Comments on: Rumours about equalising F1 engines

By: D. Hussey

D. Hussey — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 18:50:54 +0000

If Ferrari can afford to produce a car (engine and chassis) and be competitive then certainly Toyota, Honda and BMW can afford it (although money spent does not equal results.. just ask Toyota!). Over regulation restricts innovation which only hampers small teams. Where is the team starting the season with some funky hybrid powerplant that they alone have that puts Ferrari and McLaren into backmarker status? Anyone remember the 6 wheel Tyrrell? I for one miss the days of racing being about racing and not just another commercial. We might as well just watch F2 or even Nascar for our spec racing.

By: D Shepperd

D Shepperd — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 04:22:28 +0000

I am certain the likes of Toyota and other manufactures would see far less value in F1 if they had to use say a ferrari engine, even if they are allowed to call it a Toyota engine they will know as will everyone else the truth of it. Or perhaps the dubious duo see it as a way of making themselves lots more money by selling the contract to supply F1 teams with an approved engines.

By: D Winn

D Winn — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 15:53:33 +0000

Can you imagine the situation if the mad Max spec engine is introduced – and we all know who would be first choice to supply it !
No works teams from BMW Toyota Honda Renault.
I can’t see McLaren using an engine from ‘them’ or even ‘them’ agreeing to supply McLaren.
That leaves 5 teams in F1 – or should that be ‘FR1′ (FRed1).
It seems to me that Max is out to kill F1 before he goes and he is already part way there.

ps -’The car in front is a Toyota, powered by Fiat’
‘The Power of Dreams, the power of Fiat’
‘The Ultimate Driving Machine, driven by Fiat’
‘Twice the va va voom, twice the Fiat’
‘Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren, bred from the passion
of racing and the knowledge gained from Fiat’

By: Ron

Ron — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 07:12:16 +0000

And I thought F1 was the unrestricted series in Formula racing.
i think Molsey should watch GP2 and other spec series and leave F1 to those who understand what it’s all about.
and if renault are having problems adapting then they shouldnt be sad, cause they have all those formula renault’s to content with.
I say leave F1 be what it can be, the most technologically advanced open wheels racing series there will ever be.
mind you, A1Gp have a new car and it’s already more advanced on many fronts then next year’s cars. well almost.
F1 should be at the cutting edge of racing and automotive technology. the technical rule book should be slimmer and less intrusive.
however everythign should be controlled by the driver that is. keeping in mind that there is a human factor in the sport.

so Mosley go get a season ticket to GP2 and Formual Ford, and leave F1 be with your dumbass ideas. prepostrous!!!!

Enzo Ferrari must be turning in his grave right about now.

By: beneboy

beneboy — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 19:06:39 +0000

I think the development freeze has been a joke.

Some teams are obviously still developing their engines, while others are not – How is this fair to anyone, the fans included ?

The only rule I would like introducing for engines is that from the start of next season each team would be given a set amount of fuel for the race and that would be all they are allowed to use.

Each year the amount of fuel would be reduced to encourage fuel efficiency developments & keep the power outputs to a safe level.

Other than that I think the teams should be able to develop any type of engine they think will help them win the race.

All of this talk of cutting costs is a waste of time.
Some teams will always have bigger budgets than others, I for one loved the fact that Minardi managed to keep running for so long with so little money and I would hope & pray before each and every race that they would get a good result.

Monza’s result felt so good because I finaly got to see Minardi’s successors, STR, win a GP, without wishing to sound cheesy, it really was a dream come true and I ran around the house like I was 8.

A spec racing series is what F1 is slowly becoming and I don’t like it.

By: William Wilgus

William Wilgus — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 14:54:34 +0000

No customer cars—but customer engines are O.K. What a bunch of clap-trap. But anyway, here’s a great way to save money on engines: limit them to one (1) cylinder! (Just think of all the parts, machining that would eliminate.)

By: MattX

MattX — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 14:10:39 +0000

There is a simple answer evolving out of the last few comments here. LIMIT THE FUEL. Every team has a set amount that equates to a certain amount of energy that can be used to get the car round the track. The amount could steadily drop every year (by say 5%)so the engineers know how to design for the future. Allow cars to theoretically get to the end on one tank if they wish (as alternative technology such as KERS comes in refueling will become ever more pointless)
Engine development would move forward in the short term as everyone optimised their engines but you could end with small turbo or supercharged, or gas turbines to an electric motor or more efficient N/A engines etc. As the fuel cuts down each year the emphasis moves away from engines to KERS etc the team will gradually move their focus to these other areas. Not even F1 teams will spend £20m on 1% engine performance improvement, if you can get 20% KERS improvement. This means more innovation with completely new tech (traditionally the small teams do this as they have less to lose with experimental ideas) and the manufacturers might learn something but definitley have a better marketing message

By: Pingguest

Pingguest — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 13:21:33 +0000

If Formula 1 really want continue to be the pinnacle of (open-whee) racing it should open-up the engine rules dramatically and only reduce the engine performances by limiting the fuel consumption. This would make Formula 1 more road relevant and enable manufactures to justify their budgets.

By: Mick

Mick — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 11:44:55 +0000

Renault definitely fell behind and this is probably the FIA trying to get them back up there. I say, keep it the way it is. I wasn’t keen on the engine freeze either. The technology is there. Exploit it. We are at the pinacle of motorpsort. It doesn’t attract the best drivers and engineers for nothing. Let’s see what the guys can do. Only restrict based on safety, for everything else, push the limits.

By: Jean

Jean — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 10:19:06 +0000

FIA are playing with the rules too much and too often. (Maybe deliberately so ?)Once all the limits are clearly set out ( regarding aero. parts / engine revs. / electronics / suspension / tyres), it should stay the same for at least five years. Ferrari’s and McLaren’s development curve would probably initially be steeper than others , for example , but even for teams like them , a limit to the efficiency of any innovation is eventually achieved. That would have the effect of allowing smaller teams a chance to catch up in the next or following years . So while FIA blast wind about so called “cost-cutting” , the frequent rule changes we have become accustomed to in recent years are probably the catalyst towards additional spending , not to mention having a situation where Williams , for example , are forever left behind. As for equality of engines , goes completely against the spirit of the sport of F1.

By: Magnus

Magnus — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 09:31:58 +0000

If all the engines are the same and technology is getting close to identical why would I bother to watch formula one? I might as well watch A1GP. Or we might as well use standardised Minis.

To me one of the great attractions of F1 is the contest between manufacturers to produce a better all round performance than their competitors; ultimately good drivers need excellent cars to win and formula one should demand that the envelope be pushed hard at all times. So a big NO to standardised engines. Keep some interest in the contest.

If cost is a problem perhaps driver contacts need to be revisited?

Formula One can only remain the pinnacle of motor racing if it is a great contest on all fronts.

By: antonyob

antonyob — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 09:17:34 +0000

id rather they left the cars alone and let them play around with the engines.

heres what i think should be done: radiators must sit ahead of the front wheels and be limited to 1 foot in depth, the engine must sit behind that and again ahead of the driver. the body must have no visible aero wings or ears/chimmneys/gullys what have yous. id re allow turbo’s and keep kers as a nod to enviro conscience as it may spread its use to road cars. id get rid of the paddle shift nonsense and take off power steering, this will naturally limit tyre width but id let every team decide how wide they wanted to run the tyres within limits.

Finally id have 2 sprint races on the sunday, the first race decided by quallifying the second a reverse of the first ( a la touring cars) so 1st starts last etc and very finally id give a point for fastest lap.

By: DG

DG — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 08:58:30 +0000

If this really is a serious suggestion then I think it is the first step towards Bernies rumoured ‘GP1′ spec. Of course he wants the equal cars, as he sells the ’show’ on the drivers and not the teams. He has already hinted that he prefers to count the Champion from the number of wins, and not the number of points, so he doesn’t want the teams to count for much….very similar to GP2.
However, I can see the Manufacturers not liking this, but Bernie now has control of them with FOTA, so it will be ‘like it or lump it’. He will be playing them off against each other to be the sole engine supplier too…
I wonder if it will mean that a ‘Team’ could run more than 2 cars? The independant ‘Teams’ will be pretty safe – Red Bull, Williams, Torro Rosso, Force India, its only the ‘Works’ teams which are under threat – Ferrari, BMW (although they can run as Sauber), Toyota, Honda, McLaren (although they don’t have to use Mercedes engines).
And certainly if the KERS development continues, it would be cheaper all round to have one supplier looking after all the cars, again similar to GP2.
On a slight off-topic, Gerhard Berger has said that STR is not really for sale, just looking for a secure backer separate to Red Bull, to comply with the vague ‘Customer Car’ rules. I wonder what the rules would say if Ferrari (as engine supplier) pumped more funds into the team for chassis development etc….?

By: AussieLeb

AussieLeb — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 08:28:29 +0000

All I can say is “Obvious issue rearing it’s ugly head” It can be done but shouldn’t. Reason being that it wouldn’t feel right for me, to turn up on a Sunday evening in my lounge room, south of Sydney, wearing my Ferrari red PJ’s and prancing horse logo-ed baseball cap (not to mention the claret red G-string!) to watch a replay of the Singapore night race, when I know that next door, John is in similar attire (only his G-string is al-foil for McLaren)but after all our efforts are in vain as it’s irrelevant which constructor we support it’d be all about the driver not the team.

On the other hand it would have to make more sense to limit the funds available to each team. I believe if Ferrari had Force India’s resources or vice versa it wouldn’t have the same negative impact as spec engines.

In closing, spec engines in F1 = moot point.

By: Architrion

Architrion — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 08:03:58 +0000

Didn’t this man have to resign and dedicate himself to a full-leather sexual life? It’s only a question I have…..

By: Robert McKay

Robert McKay — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 07:55:09 +0000

I would rather see all the teams use the same engine than what F1 is currently doing it’s best to do in making the teams all build their own engine and then working backwards and trying to equalise them from there, which makes no sense at all. Ok this year has saw some differences begin to appear again between engines, but progress is being made by circumventing the rules to do so!

There’s quite a bit of snobbishness about spec series. I think the thing to remember is that Mosely does actually get some things right – when he says that most people don’t care if the manufacturers spend $x million to get another 5 bhp or 500rpm, he’s right. The hardcore F1 fans might care and might think it’s against the ethos of F1, but so are customer cars apparenttly and noone is telling Vettel his win doesn’t count because his team didn’t build their car and they didn’t build their engine.

By: John Spencer

John Spencer — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 07:26:54 +0000

None of Max’s ‘cost-saving’ measures has ever saved any money. Even if the cars were all re-badged Formula Fords, the teams would still spend $500 million on wind tunnels and CFD work to optimise the shape of the driver’s helmet. And McLaren would drop another 500 mil developing an even shinier silver paint.

Everything Max says and does has the whiff of Machiavellian politics about it. He is probably doing one or all of the following:

1. Allay the fears of Briatore and Horner so that they will support him on a different unpopular measure.
2. Propose something extreme, to make the less extreme measure he really wants to implement more palatable.
3. Distract the teams from a completely different rule change they would otherwise have rejected.
4. Force the teams to put all their powertrain development cash into KERS, given that so many of them have voiced doubts as to whether they will run it next year.

By: Lustigson

Lustigson — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 07:21:52 +0000

I think good racing is hardly dependant on engines. If the dependency on aerodynamic grip is (partly) fixed for next season, let us see what else is necessary.

If we want to see drivers race eachother with spec cars and spec engines, we might as well watch GP2, World Series by Renault et al.

By: Noel

Noel — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 07:03:45 +0000

Remember, this is an idea currently, not an implemented rule…

I can imagine this would not be at all popular with the major engine manufacturers in F1. Ferrari certainly wouldn’t be happy giving-up its sporty engine image, and Mercedes would hate the idea of being dissociated with a winning car.

A good article and debate, but I think the answer is clear… this is so totally unlikely to happen.

By: mail123456

mail123456 — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 06:59:20 +0000

nice one Max … Did all teams must use Ferrari’s engines ? or how exactly Ferrari or BMW or Toyota or Honda or any other manufacturer will use some 3rd party engine ?