limit on the cost of a 5-year supply contract to small teams, that should help limit extravagant designs.
Apart from that you could have a 4-cylinder turbo, or a V10 for Max, to burn the fuel efficiently so that you are not carrying the weight of excess fuel. That should be road-relevant enough to please the manufacturers. Tweeks to the current V6 turbos is probably all that is needed.
Hopefully Hybrids will be history, the FE race last night had more excitement than frequently is the case in F1, under current regs.
If you also added a lowish limit on the cost of a 5-year supply contract to small teams, that should help limit extravagant designs.
Apart from that you could have a 4-cylinder turbo, or a V10 for Max, to burn the fuel efficiently so that you are not carrying the weight of excess fuel. That should be road-relevant enough to please the manufacturers. Tweeks to the current V6 turbos is probably all that is needed.
Hopefully Hybrids will be history, the FE race last night had more excitement than frequently is the case in F1, under current regs.
MiniMan64 said:
Surely the problem with the current regs is not the engines, it's the overly
complicated aero packages?
See the other thread for aero, but in short thats a very difficult problem to solve.complicated aero packages?
I have a somewhat cynical view of trying to control costs in F1.
God knows how many years back regs were changed to limit the number of engines used during a season, that limit has been reduced over the years to the point that each car has four engines. At the time this was put in it was a valid way of reducing costs - instead of buying anywhere between 20 to 40 engines I now buy 4 or 5 a year. Great.
Then the regs were changed again ( still back in the V8 days ) to freeze engine components, the theory was that this reduced costs because the engines couldn't be developed further.
The Cosworth V8 was introduced as a low budget option, not as good as the Merc/Ferrari etc up front but it was far from a stinker. One by one teams abandoned the Cosworth for the better engines. Cosworth stopped producing the engine, citing lack of support, because teams were greedy and wanted the best engine they could lay their hands on. Even so, the engines are relatively inexpensive, weren't really causing a problem as far as racing goes. The money teams used to spend on buying all those extra engines now gets spent elsewhere..
Engine manufacturers start whinging that the engines aren't road relevant, they want to link F1 engines to their road cars. So after some time wasters (VAG) they settled on the V6 format. Manufacturers more or less get everything they want - small displacement turbo, a fuel flow limit is agreed as a "leveller" (I believe this was the FIAs idea). Gearbox regs are also changed to fixed sets.
An engine freeze system is agreed so that costs are controlled, everyone is happy.
2014 season starts and its pretty evident Merc have pulled a blinder - the engine is doing everything that could possibly asked of it. The Ferrari isn't terrible, but no match for the Merc. The Renault.. uh, well.. it runs. sort of. some of the time. Pretty quickly the freeze system comes under attack because the other manufacturers want to catch up. Wait, what happened to controlling costs ? Out the window.
It also turns out that the gearboxes aren't well matched to the engines, they have too many gears, this helps the engine manufacturers, because they don't want to rev the engines high to keep under the fuel flow limit.
The engines are much more expensive, but teams haven't reduced the spending in other areas that they increased in the V8 days, they just have to find some more money from somewhere. They all sign new Concorde agreements with FOM.
Then, the whinging starts - its too expensive, we should get more prize money (or at least make it equal), they get the EU involved because they now don't like the FOM deal that they signed. At the same time they ask more of the engine manufacturers. In the case of a certain Mr Horner he moans continuously thats its all so unfair and Renault aren't even worthy of being scraped off his shoe. It looks bad for the sport.
What also looks bad is that the engines are quiet - because during the whole regulation setting thing everyone forgot to think about the show. The engines are too quiet, Merc disappear down the road at the start of each race.
Drivers are careful to conserve the engines so don't push when they don't need to.. at times its almost like 2 hour F1 races are being treated like endurance races, which is kind of wrong. You can't blame the race engineers - they're doing their job, which is to win/get the best result - so if thats what takes, thats what they do.
Horner has his gawping face all over the TV b
hing and moaning at every race. The media are having a field day.The team manager for one struggling teams (who badly need sponsorship) is quoted in the press as saying they wouldn't get involved in F1 as a sponsor! Probably through frustration, but what a stupid thing to say.
The FIA for their part pursue and ill-advised legal action against Merc for "illegal testing" (that they actually sanctioned). They look like fools and it reflects badly on the sport.
Promoters aren't happy, that means Mr E isn't happy. Engine manufacturers couldn't give a toss. Technically the engines are amazing bits of kit, but no-one really gives a toss that they are limited on fuel flow.
Take last weekend - drivers get asked a "what would you like.." type question - one pipes up with "V12s!" in a press conference. Awkward. People don't care how clever the engines are.
Teams are spending a bunch of money on these engines - development is unlimited. Although the usage limit has dropped I bet they are paying more now than they were in 2014. For what ? to please some exec in a boardroom that the F1 engines are "road relevant" ? Show me V6 1600 hybrid road cars with a fuel flow limit then. Oh.
Everyone involved with regulation setting is to blame - engine manufacturers, teams, Mr E, the FIA - they all played their part.
The problem is now if we go back to cheap engines - if they open up the regs making a 1000hp racing engine isn't going to be that expensive - make them dirt cheap and usage unlimited - use it for a race and bin it (like the "good old days" as some would say). What happens ? will teams spend less ? of course not - they'll just use that money to do something else... The lesser teams will then moan its all too expensive but get dragged along with the rest of the circus anyway.
The FIA need to let Brawn rule the roost on technology - they simply don't have the knowledge or understanding but meddle with things, they need to stop that.
Lets have the engines capable of being used on the limit. If that means they use 40 $1m engines instead of 4 $10m engines, so be it. Lets have regulations that are about racing and not the commercial/political aims of the FIA or engine manufacturers. If a manufacturer doesn't want to be a part of that, then fine, plenty of other companies can make cheap, powerful engines.
Lets see hoe the story develops. I won't be surprised if Brawn suggests changes for say, 2019 - as discussed a few tweaks could make a big difference.
ETA: Just seen this, right on cue, max wants V10s. http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/128760...
Edited by Crafty_ on Sunday 2nd April 19:15
The single biggest issue facing modern F1 is that it is overly-reliant on volume car manufacturers.
Cheaper engines that could be produced by the likes of Gibson and Cosworth would remove the manufacturers' grip on the sport. Yes, the big teams will spend the saving on other things and it will still cost a lot to build a competitive car, but it would lower the cost of entry allowing smaller teams to enter and race, and we wouldn't have the ridiculous road-relevance nonsense foisted on the sport, which has resulted in the visually and aurally unspectacular cars of today.
There is absolutely no need for the engine of a 200mph, open-wheel, winged racing car to be road-relevant. In fact, the current engines aren't - the technology they rely on for their huge efficiency is far too expensive to use in road car applications. Yes, the green lobby, who are credited with far more power than they actually have, will wail and gnash their teeth. But, people will still know that Hamilton drives a Mercedes and the other British bloke drives a Renault.
Cheaper engines that could be produced by the likes of Gibson and Cosworth would remove the manufacturers' grip on the sport. Yes, the big teams will spend the saving on other things and it will still cost a lot to build a competitive car, but it would lower the cost of entry allowing smaller teams to enter and race, and we wouldn't have the ridiculous road-relevance nonsense foisted on the sport, which has resulted in the visually and aurally unspectacular cars of today.
There is absolutely no need for the engine of a 200mph, open-wheel, winged racing car to be road-relevant. In fact, the current engines aren't - the technology they rely on for their huge efficiency is far too expensive to use in road car applications. Yes, the green lobby, who are credited with far more power than they actually have, will wail and gnash their teeth. But, people will still know that Hamilton drives a Mercedes and the other British bloke drives a Renault.
Edited by HardtopManual on Sunday 2nd April 20:01
Crafty_ said:
The FIA need to let Brawn rule the roost on technology - they simply don't have the knowledge or understanding but meddle with things, they need to stop that.
Lets have the engines capable of being used on the limit. If that means they use 40 $1m engines instead of 4 $10m engines, so be it. Lets have regulations that are about racing and not the commercial/political aims of the FIA or engine manufacturers. If a manufacturer doesn't want to be a part of that, then fine, plenty of other companies can make cheap, powerful engines.
Lets have the engines capable of being used on the limit. If that means they use 40 $1m engines instead of 4 $10m engines, so be it. Lets have regulations that are about racing and not the commercial/political aims of the FIA or engine manufacturers. If a manufacturer doesn't want to be a part of that, then fine, plenty of other companies can make cheap, powerful engines.
If things are allowed to continue the way things are now, F1 risks disappearing up its own arse. The engines are too expensive, too complex, and largely irrelevant to most fans, who just want to see loud, fast racing cars driven on the limit by the best drivers in the world. Saving fuel and managing hybrid engine modes isn't exciting.
thegreenhell said:
If things are allowed to continue the way things are now, F1 risks disappearing up its own arse. The engines are too expensive, too complex, and largely irrelevant to most fans, who just want to see loud, fast racing cars driven on the limit by the best drivers in the world. Saving fuel and managing hybrid engine modes isn't exciting.
Chasing the money isn't going to stop. Everyone seems to think that because CVC & Bernie are gone everything is goingto be different - well, some things are going to change but LM are in it for the money.
If you look at NASCAR the cars have to relevance to their road going counterparts, the chassis is mandated by NASCAR to fit a certain design (although there is scope to build good and bad cars). The engines in Cup only moved to fuel injection a couple of years ago - the engines are 2V pushrod engines that make pretty close to F1 figures.
Everyone, including manufacturers accept that racing is for racing and doesn't need to bear any relevance to road cars, barring the badge on the front. I don't doubt that there are Jimmie Johnson fans who bought a Chevy because his #48 race car is one. A lot of money comes from sponsors and they get mentioned often in interviews, right now the pit reporter is doing a report stood in front a massive toolbox with EBAY MOTORS plastered all over it.
It does cost serious money to compete, but you could run a 2 car team for a year for the cost of a single F1 engine. The racing so far this year has been good too thanks to some sporting reg changes.
The sport has plenty of detractors, but its still here, plenty of people still watch and it makes a whole bunch of money. I'm sure LM would like 26+ car fields at F1 races and they could do worse than look at how NASCAR works - especially in terms of fan interaction.
If you look at NASCAR the cars have to relevance to their road going counterparts, the chassis is mandated by NASCAR to fit a certain design (although there is scope to build good and bad cars). The engines in Cup only moved to fuel injection a couple of years ago - the engines are 2V pushrod engines that make pretty close to F1 figures.
Everyone, including manufacturers accept that racing is for racing and doesn't need to bear any relevance to road cars, barring the badge on the front. I don't doubt that there are Jimmie Johnson fans who bought a Chevy because his #48 race car is one. A lot of money comes from sponsors and they get mentioned often in interviews, right now the pit reporter is doing a report stood in front a massive toolbox with EBAY MOTORS plastered all over it.
It does cost serious money to compete, but you could run a 2 car team for a year for the cost of a single F1 engine. The racing so far this year has been good too thanks to some sporting reg changes.
The sport has plenty of detractors, but its still here, plenty of people still watch and it makes a whole bunch of money. I'm sure LM would like 26+ car fields at F1 races and they could do worse than look at how NASCAR works - especially in terms of fan interaction.
HustleRussell said:
fck todt hes such a political French tw1t
mainly French tw1t
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-motor-f1-engines... before
and now after
FIA President Jean Todt said: "I was very pleased with the process, and the fact that so many different stakeholders were able to agree on a direction for the FIA F1 world championship in such an important technical area.
Edited by housen on Monday 3rd April 07:43
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff