Importance of privateers & garagistas for the character of F1

[vorticism]

The idea of a fuel flow regulated engine was floated by Keith Duckworth several decades ago. It has considerable merit and can only be partly blamed for the shortcomings of the current formula.

In isolation, maybe, devoid of some other rules. We ultimately got the engine-layout-by-committee that no one wanted; six cylinders as a chassis brace and a marketing hedge against having two cylinders fewer. Consider that every motorsport is fuel flow limited to some degree by nature of combustion properties and fuel cell weight. This inherent limit was deemed not good enough by F1, and its larger culture, that wanted there to be some sort of connection to road cars which I think was a way to justify budgets. Which is to say, F1 became too reliant upon advertising money, specifically manufacturer involvement. RB and McLaren and Williams could run a better version of F1. RB trying to get into the engine biz is interesting in this sense. Said another way: if a Cosworth can't supply an F1 engine, is it still F1?

Technology could permit the simplification of engine development if only the regs would allow it. The non-works teams should be manufacturing engines on their own.

F1 was a niche and should become one again. Automotive mega corporations should perhaps be shown the door. That or the non-works teams should conspire to form a counter series. Way things are going, the works teams and their corporate donors will only be able to produce heavier more convoluted cars; electrification is where their motherships are headed, again for arbitrary reasoning. The alternative is to return to the earlier spirit of F1 which was less concerned about road relevance.

The secret may be in writing rules about who can participate. Non-works teams and, if possible, the FIA should walk away and say no involvement by corporations over a certain size (measured by employee count or profit). The cars are then composed not so diffently from how they are now; mostly in-house, with a large percentage of components from boutique suppliers. Include the engine in that mix. Engines by Cosworth, nascent RBPT, possibly McLaren.

If you ask, "How will they afford it," well, then you have to also ask, how did they ever afford it? In the history of F1. How many ads were trackside when Coventry Climax engines were running the courses? How many stickers were on the car? How large were the stickers? How does a person afford a hobby? How does a group of people afford a hobby? How does a large group of people afford a hobby?

Side question-- Do RB, Sauber and Williams count as garagistas or is there another term for them?

[vorticism]

Mecachrome as well, for an engine supplier. Along with Cosworth, RBPT, McLaren (they do make their road car turbo V8s correct?). I know there are other companies out there of this ilk; if you know of one please mention it.



Do you agree or disagree that large manufacturer involvement (Ferrari, Mercedes, Renault) is harming the nature of F1? Ferrari might be salvageable, although they are an SUV and burgeoning EV manufacturer now. Would they build V12s for race cars if the EU only permits them to build electrified V6s?

With a modified engine formula, it is much easier for smaller companies to produce a 'power unit'. Look at what Cosworth were able to provide GMA--a couple hundred 4.0l 650hp V12s at a cost of some fraction of $2m (cost of a T.50). This within the 'engine formula' of world automotive markets. Those engines could be tweaked to run a portion of a season and wouldn't be out of place in a revised F1 rulebook.

If given the choice would RB for example ditch the Honda hybrid and run a version of the Valkyrie V12 in one of their homemade chassis? That opens up a question about various other parameters. Probably they would want to turbocharge it or modify the cylinder count.

[izzy]

Well what is it we want to watch? Affordable or expensive? Awe-inspiring or sensible? F1 is the most popular it's ever been, so we have to account for why we think that is. Making allowances for when some of us were young and everything was perfect

[Jolle]

Mecachrome as well, for an engine supplier. Along with Cosworth, RBPT, McLaren (they do make their road car turbo V8s correct?). I know there are other companies out there of this ilk; if you know of one please mention it.

https://www.lemans.org/media/cache/api_ ... 740959.jpg

Do you agree or disagree that large manufacturer involvement (Ferrari, Mercedes, Renault) is harming the nature of F1? Ferrari might be salvageable, although they are an SUV and burgeoning EV manufacturer now. Would they build V12s for race cars if the EU only permits them to build electrified V6s?

With a modified engine formula, it is much easier for smaller companies to produce a 'power unit'. Look at what Cosworth were able to provide GMA--a couple hundred 4.0l 650hp V12s at a cost of some fraction of $2m (cost of a T.50). This within the 'engine formula' of world automotive markets. Those engines could be tweaked to run a portion of a season and wouldn't be out of place in a revised F1 rulebook.

If given the choice would RB for example ditch the Honda hybrid and run a version of the Valkyrie V12 in one of their homemade chassis? That opens up a question about various other parameters. Probably they would want to turbocharge it or modify the cylinder count.

McLaren does not make their own V8's. Its an old Nissan design that is reworked by Riccardo.

As for road engines (even the high end ones) vs F1 racing engines. The costs are not in the cylinder count, the turbo's etc but in that last percent of performance. All manufacturers can make a cheap V6HT, but it would have 100hp less than they have now. And you don't win races like that. Same goes for a V12. Daimler, Ferrari and RedBull would spend about the same as they do now to get the most out of it. It's not a question how expensive it is, but how much the manufacturers are willing to spend.

As for the romantic idea of that cosworth V8 that was powering half the field in the seventies, it was paid/a project from Ford. Just like Mercedes is using Ilmore (well, they actually bought the company), a Renault is a Meccachrome and Yamaha was buying their engines at Judd, etc etc. I think for the real last independent engine manufacture you have to go back to the early sixties when they were racing under F2 rules.

[vorticism]

McLaren does not make their own V8's. Its an old Nissan design that is reworked by Riccardo.

As for road engines (even the high end ones) vs F1 racing engines. The costs are not in the cylinder count, the turbo's etc but in that last percent of performance. All manufacturers can make a cheap V6HT, but it would have 100hp less than they have now. And you don't win races like that. Same goes for a V12. Daimler, Ferrari and RedBull would spend about the same as they do now to get the most out of it. It's not a question how expensive it is, but how much the manufacturers are willing to spend.

As for the romantic idea of that cosworth V8 that was powering half the field in the seventies, it was paid/a project from Ford. Just like Mercedes is using Ilmore (well, they actually bought the company), a Renault is a Meccachrome and Yamaha was buying their engines at Judd, etc etc. I think for the real last independent engine manufacture you have to go back to the early sixties when they were racing under F2 rules.

Yes, it's Nissan blueprints, but McLaren actually do the manufacturing, don't they? Just speaking as their potential as a manufacturer.

Yes, there is the continued question of cost vs performance, and how regulations influence that.

If mass market auto manufacturers are barred from the sport, we'd perhaps not see less money spent on engine development, that would be unavoidable. Aside from loss of funding restricting development. So then how would that free up the garage teams to develop their cars? What would they develop? If your sponsors are not companies forced to produce warrantied EVs and hybrids, how does that change the championship? If the competition cars are less road relevant would this draw in more spectator money? Authenticity and novelty might provide greater interest to the spectator. Rather than relying upon woke P.T. Barnums like LibertyTM to turn the sport into a 200mph soap opera.

[Jolle]

McLaren does not make their own V8's. Its an old Nissan design that is reworked by Riccardo.

As for road engines (even the high end ones) vs F1 racing engines. The costs are not in the cylinder count, the turbo's etc but in that last percent of performance. All manufacturers can make a cheap V6HT, but it would have 100hp less than they have now. And you don't win races like that. Same goes for a V12. Daimler, Ferrari and RedBull would spend about the same as they do now to get the most out of it. It's not a question how expensive it is, but how much the manufacturers are willing to spend.

As for the romantic idea of that cosworth V8 that was powering half the field in the seventies, it was paid/a project from Ford. Just like Mercedes is using Ilmore (well, they actually bought the company), a Renault is a Meccachrome and Yamaha was buying their engines at Judd, etc etc. I think for the real last independent engine manufacture you have to go back to the early sixties when they were racing under F2 rules.

Yes, it's Nissan blueprints, but McLaren actually do the manufacturing, don't they? Just speaking as their potential as a manufacturer.

Yes, there is the continued question of cost vs performance, and how regulations influence that.

If mass market auto manufacturers are barred from the sport, we'd perhaps not see less money spent on engine development, that would be unavoidable. Aside from loss of funding restricting development. So then how would that free up the garage teams to develop their cars? What would they develop?

McLaren does not make their engines, like I said, Riccaro is making them.

If mass manufacturers are banned. This would include Exor NV? as they are on their way to become maybe the largest of them all? And what would be the difference in RedBull as not a car manufacturer or PMI (like they ordered some engines from Porsche for their team) putting in several hundreds of millions a year versus Daimler or Exor?

Lets say, Mercedes isn't allowed in F1 anymore. HPP could go back to its original name Illmore engineering. Daimler only has 30% stake in the team, so that's no problem. So it would be the Ineos Ilmore. Same people, same budget and same performance. Ferrari has to stop, Honda can't make engines for RedBull anymore and maybe Enstone could use some old Meccachrome engines?

The big car companies are just fancy sponsors, nothing more, nothing less. PMI, Daimler, RedBull, no difference. They have a budget, buy in an engine and tech and go racing.

The next step would be, no more sponsors, Just rich kids driving cars around, like in the fifties.

[vorticism]

If mass manufacturers are banned. This would include Exor NV? as they are on their way to become maybe the largest of them all? And what would be the difference in RedBull as not a car manufacturer or PMI (like they ordered some engines from Porsche for their team) putting in several hundreds of millions a year versus Daimler or Exor?

...

The big car companies are just fancy sponsors, nothing more, nothing less. PMI, Daimler, RedBull, no difference. They have a budget, buy in an engine and tech and go racing.

Who is Exor tied in with currently? Are you saying the own stakes in one of the garage teams?

"The big car companies are just fancy sponsors..." How does sponsorship affect regulations? Budgets? Rule crafting? How are sponsors drawn to the sport? As it relates: Why would a motorsports participant be overly concerned about consuming 200l of fuel on a weekend vs 400l? Among all of the other more expensive factors of racing.

It was the big car companies pushing for the current era of engine formula, not Cosworth, correct? Is the GMA V12 based on a mass market manufacturer's engineering drawings?

[Big Tea]

The 'privateers & garagistas' could only exist if manufacturers produced dedicated F1 engines and other parts.
The boom years of garagest it would have been far different without the Ford engine. There were efforts to stick 2 half engines together or convert fire pump engines, but in reality Ferrari would have won 99% of the time without what was in actuality another factory entry.

My vote. Maybe

Edited as an after thought, Without the big 3 being in F1 this last 2 decades I am convinced F1 cars would be running modified motorcycle engines.

[vorticism]

The 'privateers & garagistas' could only exist if manufacturers produced dedicated F1 engines and other parts.

That's why I'm saying have RB/McLaren/Williams etc manufacture their own engines, or source from boutique/non-mass-market manufactures. Like the aformentioned Cosworth (who've built things other than a Ford V8 from the sixties), Mecachrome, RBPT, Riccardo maybe.

It's like saying you need 'the manufacturers' to build a chassis, or a wing. You don't.

[JordanMugen]

There were efforts to stick 2 half engines together or convert fire pump engines, but in reality Ferrari would have won 99% of the time without what was in actuality another factory entry.

That's just patently false, no? Both the Coventry Climax and Repco privateer engines won lots of races, much more than 1%.

Repco (Brabham) - 8 wins, 25 podiums from 33 starts (24% win rate)
Coventry Climax - 40 wins, 104 podiums from 96 starts (41% win rate)

[Big Tea]

The 'privateers & garagistas' could only exist if manufacturers produced dedicated F1 engines and other parts.

That's why I'm saying have RB/McLaren/Williams etc manufacture their own engines, or source from boutique/non-mass-market manufactures. Like the aformentioned Cosworth (who've built things other than a Ford V8 from the sixties), Mecachrome, RBPT, Riccardo maybe.

It's like saying you need 'the manufacturers' to build a chassis, or a wing. You don't.

But where are the engines? They were not built last time when they were far simpler, so would they be built now?
They will not use uncompetitive engines, so either the likes of Ferrari would have to supply everyone or a standard engine built and Ferrari made to use it, and they would probably leave.
I do understand what you are saying, and it would be nice, but would it be possible? or even desirable?

Edit, would Ferrari also have to leave? They are a manufacturer , and depending on how you decide so are renault, Mclaren and Aston, and Alpha.

[vorticism]

If a company like Elmer Engineering (10-20 people?) can produce " the highest power-to-mass ratio of any OEM circuit racing engine ever! (beating the previous record holder, the Honda V10 F1 engine)" then what can McLaren, RBPT, Cosworth, with 50-100 people in the powertrain department produce?

Apples to oranges a bit, TT vs F1. Hopefully I'm getting the point across.

https://shop.elmerracing.com/

[JordanMugen]

Without the big 3 being in F1 this last 2 decades I am convinced F1 cars would be running modified motorcycle engines.

What's wrong with that?

By all means the 2.4L V8s are large motorcycle engines (two 1.2L inline-four GP bike engines joined together effectively), Honda of course being a motorcycle manufacturer, and they were much loved for their motorcycle-like characteristics. As were all the other motorcycle-like F1 engines, like the 1.5L V12 -- effectively two 750cc inline-six bike engines joined together, the DFV Cosworth, the Matra V12, the BRM H16, the Ferrari flat-12, and all the others.

But where are the engines?

AER V8 from LMP1
http://www.mulsannescorner.com/AERLMP1-4.jpg

Menard V12
http://www.f1album.com/albums/misc/bloo ... D3-42c.jpg

The venerable Judd V10, of course.
https://racecarsdirect.com/content/User ... 99.jpg?v=2

There are lots of independent racing engines.

They will not use uncompetitive engines

Obviously the category engine, for example a twin-turbo AER V8, would use different rules with a balance of performance mechanism so it was equal to the best of the manufacturer engines.

That's the whole point of having a category engine, if you refer to the BTCC for instance, where the TOCA category engine is guaranteed to be equal to the best of the manufacturer engines. Or you could detune the manufacturer engines under the balance of performance, and use the same rules, like the BTCC. Either way.

[Big Tea]

Without the big 3 being in F1 this last 2 decades I am convinced F1 cars would be running modified motorcycle engines.

What's wrong with that?

By all means the 2.4L V8s are large motorcycle engines (two 1.2L inline-four GP bike engines joined together effectively), Honda of course being a motorcycle manufacturer, and they were much loved for their motorcycle-like characteristics. As were all the other motorcycle-like F1 engines, like the 1.5L V12 -- effectively two 750cc inline-six bike engines joined together, the DFV Cosworth and all the others.

This guy does stuff like that

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hp66Sx62Aj0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxppucmdbeI

Edited to add this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjxiHLZdSGw

A V8 from Kawasaki engines if any interest

[vorticism]

Edit, would Ferrari also have to leave? They are a manufacturer , and depending on how you decide so are renault, Mclaren and Aston, and Alpha.

Yes, they may have to as they link road cars, road relevance, to their F1 expenditures. They are choosing to sell SUVs and batteries now.

Garage teams don't have this conflict of interest. You are saying you need a Ferrari to supply the engines, yet Cosworth supplied engines alongside. With Ferrari Merc and Renault types gone, smaller less conflicted manufacturers may supply the engines which would allow them to focus on racing parameters instead of marketing games.