F1 Fanatic

PM you did not pay attention to the rest of what I wrote ” It has been known for some time ” is hearsay not evidence and my point is not that the engines will be a disaster, or that they wont sound good but that they will be a backward step.

I did pay attention to your argument. And it’s quite clear that all you are trying to do is bury my argument in semantics for the sake of strengthening your own when, rather ironically, you have no evidence of the claims you made in your opening post.

Latest news is that the circuit operators are not happy with the new regulations either, they are emphasising the engine noise issue knowing that a lot of the under 30 yrs. crowd feel strongly about this.

They’re not going to defect. Bernie will not let them. As soon as the first batch of new engines are produced, everyone will see that they sound similar to the current engines, and the circuits will stop caring.

No, your claim that the 2014 engine rules will be a disaster. That’s the claim you have no proof of.

The 2014 engine rules are only a step on the way to the disaster that is creeping up on us, which is going to be the standard engine.

You have no proof that a standard engine is being planned. If anything, the original 2013 regulations were closer to a standard engine, since Max Mosley was talking up the idea of a “world engine” to be used by all teams in all forms of World Championship motorsport – Formula 1, WRC, WTCC, etc.

have slight differences need artificial assistance in order to make a pass on the straights

It’s fairly clear you have absolutely no understanding of the sport, then. The DRS was not added because the engines are too similar to one another to be able to pass, but because the use of aerodynamics in the cars was making it impossible for themt to get closer to one another. A car with good aerodynamics and a bad engine will always do better than a car with bad aerodynamics and a good engine.

No Prisoner Monkey, I understand the sport better than you do, there is nothing in the aerodynamic aspect of the current cars that stops cars from following or overtaking on the straights, the aerodynamics only prevent the following car from following closely in corners where their aerodynamic downforce is compromised by the turbulent air created by the car in front, the two methods introduced by the FIA in an attempt to overcome this problem,KERS and DRS both try to emulate a more powerful engine, Kers by increasing torque and therefore acceleration out of the corner and DRS by increasing the power to drag ratio. Kers of course was self defeating because both cars had it, DRS is restricted to provide limited opportunity and is an artificial overtaking gimmick.

I agree with HoHum here, one of the most distinguishing characteristics of Formula One historically and traditionally is the ability of not only drivers racing, but also constructors racing, engine manufacturers racing, tyres suppliers racing, aerodynamicists racing, strategists racing each other, etc, etc, etc.

I don’t know if this is the reason for Formula One being the pinnacle of motorsport or for the huge difference in audience between F1 and other motorsport series, but having this DNA it sure helped. The ability of Colin Chapman’s skirts, Frank Williams driver aids, Adrian Newey aero-genius and Ross Brawn’s Double Diffusor, amongst others, the ability of these inovations in winning championships is unique in the world of sport and it would be very very dumb if we were to revert F1 to being a kind of over-priced GP2.

I don’t know about the engine issue in discussion here, as I’m no expert nor I follow it too close, but in principle I’m always in favour of giving the teams more room to innovate. On the other hand, some of the best innovations in F1 history derived precisely from the regulations being restrictive. So I’ll side with those who say we should keep the noise of the engines.

they appear to be promoting a technical race between the suppliers.

this is what Formula One is about! Although it can lead to episodes like US 2005 (it was about tyres that time).

To all those that said after (during!) the Indianapolis 2005 that it was the end of F1, the sport was in disrepute (why does it seems sometimes that different people tend to use the same words and expressions when regarding to F1 discussion? why do we hear always “disrepute”, and not discredit or reproach, etc?; I counted 26 synonyms for the word, here: http://thesaurus.com/browse/disrepute ), it’s a dark day in history, etc.. to all those people, I say it was in fact a beatiful day for F1, one more in the history of drama this 50 years soap opera has used us to. And it brought tones of first pages in newspapers and mediums that usually reserve a small column, if that, to the sport.. like the other one says “every publicity is good publicity”

McEngine if the press-release is correct then they are sure to be trying all ways to get more power from every cc of fuel burnt, win-win situation.