Di Montezemolo: 2013 engine rules ??pathetic??

F1 Fanatic round-up

Ferrari boss Luca di Montezemolo is concerned about the new, cost-cutting engine rules for 2013.

Di Montezemolo has told Auto Motor und Sport: ??Four cylinders is not Formula One. We will not be building any for our street cars [and] for the top class of racing it sounds a bit pathetic.?

??Why couldn’t we have a V6 turbo? We should not confuse affordable with cheap.?


Ferrari opposes ‘pathetic’ engine changes (ESPN)

??Ferrari boss Luca di Montezemolo has admitted he is looking for allies in his aversion to Formula One’s new engine formula for 2013. When the four-cylinder turbo regulations were announced recently, di Montezemolo said the team was ??not happy? but ??will not stand in the way?.??

Brawn plays down speculation over his future (ESPN)

??Mercedes team principal Ross Brawn has looked to play down increasing speculation over his future amid a reported restructuring of the German team. ??I will not resign until this team is successful,? he told Germany’s Auto Motor Und Sport.??

Construction underway on Austin F1 venue (Formula1.com)

??Work has begun in earnest on the new United States Grand Prix venue in Texas, as race organisers push ahead with preparations for Formula One racing?s return to the country in 2012.

??To view the circuit’s draft 3-D layout in more detail click here. To view the circuit’s draft 2-D layout in more detail click here.??

Jenson Button on 2011 (The_Real_JB via Twitter)

??Good 3km swim this morning, now we’re stuffing our faces! Hawaii rocks!

??Big thanks to all my fans for your support over the years.. I’ve got a feeling 2011 is going to be a very special year! Bring it on ;-)??

The Dakar Rally: Scariest race in world beat the terrorists (The Express)

??It’s dangerous enough to border on the insane. A 6,000-mile dash around jagged terrain but with a unique appeal to professionals and amateurs determined to test the limits of driver and car to the utmost.

??The 33rd Dakar Rally started yesterday with 430 machines ?ǣ some with two wheels, others with four or even six. Originally it went from Paris to Dakar, in Senegal, but the threat of terrorism has forced the event to move continent ?ǣ drivers are now confronted by a daunting loop around Argentina and Chile.??

Timo Glock in training (Twitpic via realTimoGlock)

??After a hard training day, there is a Lasagne waiting for me and for you the proof, that I don???t eat just soup and salad! Have a nice Sunday evening.??

Comment of the day

Sahajesh is going to the Belgian Grand Prix and has a few questions ?ǣ can anybody help?

I?m going to my first GP ever (Spa 2011) and I?m undecided between Silver 1, Silver 2 and Gold 4. I?m guessing Gold 4 would be a better location (higher up, great views of Eau Rouge etc) but I?d appreciate comments from the people here.

There will be 3 of us going (and a birthday weekend for one of us), this guy loves F1 and Spa as well!

What are the relative views from each stand and what would you choose?

From the forum

As we head into a mammoth long season, Zadak asks where does the future of the Spanish Grand Prix lie?

Happy birthday!

A big happy birthday to Ajokay ?ǣ hope you have a great day!

On this day in F1

And happy birthday to Michael Schumacher, who is 42 years old today.

The seven-time world champion is the oldest F1 driver on the grid. His career history includes 91 victories, 1,441 championship points and 76 fastest laps, spanning 269 race entries.

After a difficult 2010, Schumacher remains with Mercedes this year.

Advert | Go Ad-free


186 comments on Di Montezemolo: 2013 engine rules ??pathetic??

  1. Maciek said on 3rd January 2011, 8:58

    I think DiMontezemolo is just preaching to his flock. People who buy Ferraris aren’t likely to put a high importance on relevance and sustainability, methinks. They’re rather much more likely to think that ‘small engines’ means ‘the poor’, like Toyota owners. He’s just playing it up for them.

  2. Mike said on 3rd January 2011, 9:03

    Di Montezemolo: “pathetic”

    I agree. This whole V8’s are the only real engines thing is pathetic in itself. Why don’t we just go for W12’s?


    Surely a 3.5 litre 12 cylinder engine must be the pinnacle of motor sport. *Sarcasm*

    The engine’s have been the same every year for ages now, Can’t you guys be a little enthusiastic about the prospect of the engines being part of the package of the F1 car, rather than a rather boring talking point for Legard?

    I mean, geez, do you really want to hear the commentators going on about how the Merc is more powerful but the Renault is more efficient in 2014 and 2015 as well?

    I mean, Forcing engineers to try and create new and revolutionary engines with smiler levels of power with half the cylinders within tight resource limits? Isn’t that what F1 should be? Inventive and innovative minds creating solutions to problems the world wouldn’t otherwise be able to solve?

    And to answer Luca’s question, Why couldn’t we have a V6 turbo? The same reason we don’t have V10 turbos, fan cars, 6 wheels with jet engines attached. They are trying to keep F1 reasonably safe for the drivers.

    The fool should keep his mouth shut.

    • breza said on 3rd January 2011, 9:16

      Wow, such ignorance…
      Mike, Mike, Mike, you just don’t get it, don’t you? F1 was always about pushing the envelope and going faster, not the Volvo commercial!
      Fan cars and 6-wheelers are the stuff everybody wants to see. Safe? I keep my gun in one…

      • Maciek said on 3rd January 2011, 11:33

        Does your everybody include anyone besides yourself? Fan cars etc are what everyone likes to be nostalgic about, including me, but seeing them racing now would be like watching spitfires take on modern fighter aircraft – it’s a fantastically romantic idea, but just as ridiculous. And bravo to you for practicing gun safety. Even small steps out of the dark ages are progress, so you must be on the right track.

      • adamf184 (@adamf184) said on 3rd January 2011, 11:45

        Pushing the envelope and going faster? Is that what the currently frozen V8 the harks back decades is!?!? Lagging behind current real world engine development and going the same speed each year more like.

        Im not sure if you comment was for/against new engine or just against safety

      • F1 was always about pushing the envelope and going faster,

        Well, not in the last few decades. The FIA has brought in multitudes of regulations just to keep the speeds of the cars down, and rightly so. F1 without rules would be chaotic to say the least, and wouldn’t survive in today’s politically correct world.

        • US_Peter (@us_peter) said on 3rd January 2011, 18:35

          Not to mention that one of the main safety features in place (track runoff) would constantly be having to be increased and modified if cars were continually getting faster and faster every year.

  3. breza said on 3rd January 2011, 9:12

    Four cylinders in F1 sounds so pathetic, nevermind they will do the business. The problem is that F1 must go along the hype in car industry, and use technologies that can be placed in commercials. Will 4c engines in F1 save the planet? F1 is already saving the planet keeping few hundred million drivers in front of their LCD-s for few hours during the race weekends, so they do enough… Downsizing is the word right now, so downsizing in F1 it is. Luca has the point, 4c engines are a little bit “not in Ferrari F1 style”, but high technology is high technology-nevermind the size

  4. Superted666 said on 3rd January 2011, 9:18

    If the FIA continue down this path of thinking then how long will it be before they curtail things like aero decelopments to ‘road relevant’ and we will end up with just really fast road cars.

    There’s tons of motorsport classes in the world, why can’t we use series such as touring car or lower formula to develop smaller engines?

    I’m already disappointed that the slowest f1 car in the pack isnt much faster than the fastest GP2 car. Formula One to me should be the most advanced and powerful race car possible within safe reasoning.

    I see the appeal for the FIA to entice manufacturers to the sport but plenty of small engine open wheel racer formulas exist, let’s keep it different, let’s keep it a spectacle!

    I’m more amazed by a screaming V10 or V12 than a large turbo and the engine out of a ford fiesta.

    • US_Peter (@us_peter) said on 3rd January 2011, 18:37

      There’s tons of motorsport classes in the world, why can’t we use series such as touring car or lower formula to develop smaller engines?

      Because no other class of motorsport has the level of investment and pace of development that F1 does.

  5. GeeMac (@geemac) said on 3rd January 2011, 10:37

    Correct me if I’m wrong here, but I always though that the BMW powered Brabham Turbo’s were 1.5l straight 4’s.

  6. Dutch_Alex said on 3rd January 2011, 11:29

    All this durability and environmental friendly talk is not what F1 is about. Formula 1 is about having a car that can drive a grand prix distance faster than any other competitor (plus offering some degree of safety, so we don’t see a driver get killed every weekend). It was never about road relevance. All technologies that found their way to road cars were developed for one thing: Making race cars faster. Not because they would be good for road cars.

    So instead of dictating exactly what they can and can not build, why not leave some degree of freedom. I bet that if you scrap the rules about exactly how much power a KERS system can deliver and for how long, we would have super efficient KERS systems producing hundreds of horsepower for laps. Why? Because that would make cars faster. And maybe if it is relevant for road cars, the technology finds its way there.

    • jimscreechy (@) said on 6th January 2011, 1:27

      Best, probably truest comment I have seen on this site to date! Well said, well said.

  7. SVettel (@) said on 3rd January 2011, 11:44

    What about the turbo era when F1 cars could make 1500bhp? Then, they only had 1.5l V6s, which, when compared to the 2.4 V8s, the smaller engines have about double the power of the larger, normally aspirated engines.
    Smaller engines with more power! Group B Formula 1 cars!!!

    • Argent (@argent) said on 3rd January 2011, 14:19

      Those engines made that power at 5.5 bar; during the race they were running less than half that. Do you really think that with the downforce levels of today that the FIA will allow that level of forced induction?

    • Stephan said on 3rd January 2011, 19:57

      Peoples memories of the early 80’s turbo days is the biggest problem because as was said before these turbo motors will be rather neutered things due to tight regulations which will focus engineers attention rather on the dead end technoligy of hybrid technology.

      Personally I blame the fact that the FIA is trying to ruin the beautiful sport that I love so much on stupid smelly hippys.

  8. Maciek said on 3rd January 2011, 11:57

    I like steam locomotives. They represented a pinnacle of technology in their day. People still get nostalgic about them and that’s a nice and pleasant thing. And I’m sure you can find afficionados who’ll tell you why they were much better than modern transport. Be that as it may, there’s a host of obvious reasons why we don’t travel in them every day and wouldn’t want to, no matter how quaint it might seem.

    Saying that such and such a thing is not what F1 was about in the past so why should it be now, is no argument at all. Things change and you can either make the best of the changes or you can get left behind and become a technological dinosaur. It’s all a question of perception really. A lot of people seem to identify speed and technology with big, loud engines, but those kinds of engines were just a product of their time and of a certain level of technological development. We can be nostalgic about them, but technology will always move towards efficiency. It’s in the nature of research. So unless we want F1 to become an obsolete relic, and if we really think it should be the pinnacle of motorsport, then we have to say: rest in peace to big engines. We will always love you, but we’ve outgrown this relationship.

    • bosyber (@bosyber) said on 3rd January 2011, 12:44

      Well said. I like the look of steam trucks (see for example http://www.darkroastedblend.com/2007/12/steam-buses-trucks.html) but I don’t think we need new steam powered cars or trucks back.

    • jimscreechy (@) said on 6th January 2011, 1:54

      I don’t completely disagree, but I do think you are confusing confusing notions of the sport in which are clearly seperate entities. Yes things change and to do anything but accept this to some degree is foolhardy, but some fundemental objectivs of the sport don’t change. Saying such and such is not what f1 about is a fairly accurate assesment of the objectives of the sport, particularly in the context Dutch Alex details in his next sentence. I have VERY little doubt F1 will ever have any other objective than beating the other guy by producing a faster more relaible car than your rivals. And if it does, then perhaps it isn’t really F1 as it was either originally defined, or as it has been come to be accepted, regardles of how it is officially titled.

      The F1A can make all the rule changes they like with whatever objectives they have in mind, good or bad for the sport, but teams, fans, drivers and others involved have certain expectations that need to be considered. Deviating from these expectations can have disatrous often unexpect results particularly if they are rejected by the people who actual do consider F1 ‘Not to be about’ the new principles that have been stipulated.

      Once upon a time football and rubgy were the same sport, and subsequently rugby league and union. Sepation comes preciesly for the reason that people find new rules, objectives or directions unacceptable, and in effect contrary to what they consider the sport to ‘be about’ a concept you seem to dismiss out of hand. The budget cap is a very good example of this unaceptable change in opearation that prompted teams to make a break away group.

      I think it is a very valid point indeed.

  9. Jolerto said on 3rd January 2011, 13:41

    Why do you keep forgetting about the 10,000 rev restriction and 600 hp restriction? Just a thought…

    • Jolerto said on 3rd January 2011, 13:43

      Also did you guys see the new Gp2 2011/onwards Dallara spec car? http://gp2series.com/

    • Stephan said on 3rd January 2011, 20:04

      I don’t understand why everyone is forgetting about it either. I could maybe live with those regulations if those 2 limtations werent there.

    • Hairpin (@hairpin) said on 6th January 2011, 23:18

      Hold on a minute letts sort this out.
      Here is a section of the proposed 2013 regs.

      The WMSC approved the introduction of a new specification engine from 2013, underlining the FIA’s commitment to improving sustainability and addressing the needs of the automotive industry.

      Following dialogue with the engine manufacturers and experts in this field, the power units will be four cylinders, 1.6 litre with high pressure gasoline injection up to 500 bar with a maximum of 12,000 rpm.

      So I see no mention of 10000 rpm or maximum horsepower, or even turbos, although there will need to be some kind of forced air induction for that power on a small engine.

      Please if you must correct people, correct them correctly or they’ll incorrectly beleive there correct and correct others incorrectly, got tit!

  10. Is it me or does formula1.com always seem to be days behind in their “reporting” of stories?

  11. Racefan said on 3rd January 2011, 15:22

    Four cylinder turbos with KERS can only mean one thing,
    slower F1 cars!Can’t agree more to LDM bcause V6 turbos are still an option.It does change the game in terms of technology at the same time, without losing the noise and glamour F1 stands for.

    • BasCB (@bascb) said on 3rd January 2011, 15:56

      Why? These cars will very probably be slower at the start of the new rules being put into place, but after some development, I exptect them to be almost as fast.
      With the smaller engines, they will be very agile. The engine capacity will be boosted by the KERS systems to help out at lower Revs where combustion engines are less effective.

      It is a bit different concept, but after all the teams went form big chunky V12 engines to lighter V10 and V8 engines for a better total package. We are doing not tractor pulling or drag racing here were only pure power matters.

      • Patrickl (@patrickl) said on 3rd January 2011, 16:32

        Even if they catch up during the season. They will be slower.

        Not sure how that is either a surprise or a problem though. The cars simply are starting to go too fast again. So it’s obvious that regulation changes will be implemented to make them go slower. Or perhaps “less ridiculously fast” is a better phrase.

  12. Bartholomew said on 3rd January 2011, 16:04

    Luca should look at the positive side : developing fantastic powertrains for their partners in America, the Chrysler group.

  13. We Want Turbos said on 3rd January 2011, 16:14

    I can’t believe people are complaining going from official stats off Mclaren when switching from V10’s to V8’s power was down 200bhp did it detract from the sport? I think not, however the engine freeze did. The 4 pot turbos should be 700 bhp which is a drop of 50bhp However hopefully with a reduction in the minimum weight an a relaxation of the KERS rules (more power for longer periods) these cars should be faster, more economical (yet lighter and faster still), couple that with the aero updates and 2013 F1 should be awesome… Then hopefully with a little common sense from the FIA 2014 and beyond should be better and better and better…

    • Stephan said on 3rd January 2011, 20:12

      Have you even looked at the proposed regulations at all? Engine power will be limited to 600hp and revs will be limited to 10000 RPM. These engine regs are too tight and choking.

  14. I don’t think that anyone is actually stopping Ferrari from putting V12’s into its road cars, in much the same way that no one is stopping Mercedes and McLaren from doing the same. They shouldn’t be too surprised, however, when even stricter emission regulations and governments refusals to take hand-outs of cash in lieu of turning a blind eye to their ridiculous fuel consumption/emission figures, start becoming the norm.

    If they think that they can get emissions on the same level as an inline 4, then good luck to them.

    Countries like China, Russia, Brazil and India don’t need to be adding to a problem that we’re trying to make go away.

    It may also have escaped everyones notice that the COTY (car of the year) 2011 is Nissan’s “Leaf”!!!!

  15. matt88 (@matt88) said on 3rd January 2011, 18:10

    Luca, this time you’re wrong. I know that most people loved the V12 sound and then the V10… and then the V8. F1 evolves and every time legends were born due to the engineering and road challenges, not because of sound. in 2013, it will be the same, only with a different “scream of science”. :)

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.

Skip to toolbar