Because in fact I believe Mercedes their threat was far more real had the engine changes not come.
That was far more acceptable- they didn’t make the threat because they were sore losers. They had the best engine at the time anyway and were achieving pretty decent results as a supplier if not a works team. But continuing with that engine made no sense to them as a car manufacturer. I do think that’s a shame and wish the manufacturers had a deeper passion for racing beyond marketing, but that’s the way it is, as demonstrated by the 2008 mass-exodus. Merc are happy to be in F1 while it’s relevant for them, Red Bull are happy to be in F1 while they’re winning. I see one as far worse than the other.
On the other hand, the offset is that now cars have fixed gearing you rarely get the situation where the chasing car reaches their top speed and stops catching before the end of the DRS zone- now DRS is an advantage for longer.
Tradition, business, the impact of ruining the sport for millions of fans who appreciate a team competition with development, making thousands unemployed and the companies that currently employ them collapsing.
Thanks for such a comprehensive answer. Although it’s great to hear such impressive power figures, it’s a shame that they can be fairly meaningless if it only translates to being usable a couple of times a lap. Same story with the F1 cars, for which I assume even the quoted ICE figures only apply to when the car hits the redline- which it doesn’t at present.
How much of the power is usable according to the regulations? Aren’t there limits about either how much they can generate or use? I’m curious about how often any of these cars are actually able to hit their peak figure.