Raikkonen not happy with balance yet – Domenicali

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Kimi Raikkonen, Ferrari, Albert Park, 2014In the round-up: Ferrari team principal Stefano Domenicali says Kimi Raikkonen is not happy with the balance of his car yet.

Links

Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

Stefano Domenicali: “It’s like the cat has to bite the tail…” (Adam Cooper’s F1 Blog)

“I think we need to help Kimi in trying to find the right balance with the car, helping him because he deserves that. I think there was an improvement during the days.”

Walker furious at the lack of GP ‘screams’ (The Age)

“I was absolutely delighted with the whole weekend, but I was not too happy with the sound. We are resolving that with Bernie. It’s clearly in breach of our contract. I was talking to him last night [Sunday] and it’s not what we paid for. It’s going to change.”

Teams may pay price for quieter F1, says Ecclestone (Reuters)

“We give the teams a percentage of the revenue we receive. So if we are receiving less revenue, whatever the case may be, certainly the teams wouldn’t get as much. So it’s going to cost them.”

F1 2013 vs 2014 sound comparison – Melbourne (YouTube)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jS4Dh_EAfJI

Button ‘emotional’ after podium finish (The Telegraph)

“This weekend has been an emotional one for me, and the support I’ve had has been brilliant. That being the case, it would have been a real bonus if I could have celebrated my third place from the podium, alongside Nico and Kevin. But I really feel for Daniel, who drove a great race in his first race for his new team, in front of his home crowd.”

Red Bull rivals followed FIA sensors (Autosport)

“On the back of clarifications made by the FIA earlier this month – making it clear that the fuel-flow rate being produced by the sensor would be the one that determined conformity with the regulations – no other team went down the Red Bull route and deliberately ignored the sensor reading.”

Daniel Ricciardo, Red Bull, Albert Park, 2014Australian GP report by Mark Hughes (MotorSport)

“‘According to our analysis,’ said Red Bull’s Christian Horner, ‘we are losing a second per lap down the straights.’ One second per lap appeared to be the advantage Rosberg enjoyed over the Renault-powered Red Bull here. Rosberg admitted that, having earlier in the weekend worried about the fuel consumption, in the race it was not a concern. “I could see from quite early in the race that it wasn’t going to be a worry.”

Red Bull will be cleared: Paul Stoddart (The Sydney Morning Herald)

Daniel [Ricciardo] did not gain any advantage and that will be proven by Red Bull in their appeal.”

Australian Grand Prix – weighing the benefits from a state outlay of $58m (The Guardian)

“‘I don’t care if people like F1 or not, but let’s stop pretending it’s about the economy. People have a go at me and say ‘well, we subsidise the opera’. Well yes, we probably do, but the difference is the opera doesn’t claim it is in the best economic interests of Australia.”

Toro Rosso STR9 – cooling solutions (F1)

“The new 2014 power units mean all the teams have had to increase their cars’ radiator cooling, leading to some quite complex layouts. Toro Rosso’s is unique.”

UK supply chain keeps Formula One on track (FT, registration required)

“‘To be quite honest we don’t know what our parts are used for half the time,’ says Alan Rollason, managing director of ACE, a Shropshire company that makes parts for high performance engines.”

Maurice Hamilton: Papers miss bigger picture (ESPN)

“The 11-hour time difference did at least allow writers to wait for the stewards’ decision without worrying about missing the early editions of their paper, as would have been the case had the race been in Europe. As a result, all of the Monday dailies carried the story. The various interpretations literally made interesting reading.”

#ForzaMichael! – 17 March (Ferrari)

“Michael, we think and talk about you and your family every day, and we anxiously await good news from this, your greatest challenge of all. You have all of our support and best wishes in these dark days and we desperately hope for and look forward to happier times with all of our hearts. The Brundle family.”

Sky’s fortunes increase as BBC’s Australian Grand Prix ratings drop (The F1 Broadcasting Blog)

“Yes, a Sky gain of 73k is great for them, but if BBC loses nearly 200k, it eradicates whatever gain Sky is made.”

Revolutionising racing (The Way It Is)

“It will be fascinating to see how F1′s new world order takes shape after Ecclestone finally retires or is removed from the scene. Most longtime observers believe a gruesome power struggle will ensue among the team owners, CVC and the FIA that’s likely to do the sport more damage than good.”

Melbourne podium highlights the problem with GP2 (Duncan Stephen)

“Both Ricciardo and Magnussen cut their teeth in Formula Renault 3.5. For a long time, Formula Renault 3.5 has seemed like a better school for wannabe F1 stars than the Bernie Ecclestone-backed GP2 Series.”

Tata Communications powers Remote Operations for Formula 1 (Tata via YouTube)

http://youtu.be/3HHyZyFLlj8

Tweets

Comment of the day

Red Bull’s dramas aside, how competitive are the world champions this year? Thoughts from @Estesark:

I’m not sure where Red Bull fit into the pecking order after all this.

Vettel had a software problem on his car, which should be resolved easily enough. Ricciardo appeared to have no problems at all – and excellent pace – until the stewards announced their decision to disqualify him.

I don’t understand why his team chose to ignore the rulebook, but if his fuel rate monitor really was faulty, perhaps they anticipated getting a working one for Malaysia and chose to use the race as a testing session. If that is the case, they could be much closer to the front than most people anticipated. On the other hand, if their monitor wasn’t faulty, then Ricciardo’s pace was misleading and they could be anywhere.

My instinct tells me it’s the former. If the team can sort out its reliability issues then more podium finishes are well within their grasp for the next few races.
@Estesark

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Oskar!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is by emailling me, using Twitter or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

1994 F1 seasonOn this day 20 years ago Benetton confirmed Jos Verstappen would be Michael Schumacher’s team mate for the first race of 1994 in Brazil, JJ Lehto having not recovered sufficiently from his neck injuries.

Verstappen only had 52 race starts to his name at the time but Benetton had fended off interest from McLaren to sign him as their test driver.

Images © Ferrari/Ercole Colombo, Red Bull/Getty

Advert | Go Ad-free

123 comments on Raikkonen not happy with balance yet – Domenicali

  1. Sir OBE said on 18th March 2014, 0:06

    It’s “car”, not “cat”! Didn’t you read the article?

  2. OmarR-Pepper (@omarr-pepper) said on 18th March 2014, 0:11

    If Red Bull gets their appeal ok, that automatically means Ric gets his points back?

    • Sir OBE said on 18th March 2014, 0:17

      And that automatically means everyone else was an idiot for listening to FIA? I don’t think that’s going to happen.

    • Yes, he should.

    • frankus28 (@frankus28) said on 18th March 2014, 0:33

      I hope Ricciardo will get his points back!

      At the 1995 Brazilian GP, Michael Schumacher (1st) & David Coulthard (2nd) got disqualified for fuel sample irregularities which promoted Gerhard Berger to 1st place. An appeal of the FIA decision followed and MSC & DC were reinstated to 1st and 2nd place months later. However, Benetton and Williams were stripped of their WCC points from the race.

      As an Aussie and a Ricciardo fan, this would be a pretty good outcome. But I feel that the FIA has a great case against Red Bull with evidence to suggest they actively ignored a directive from the FIA – I’m pessimistic.

      • ivz (@ivz) said on 18th March 2014, 2:35

        I think regardless if Red Bull can prove that they were within the limit, the FIA will want to make an example of all this right (as in, not matter what, do what we say!)?

        On another note, Ferrari must be shaking their heads, to have the advantage of building an all new power unit and chassis together, and then to be totally outclassed by Mercedes, and not only that, be slower than Red Bull (who are down on power and reliability at this stage in comparison)….they either have the wrong people on the team, or they were too negative about the rule changes, which impacted their attitude.

        • Corrado (@corrado-dub) said on 18th March 2014, 7:42

          I don’t know what makes you think RBR is faster than Ferrari, because only in the Quali and Race RBR managed to come out in front, but in Quali “special” conditions helped too. And the race was pretty dull in front, a procession. So far, Ferrari/Alonso was faster than both RBRs in every pre-Quali session. Fastest lap time of the race for each driver proves this too. I think we should wait another 2-3 races for a clearer picture.

      • dennis (@dennis) said on 18th March 2014, 8:36

        @frankus28

        It’s terrible for Ricciardo, but giving him his points back, but not Red Bull (as they did in ’95) would open the floodgates for all sorts of deliberate cheating in the later stages of the season. Imagine in theory, a team has already won the constructor’s championchip (or has no chance in improving the position), but still a stab at the driver’s championchip. Just run with an illegal fuel monitor (as an example), perhaps gain a serious advantage in certain moments of the race and then say “Ooops! But it wasn’t the driver’s fault…”
        In that case we would need to punish the same offense with two different measures. And that’s wrong. I hated the decision in 1995. Thankfully it had no impact on the order.

        It should be either all points, or no points. With Red Bull actively ignoring the FIA – this isn’t a case of argueing about ‘stretching the rules’ like usual – I have a hard time finding any justification to give the points back, even though it’s – as I said – a tough one of Ricciardo.

        • @f1p1 (@f1p1) said on 18th March 2014, 11:28

          It makes folowing the sport confusing and frustrating. We want consistency and a set of rules that are not open to interpretation. Not that this was the case. Here, a rule seems to have been broken.

    • Brian C (@bcracing) said on 18th March 2014, 15:12

      It’s not going to happen. You don’t troll the FIA and walk away scott free.

    • petebaldwin (@petebaldwin) said on 18th March 2014, 16:26

      If Red Bull get away with this, I assume that means that none of the teams have to follow the fuel cap anymore?

  3. Sir OBE said on 18th March 2014, 0:16

    I was not too happy with the sound. We are resolving that with Bernie.

    This just shows you that all the rich people live in the dream world. Is Bernie going to alter the laws of physics, making these engines produce more noise? Are they gonna rev them at 18000 rpm from now on? These people are ridiculous. And that’s sadly how most politicians think. Extremely declarative, with no goddamn idea about actually doing anything.

    • Albert said on 18th March 2014, 7:42

      Try not to be that quick to judge prople. “Talking with Bernie” could mean a lot things, from asking for rule changes to money compensations for the lost spectacle. The “that’s not what we paid for” makes me think it’s the latter.

      Don’t be that desperate to judge people and label them as idiots if you don’t really know what exactly is going on.

      • JerseyF1 (@jerseyf1) said on 18th March 2014, 9:32

        It’s clearly in breach of our contract

        This is just pure headline grabbing nonsense – and possibly trying to cozy up to Bernie to help with negotiation of the next contract.

        When the last Australian GP contract was signed in 2010 the expectation was for an inline 4 cylinder engine revving to a maximum of 12,000rpm and similar turbo and energy recovery systems so if anything I would imagine the expectation would have been for even quieter power units when the contract was agreed.

        Bernie might like to think he makes the rules but he doesn’t and the current V6 turbos are thankfully here to stay for a good few years yet.

      • I think you missed the “It’s going to change” at the end. That is pure arrogance and as sir OBE puts it “Extremely declarative, with no goddamn idea about actually doing anything”.

        The reality is that the turbo “destroys” the sound waves, and dampens the volume, and this is true for both exhaust and intake noise. The now smaller engines must now use less fuel, so the combustion is smaller too. They will not be able to produce the same sound pressure as the normal aspirated V8s did, unless they cheat and use loudspeakers like in the new BMW M5 – that could really take a chunk out of ones f1 pride!

        I like the sound, as it is new and a welcome change, most of all. I was pleasantly surprised by the sound onboard, especially compared to the renault and mercedes dyno videos they released in the winter break.

    • drmouse (@drmouse) said on 18th March 2014, 9:29

      Is Bernie going to alter the laws of physics, making these engines produce more noise?

      I agree with this. The engines, as they stand, cannot produce “more noise”.

      I guess it comes down to the contract. If there is some way to interpret the wording such that it constitutes a breach of contract, other circuits will follow suit. It will then come down to a “which will cost us the least money” calculation, like auto manufacturers do over faults (will a recall cost less than the law suits). Will it cost more to pay compensation to all the tracks, or to the teams for having to redesign the engines?

      • Optimaximal (@optimaximal) said on 18th March 2014, 11:02

        Honestly, there’s likely room to alter the exhaust to generate more noise. You know, like the boy racers do with their Corsas…

        • drmouse (@drmouse) said on 18th March 2014, 13:22

          Nope.

          Boy racers in their Corsas fit less restrictive exhaust systems, and silencers (mufflers) with less/no baffles.

          On an F1 car, the exhaust is just a big pipe (after the turbo). They could make it bigger, but that wouldn’t increase the noise much (if at all), and would affect the performance. The exhaust length and diameter are tuned to the engine, and the engine to it. It probably has less of an effect now, as the turbo is in the way, but it would still have an effect.

          The main reason the cars are now quieter is because there is a turbo in the way. This acts like a silencer. To increase the noise, you would probably need to allow exhaust gasses to bypass the turbo (in some way), which would mess up everyone’s MGU-H mappings, reduce fuel efficiency (and power output), and generally require huge amounts of work from the teams and engine manufacturers.

    • Lewisham Milton said on 18th March 2014, 9:41

      “Resolving that with Bernie” normally means “giving Bernie lots of money”.

    • JCost (@jcost) said on 18th March 2014, 9:46

      I think he was talking about money…

    • Kazihno (@kazinho) said on 18th March 2014, 9:52

      Bernie is going to twist Jean Todt’s arm to introduce a third energy recovery unit to the cars that exclusively powers a sound system which will pump out 135dB of noise that matches the frequency of the olde V8/V10′s.

  4. Chris (@tophercheese21) said on 18th March 2014, 0:21

    I don’t get how the lack of noise is a breach of the AusGP contract.

    Is there a Claus that says the 22 car field must make a combined level of 1xx.xx decibels? Seems a bit ridiculous. On tv, I thought it sounded fine. Just get over it, it’s the first race.

    I wish race promoters were putting up this much of a fight against double points…

    • Spinmastermic (@spinmastermic) said on 18th March 2014, 1:33

      Yeah, Aus GP is half points so they get half sound.

    • Wallbreaker (@wallbreaker) said on 18th March 2014, 2:04

      +1

      I had to laugh hard when I read that nonsense. I wish people wouldn’t make such a fuzz of the new sound and produce so much negative PR for F1 when there’s so many new and exciting things.

      • Chris (@tophercheese21) said on 18th March 2014, 2:16

        Not to mention much more pressing issues that need addressing.

        As long as the racing is good, then I couldn’t care less about the sound. And Sunday’s race was a really exciting race!

        • ivz (@ivz) said on 18th March 2014, 2:42

          Have any of you been to a race before? The complaint is that they bought a ‘product’ and feel that it is no longer as exciting as what they agreed to. The sound is certainly no longer special, I mean you can hear the difference in the video posted, it no longer gives you the chills and excitement as before. It is rather odd though that they think they have a case, and think Bernie can change it? I mean, how on earth can they change it!?
          I thought they might end up sounding more like this (which sounds closer to what F1 used to be), from 1:30:
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXNLQQC_AGU

          • Chris (@tophercheese21) said on 18th March 2014, 4:46

            Yes, I went to the 2011 Aus GP, and the V8′s were bone shatteringly loud. But, surely Ron Walker or who ever it is who deals with the Aus GP contract would’ve known that these changes to the sport were coming, and there would’ve been discussion that the cars would be somewhat quieter.

          • pxcmerc (@pcxmerc) said on 18th March 2014, 6:09

            could you imagine if they had gone the 4 banger route instead of choosing the 6 cylinder option. Lolz. Listening to the cars in SuperGT is so sad, I hope the FIA get off their soap box and appreciate diverse solutions.

          • JCost (@jcost) said on 18th March 2014, 13:19

            Martin Brundle doesn’t like the sound either…

            I’m yet to hear them on sight but I’m afraid I’ll miss the loud naturally aspirated V8s when the day comes :(

          • Chris (@tophercheese21) said on 18th March 2014, 13:38

            @jcost

            Martin Brundle does like the sound, he just doesn’t think it’s loud enough. And I agree with him.

            I think the engines sound great, they’re just not loud enough.

        • joc_the_man (@joctheman) said on 18th March 2014, 16:39

          I do not think a race is good when you have no real racing for P1. Do not get carried away. Merc is in TOTAL control as long as the engines (or whatever we should call these things) works. Nico were cruising and the hunting guy’s did not have fuel and fuel-rates to race him.

    • HoHum (@hohum) said on 18th March 2014, 3:49

      Would that be the Santa Claus.

  5. Trido (@trido) said on 18th March 2014, 0:24

    I miss the scream, but you could see the difference to those on the pit straight. Last year, many were wearing hearing protection, this year, you could almost have a normal conversation with someone as they went past. The noise hasn’t been right since the end of the V10 era, but as long as the cars are fast I have no problem with the new sound.

  6. iFuel said on 18th March 2014, 0:36

    I never attended to a GP.. but this year I promised to myself I’ll go to Interlagos at the end of the year…
    I can’t help but feel a little sad that I wont be able to hear those screamers…

    • ivz (@ivz) said on 18th March 2014, 2:45

      Do they do a speed comparison (fast road car vs race car vs F1 car) at Interlagos? If so, you will still get the chance to hear the V8 scream in person, as they use an old car. Still, the V8 is not as special as the old V12′s or V10′s.

    • mantresx (@mantresx) said on 18th March 2014, 2:57

      Just look on youtube for a video shot from the grandstands (high quality with no clipping), turn the volume up and that’s pretty much how it is, seriously.

      I went last year to my first GP as well and after watching so many old and recent videos there were no surprises for me, other than my seat vibrating a little when they downshifted hehe.

  7. Kingshark (@kingshark) said on 18th March 2014, 0:39

    Am I the only one on here who does not give a flying damn about the sound of the cars? I want good racing, that is all that is important to me.

    • Tyler (@tdog) said on 18th March 2014, 0:44

      Personally I was in favour of retaining the old engines, but I accept that there is no going back on this issue – the argument has been won and lost. It’s time to move on.

      Ron Walker is just stirring the pot, and maybe trying to talk down the price of the next contract extension.

      I am not the first to make this point, but they do sound much better live than on TV, and by the end of the weekend I was growing rather used to it. Not as good as the old ones to this (biased) ear, but not as terrible as some would have you believe.

    • Andrew said on 18th March 2014, 0:57

      No, I feel exactly the same way. These schoolboy notions of what a race car should sound like are rather immature if you ask me. It’s the kind of nonsense I’d expect from the likes of Jeremy Clarkson, not serious racing fans.

      • drmouse (@drmouse) said on 18th March 2014, 9:32

        It’s the kind of nonsense I’d expect from the likes of Jeremy Clarkson, not serious racing fans.

        +1

      • Paul Sainsbuy said on 18th March 2014, 9:56

        It makes me very sad that the majority are just rolling over and accepting this. ‘Real fans’ are people who have visited many races and now have had their sport removed from them due to the noise being gone.

        • Optimaximal (@optimaximal) said on 18th March 2014, 11:07

          What are you talking about? The ‘noise’ is still there, it’s just ‘different’ because of a change to the technical regulations.

        • matt90 (@matt90) said on 18th March 2014, 12:30

          Sport is not the same as spectacle.

        • KeeleyObsessed (@keeleyobsessed) said on 18th March 2014, 12:52

          So the sport in which drivers have to drive on circuits at speeds regularly over 170mph, jostling for position over 180 miles with 20+ other drivers doing the same. All that is irrelevant and it’s now just about the noise?

          Sunday’s race was a good example of a race. There was jostling for position, technical problems, a couple of incidents and in the end, a clear winner. Those are usually the 4 main things people look for (or in the case of the clear winner, the lack of) during the RTR features on Sunday after the race. Any ‘real fans’, as you put it, wouldn’t be as fussed about the noise.

          You watch sport. You don’t listen to it.

          • Paul Sainsbury said on 18th March 2014, 16:31

            No, you’ve missed the point completely. In F1, we need, and previously had, all of the things you mention, AND the noise.

    • TK (@oeuribe) said on 18th March 2014, 1:07

      Great, I was feeling lonely.

    • Diego (@ironcito) said on 18th March 2014, 1:16

      Well, I wouldn’t go as far as not giving a flying damn about it, but it isn’t as important to me as it is to other people. I don’t share the “as loud as possible, blow my ears away” philosophy. I like being able to hear tires screeching, clear radio messages, and things like that. I’ve never seen a GP live, but I’m pretty sure I’d prefer not having to use ear protection too.

    • I like hearing all the other bits other than all the wasted energy shooting out the pipes. They remind me of the Audi R15 Le Mans car. “Noise is unused energy” -Dr. Wolfgang Ullrich (head of Audi Motorsport)

    • matt90 (@matt90) said on 18th March 2014, 1:55

      I’d like FOM to make them sound a little louder on TV, particularly during qualifying with just one car being too quiet. But otherwise I don’t mind. I would probably feel differently if I was a regular attendee though.

    • Andrei (@andrei) said on 18th March 2014, 3:09

      +1 You’re not alone.

    • HoHum (@hohum) said on 18th March 2014, 3:51

      me too

    • Hamilfan (@hamilfan) said on 18th March 2014, 4:34

      Actually , I see that a lot of people who attended live felt that the sound was distinctly different . Me , on the other hand had to turn up the TV volume so much to hear the much accustomed “wrrr”. I guess it makes a lot of difference on TV . But boy,am I glad I attended a 2013 race while I had a chance.
      But seriously , I don’t think it should be much of an issue as long we have a great fight for position in our hands.

    • Jan (@yancheelaa) said on 18th March 2014, 6:06

      +1 agree completely…. :)

    • Timothy Katz (@timothykatz) said on 18th March 2014, 7:39

      I agree completely.
      It’s the racing that matters, not the noise. In previous season’s I used to go to a race with earplugs firmly in place and feel the sound actually vibrating my chest as the cars screamed past. It was exciting yes, but at the same time I always wondered if it was doing me any harm.
      I always came away with a violent headache too.

      • JohnBt (@johnbt) said on 18th March 2014, 16:26

        [I always came away with a violent headache too.]

        Not if you use good waxed earplugs that fits exactly to yours. It was really pure joy to hear the fine art of V8 audio and of course the thundering vibrations and loud cracking too. And my ears never rang at all and it’s a streets circuit, cars are really close.

    • petebaldwin (@petebaldwin) said on 18th March 2014, 16:29

      The noise is part of what makes F1 what it is but I don’t think they sound bad now.

      Some work with the FOM mics to improve the sound would be an idea and perhaps, finding a way of increasing the volume for next year.

      It made no difference to my enjoyment of the race though. I’ve been priced out of going to watch F1 live so the sound at the track makes very little difference to me!

    • Toxic said on 18th March 2014, 22:33

      I’m with you. I actually was at the last year’s race and this year. If the racing would be as exciting as last year I would enjoy the race much more than last year. Finally you don’t need to worry about your ears, hear commentators and even discuss something with your mates.
      All those “couch experts” are becoming more and more annoying. If you really like the noise so much move somewhere next to the jets military base… they are much louder than last year’s F1 cars.
      Of course I get that some people at the track didn’t like the sound. I was in Melbourne with two of my mates that were having their first time experience and they said that they preferred last years noise (you could hear it during the speed comparison race). The thing is though, that they went there just to experience the event. It was more like a show for them and they didn’t really know what is happening on the track and who actually won the race.
      I don’t get how real fans care more about the sound than the racing itself.
      I must say though that the race wasn’t that exciting at the track. Almost all looked like not pushing and you could see that they probably care more about finishing the race than finishing it higher. If that changes as the season goes… it will be one of the best seasons from a long time.

  8. Grego Franco (@francogrego) said on 18th March 2014, 0:52

    I miss the engine noise, big time! The TV was in full volume but I can’t hear the engine. F1 is about great racing and engine noise haha. The good thing is I can hear and understand well the team radio.

    • Mouse_Nightshirt (@mouse_nightshirt) said on 18th March 2014, 1:38

      I noticed no difference in TV volume – they seemed to increase the volume on the trackside microphones, because although the cars seemed the same volume on this side of the telly, I could hear more of the “trackside ambiance” than previously.

  9. marsianwalrus (@einariliyev) said on 18th March 2014, 1:26

    I can’t see how the sound of an F1 car can put Bernie in breach of the GP contract, but Walker’s got a point – the sound isn’t right.

    To be honest until the Aussie GP I didn’t give a rotten damn about the engine noise; V8s were as welcome as V10s – I didn’t even notice a world of difference. But having watched the opening race, it was eerily quiet race with engine noises that sound like loud vacuum cleaners. I grew accustomed to it as the race went on; but it still felt like I was watching a different (albeit exciting sporting-wise) motorsport series, not Formula 1.

  10. Mach1 (@mach1) said on 18th March 2014, 2:13

    Can anyone please explain why the engines are so much quieter.
    Someone explained that is not to do with the lower rev limit as older f1 cars had much lower rev limits in the early 90s and before….
    Is it just that the engines are designed so efficiently with the turbo and ERS that there is much less energy loss as sound? Is that why the turbos of the 80s were so much louder….they were more inefficient and produced more sound? Were the 80s turbos actually louder than today’s cars?
    Regarding the sound, is there not a way it could be artificially enhanced via the exhaust? I remember seeing a BBC article on the McLaren MP4 12C where they basically showed how the engine sounds from the car are artificially created and “tuned” by a sound engineer. He worked with differing exhaust profiles to produce what McLaren deemed to be the perfect sound, pitch and loudness. It is a bit extreme and artificial, but hey, seems to be the trend in F1 these days….

    • Barry Miller (@bmk1586) said on 18th March 2014, 2:25

      I would say the turbo effects the sound the most because the exhaust is now muffled by having to go through the turbo instead of straigt out the back. I dont think revs have much to do witb it. IE top fuel dragsters dont rev increadibly high but are ear blowing loud

    • HoHum (@hohum) said on 18th March 2014, 3:59

      6 cylinders X 5000 firings (10000/2) = 30000Hz
      8 ” X 9000 ‘ (18000/2) = 54000Hz
      Explains the difference in pitch, less energy from less fuel and less energy again after turbo extracts energy gives a ROUGH explanation for the reduced volume.

      • bag0 (@bag0) said on 18th March 2014, 8:38

        @hohum
        Sorry, but your calculations are way off. RPM is revolutions/minute, while Hertz is 1/second.
        So 1 cylinder @ 10000 RPM fires 166,7/2 times a second, 6 of them would generate 500Hz.
        Not to mention, that 30KHz is way above what humans can hear (20Hz-22KHz)

        Also the firings only give the fundamental frequency of the sound. An ICE sound is mainly composed of the fundamental frequency and its harmonics, plus the formant (resonance frequency). Formant is the frequency at the exhaust resonate the most, and the sound energy becomes the maximum. There is also anti-resonance frequency. It is the frequency component that weakens the sound energy extremely.

        The volume could be altered at specific frequencies by modifying the formant, thus modifying the amplitude of the soundwave, which could be achieved by altering the exhaust.

        • HoHum (@hohum) said on 18th March 2014, 13:11

          @bago, thanks for the correction, I shouldn’t do these things late at night, I remember thinking “that seems high” but couldn’t see the missing step (divide by 60) for a rough idea.
          My solution to the lack of noise would be to attach a Tuba or French Horn to the exhaust outlet, that should do it. Anyway Mach1 has his answer now.

  11. Neil (@neiljames) said on 18th March 2014, 2:13

    I’m expecting little chrome-effect clip-on exhaust tips to be in the regulations by Bahrain.

  12. Aetost (@aetost) said on 18th March 2014, 2:18

    I actually enjoyed the lower engine noises from my TV! While the V8s were more aurally impressive, they could get annoying after a while, constantly buzzing like a swarm of bees. They would also sound the same, plus they would drown every other noise: Hearing the tires screeching and the crowds cheering was a revelation for me!!
    I do understand that a lot of people were disappointed for paying for admission to watch the race and not suffering from hearing loss afterwards, but that’s life…

    • mantresx (@mantresx) said on 18th March 2014, 2:48

      You’re absolutely right! After a while it was annoying to hear that monotone noise over and over, this also happened with the very high pitch of the V10s, I even remember being embarrassed when I was a kid to turn the volume way up because it would annoy everyone else, but then again in my family no one was an F1 fan back then ;)

    • Andrei (@andrei) said on 18th March 2014, 3:17

      Another interesting point is the contribution electric motors to the engine sound. I definitely like that hiss!

      • Theoddkiwi (@theoddkiwi) said on 18th March 2014, 4:13

        I was at the race and i had mixed feelings. I do really like the news sounds, the engines and thinking about whats going on inside is just fantastic!.
        I really enjoyed Saturday the most.
        The Race was great from a sound point of view except for one thing. That was when the field were bunched up like at the start and under the safety car. After all the cars had gone past it was pretty quiet. Once they cars were on the other side of the track it was like their was nothing going on. Then out of the blue suddenly they would be their again a bit like the race was paused for 30 seconds.
        When the field is spread out its was fine. So for me its just that you cant hear them from a distance and they do sneak up on you, that’s all.

        After all that, if recall my heady days of going to Rally New Zeland in the late 90s, the WRC cars were pretty quiet, with the sound of the car running on the gravel and the antilag systems giving themselves away. Ironically the Group As and F2 Rally cars of the 90s were louder. Or rather the F2 cars would just scream… but they had no turbo

    • BasCB (@bascb) said on 18th March 2014, 6:43

      I liked that too, hearing far more of what the cars are doing. And radio can be understood now too, another plus.

      The whole thing looks like Bernie continuing his battle against these new engines, for whatever reasons. Aren’t Ron Walker and Bernie very close – I remember it was Walker who was the first to claim that no track would even think of talking to the teams when they were seriously considering the break-away series a couple of years back, so its probably staged.
      A contract made by Bernie would certainly not give a promoter a guarantee for Minimum sound levels, rather the only notion of noise lvls that might be in the contract (for legal reasons with getting state permission to race) are MAXIMUM noise limits to be regarded.

      • Aetost (@aetost) said on 18th March 2014, 11:47

        @bascb I agree, the whole lawsuit thing sounds like one of Bernie’s weird schemes… Indeed, today he declared “war” against the engine sound… I don’t know if he tries to divert the press away from his trial, but I am getting tired of him and his PR ways.

  13. Barry Miller (@bmk1586) said on 18th March 2014, 2:20

    I dont see how they can decide to pay the teams less if the FIA dont recieve the income they planned on for the reason the PUs arent as loud. Its not the teams fault the FIA changed the rules without thinking of the potential backlash. Especially after all the money teams spend developing new cars around new PUs. That seems a breach of contract. Guess the FIA are really trying to hurt an already financially hampered sport(teams) for the benefit of their own pockets

    • BasCB (@bascb) said on 18th March 2014, 6:44

      You should question what FOM (Bernie) is proposing here, the FIA “only” does the rules, they only get a tiny amount of money out of it themselves

    • drmouse (@drmouse) said on 18th March 2014, 13:34

      I dont see how they can decide to pay the teams less if the FIA dont recieve the income they planned on

      It will all come down to the wording, and I suspect they can.

      As a simplified example, say the contract states that 10% of the revenue is divvied up between the teams. FOM refund the venues 25% of their fee because of this, and the same with the TV deals and all other sources of income. The teams will then get 25% less, because the revenue is 25% less.

    • joc_the_man (@joctheman) said on 18th March 2014, 16:33

      less people buying tickets because the thrill and excitement at the track is no longer there. Less people attract less sponors…less money. Simple as that. Death spiral.
      …I am one and there are loads of ‘me’ in that respect. To me it is … Sad times.

  14. Theoddkiwi (@theoddkiwi) said on 18th March 2014, 2:23

    Regarding Red Bull
    The fuel flow limit provides a power limit. In WRC they had a restrictor to the turbo inlet. That in itself limits the power of the engines.
    A number of times teams in WRC have been disqualified for running a larger restrictor.
    If you can all recall the Sauber’s were disqualified post race in Melbourne because their rear wing element cord dimensions was out by a few millimeters. They had no significant performance benefit and it was traced to a manufacturing error. There was no uproar because it did not affect the podium or a local driver. Sauber accepted the error as any respectful team would

    The Fuel Flow limit is designed to limit the peak potential power of the engine. Without a fuel flow limit they could have massive boosts of over 1000hp. By limiting the flow it prevents teams being able to have this level of boost even if they stay within the 100kg over the race. It also means during Qualifying they are not running ridiculous and unsafe power levels as fun as that might be to watch. I’d expect a fair few cars to end up in the wall in a flaming mess.

    Red Bull have no defense because regardless of if the fuel flow was faulty, they fitted a component without the FIA approval, and continuously ignored warnings during the race. Either of those is grounds for disqualification. This regardless of if a performance benefit was their or not. (I strongly suspect they were getting a benefit otherwise why would they not comply when instructed)
    Imagine a driver is given a drive through for a contentious passing move. Have you ever seen a team ignore a drive though? Being told to do something by the FIA is mandatory, the teams do not have discretion. Applying your own rules and ignoring the officials is grounds for disqualification.
    Perhaps the next a team who ignores them will simply be given a black flag during the race.

    Red Bull should be apologizing to Riccardo and do their up most to pay him back. They cheated him and the fans out of his best result. They should have accepted a guaranteed 4th or 5th position.

    • mantresx (@mantresx) said on 18th March 2014, 2:41

      The FIA also let this grow out of proportion by not black flagging Daniel in the first place, at least it gives us something to talk about until the next race.

    • HoHum (@hohum) said on 18th March 2014, 4:12

      Having read the COTD further reinforces my belief that to run at 96% power would have been a total loss for RBR, once they show that they were not using extra fuel they can at least say the/car and driver deserved 2nd. place, if they allowed the FIA to bully them into accepting racing underpowered no-one knows where Dan would have finished and there is no chance that he would be gifted 2nd. place. RBR had more to gain by running at the correct fuel flow than they did by running at the imposed fuel flow.

      • Theoddkiwi (@theoddkiwi) said on 18th March 2014, 4:23

        “RBR had more to gain by running at the correct fuel flow than they did by running at the imposed fuel flow.”

        Until they got disqualified. The had points to gain if they had run at the corrected fuel flow.
        I cannot think of any professional sport where you can get away with actively disobeying the referee.

      • Optimaximal (@optimaximal) said on 18th March 2014, 11:25

        @hohum You say this as if you have intrinsic insider knowledge that Red Bull’s ‘correct’ fuel flow is any more correct than the FIA’s.

        The FIA’s sensor is an homologated part that is overseen by a neutral party, one that also happens to set the rules the races are run to. If Red Bull ‘win’ this ruling, it basically destroys the FIA’s position in policing the sensors, if not the entire sport. Cheating the sensor will basically ‘be allowed’.

        It’s a political play.

        • Robbie (@robbie) said on 18th March 2014, 13:21

          Yeah I don’t see how the FIA were being bullies in this, and the day a team has more to gain from ignoring the FIA’s warnings and expects that to be without consequence is the day a whole can of worms opens up. So I don’t see any need nor room for politics in this issue…it’s fairly black and white to me and as has been pointed out, them proving they did not gain advantage is irrelevant. The FIA not only did not bully them, but gave them every opportunity to prevent this dsq from happening, so RBR has only themselves to look at in this.

        • HoHum (@hohum) said on 18th March 2014, 13:27

          At Optimaximal, it is RBR position that their FF is correct and they can prove it, if they are wrong it is a different ballgame as you point out. However both parties agree the sensor was inaccurate despite it having been tested and found to be within spec. before and during FP1, the manufacturer claims accuracy between 0.1% and 0.01% yet RBR were told to apply a correction of -4.00%, clearly they weren’t going to be competitive or representative running that far down on power which would have left them defenseless in the DRS zones, a couple of points maybe, 17 no way.

          • drmouse (@drmouse) said on 18th March 2014, 13:40

            it is RBR position that their FF is correct and they can prove it, if they are wrong it is a different ballgame as you point out

            Actually, I think the FIA’s position (as, I believe, it should be) is also that RB refused a direct instruction from the technical representative. The fuel flow actually becomes secondary in this instance.

            It is as if, in a football game, the referee gave one of their team a red card, and they refused to take the player off the pitch. It doesn’t matter whether you are right or wrong, you do what the ref tells you, or face the consequences. You may loose the game because of it, and feel cheated, but you do as you are damn well told!

  15. schooner (@schooner) said on 18th March 2014, 3:01

    That sound comparison from Melbourne is the most distinctive one that I’ve heard yet. I’ve been following and watching F1 for many years, and I guess that I’ve always taken the awesome sounds for granted. Engine configurations change, teams and drivers come and go, and the cars themselves morph into different and wonderful shapes. And while there may have been some minor grumbling about exhaust noises back in the previous turbo era, those cars were different beasts entirely. 900+ hp, fire spitting monsters! I get it that the sport needs to move forward to survive, but in my view it has lost a great deal of its visceral appeal in its latest form. I’m pretty sure that F1 has never before specifically addressed exhaust noise, and while doing so simply to make the cars louder would be a bit artificial, it needs looking into. F1 machines whispering by just won’t do.

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.