F1 engine re-equalisation

[bill shoe]

They could use ballast or reduce the maximum revs from winning pilots.

By the 6th or 7th race of the season, Jenson Button's car would have been so heavy he couldn't drive out onto the track unless there was specially reinforced heavy-duty pavement.

[rich1701]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78776

The article says that basically Mercedes may be asked to 'de-tune' their engines so that it is more equal to the others.

To me it seems completely outrageous. Why should they have to de-tune when they have paid their engineers to come up with the supposed best engine in F1.

Everyone else should catch up!

rrrrggg

There is supposed to be an engine freeze on performance development. And mercedes and last year Ferrari have found a way to circumvent this rule. To be honest, they are in the wrong, why should engine suppliers who adhered to the spirit of the regulations suffer while others gain what should be an illegal performance advantage?

[flynfrog]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78776

The article says that basically Mercedes may be asked to 'de-tune' their engines so that it is more equal to the others.

To me it seems completely outrageous. Why should they have to de-tune when they have paid their engineers to come up with the supposed best engine in F1.

Everyone else should catch up!

rrrrggg

There is supposed to be an engine freeze on performance development. And mercedes and last year Ferrari have found a way to circumvent this rule. To be honest, they are in the wrong, why should engine suppliers who adhered to the spirit of the regulations suffer while others gain what should be an illegal performance advantage?

all changes must go through all of the teams for approval

[Belatti]

and if they dont win thy will just leave(this is the big problem)

No, thats the solution.

[ISLAMATRON]

and if they dont win thy will just leave(this is the big problem)

No, thats the solution.

Good call Belatti... FIAT/Ferrari too?

[gcdugas]

Lift the freeze problem solved. Its pretty clear the last 2 years that this rule is unenforcable.

What is the point of having different manufactures if all the engines are the same?

And if you think the engine freeze saved any money They just spent it on Aero instead.

Any freeze is against the spirit of racing. As is the std. ECU. But when has Max ever had a good idea?

The freeze idea is a veiled power grab as the FIA can now be the final arbiter of performance. This way all the teams have to grovel before them constantly for "fairness". The teams all have a budget. If they only have $240M from their board, then they will have to live with that and allocate the funds in a way that best affects their performance. If you restricted 99% of the car by the rules, then the teams would spend like hell within that 1% domain of freedom to build a faster car. We need more open regs, not narrower.

And who can ever trust the FIA as arbiter of performance anyway. What they are doing is trying to bust FOTA. They want the teams to provide a solution. That sounds noble but remember that the FIA has final say on what they will sign off on. So if all the teams agree on something, like a new points structure... aham, the FIA can still decline it. If all the teams agree on a way to restrict the MB engines, then the FIA can simply stir the pot of dissention by requesting that they come up with another solution. The FIA can keep the teams at each others' throats all the while seeming pristine and noble because they "let the teams decide". Humbug!

End the freeze. The FIA cannot be trusted as arbiter of "engineering fairness". It is not their role to be the arbiter of engineering fairness because engineering fairness shouldn't ever be governed by anyone. Why not driver fairness? If Alonso is 0.3/lap faster then should we load him down with extra ballast to equalize things? And we should let Alex Yoong back in F1 with a car that is 50Kg lighter. And don't forget Ide. I am sure some "fairness" could bring him back too.

[Belatti]

and if they dont win thy will just leave(this is the big problem)

No, thats the solution.

Good call Belatti... FIAT/Ferrari too?

I dont know, was it a problem in the 80s ?

[flynfrog]

Lift the freeze problem solved. Its pretty clear the last 2 years that this rule is unenforcable.

What is the point of having different manufactures if all the engines are the same?

And if you think the engine freeze saved any money They just spent it on Aero instead.

Any freeze is against the spirit of racing. As is the std. ECU. But when has Max ever had a good idea?

The freeze idea is a veiled power grab as the FIA can now be the final arbiter of performance. This way all the teams have to grovel before them constantly for "fairness". The teams all have a budget. If they only have $240M from their board, then they will have to live with that and allocate the funds in a way that best affects their performance. If you restricted 99% of the car by the rules, then the teams would spend like hell within that 1% domain of freedom to build a faster car. We need more open regs, not narrower.

And who can ever trust the FIA as arbiter of performance anyway. What they are doing is trying to bust FOTA. They want the teams to provide a solution. That sounds noble but remember that the FIA has final say on what they will sign off on. So if all the teams agree on something, like a new points structure... aham, the FIA can still decline it. If all the teams agree on a way to restrict the MB engines, then the FIA can simply stir the pot of dissention by requesting that they come up with another solution. The FIA can keep the teams at each others' throats all the while seeming pristine and noble because they "let the teams decide". Humbug!

End the freeze. The FIA cannot be trusted as arbiter of "engineering fairness". It is not their role to be the arbiter of engineering fairness because engineering fairness shouldn't ever be governed by anyone. Why not driver fairness? If Alonso is 0.3/lap faster then should we load him down with extra ballast to equalize things? And we should let Alex Yoong back in F1 with a car that is 50Kg lighter. And don't forget Ide. I am sure some "fairness" could bring him back too.

=D> =D>

[nipo]

If you restricted 99% of the car by the rules, then the teams would spend like hell within that 1% domain of freedom to build a faster car. We need more open regs, not narrower.

Cannot agree more.

Ever since this engine freeze thing the glory of F1 was gone. FIA did it in the name of what, budgetary concerns? My ass.

Give me engine freeze rules. Engineers will find a way to upgrade performance in the name of reliability.
Give me restrictions on aero. Designers come up with double-deckers.
Encourage spending on innovation. Only 2-3 teams use KERS.

If this is not the dumbest and most laughable failures in history, what is?

Now the budget cap is on the horizon.

Is it a joke or the FIA has a sadistic desire to insult themselves?

[gcdugas]

Encourage spending on innovation. Only 2-3 teams use KERS.

KERS has the potential to be great. Why limit it to 6 sec/lap. Make it have no limit and every team will use it, perfect it and F1 will have benefited mankind and given the manufacturers something they can directly apply to their road cars. Only a goofball would think of a 6 sec/lap usage rule. Seriously... what is that?

[Giblet]

Kers is coming in to it's own now, even at it's neutered state.

aruably the Mclarens and Ferrari's have been cranking out better times than most and (almost) winning races (spin cough cough).

[xpensive]

I hate to repeat myself into stupidity, but regarding KERS here are a number of physical limitations to consider:

a) The kinetic energy available. A 700 kg object, such as an F1 car, loses 1400 kJ slowing down from 250 to 100 km/h.
If you do this that 5 times per lap you have in theory 7000 kJ to accumulate, but that means all-wheel KERS and no conventional brakes.

b) The MGU capacity. It is difficult to imagine a Motor/Generator much larger than 60 kW, while picking up all the energy of the 1400 kJ xample above in five seconds means an average Generator power of about 300 kW, peak probably 500.

c) The battery capacity. Stories have it that today's cost of the 400 kJ batteries is 100 kUSD per car and race, then throwaways. Twice that cost will of course give you 800 kJ and so on, but hey?

At the same time, to get some perspective, an F1 car produces more than 500 kJ per second with engine on full song.
One liter of gasoline contains about 34 000 kJ

[WhiteBlue]

Things are now pointing in the right direction. If FOTA thinks that Merc has an advantage with the engine they can unanimously decide to cut the Merc engine back. Good luck with that proposal when Nobby is asked to limit his revs or mod his mapping.

A good idea would be limiting absolute power which is child's play on an F1 engine. All parties would simply work on efficiency as the competitive advantage. With the refueling ban it would be a great spectacle and a good engineering contest.

The engine performance levelling was actually one of the best things they ever did to F1 racing. Since we have it, we had the most thrilling seasons in the last two decades. Something must be right.

Now we just need those development funds directed to better and unlimited energy recovery and general aero and engine efficiency. There will be less money to go round anyway, which should benefit the smaller teams. They should be able to land some hits engineering wise if they have good and imaginative people.

[gridwalker]

This is yet another travesty that goes against the essence of what racing is supposed to be about. If Merc is directly penalised for doing too good a job then where's the point of being in the competition?

I think that they should do away with the engine freeze and simply allow ONE homologated engine design per season. This way we don't have to worry about the equalisation issues & it gives manufacturers the opportunity to compete & shake up the running order each year without the pressure of having to bring out new iterations of their engine design throughout the season.

Why do the regulations have to be all or nothing?

[ISLAMATRON]

Why do the regulations have to be all or nothing?

Because the teams will pour enormous amounts of money, into the next engine, even/especially if it is just 1 homologation.

The only way to cut the spending significantly is to totally freeze them.

Most of the engines who were strong before the freeze are the the same engines who are strong after the freeze... so Millions were spent and the relative positions have remained the same.

gcdugas seems to consistently forget the large number of teams that spend their way out of existence, the manufacturer teams may have a set budget, but when the results dont come they either ask for more money from the parent company which either ponies up or shuts down the whole operation. F1 teams never stay on budget.

No "glory" has been lost from the engine freeze, F1 engines have only ever revved higher than they do now for what, maybe
4 0r 5 seasons at most (2005 to 2008). The switch to the V-8's was a bigger lose of "glory" than the actual freeze itself.

And when the manufacturers spend enormous amounts of money developing the engines the customer teams have to pay for these upgrades or the are relegated to the back.