Why turbo´s in F1?

[Tim.Wright]

It is absolutely legitimate in my view to spend money on power train development in order to keep F1 relevant to the world outside of the 20 races it does each season. There is so much money being wasted on aerodynamics that have no use in the real world outside of F1. I' very happy that this excesses are a little bit rebalanced towards spending on more sensible technologies. I think it is even more important to limit the aero research and the speed of new aero parts being introduced by a homologation scheme like the one we have on the power train side unless of course the team budgets get capped in a sensible way.

If it was relevant to the real world I'd also be happy. My argument is that with the restrictive rules and a planned freeze there is no possibility of any relevance or cross-over of technology occurring. The only relevance now is symbolic and the teams are straining to sustain the development costs.

For what its worth, I'd happily welcome a restriction on aero rules and an opening up of chassis and powertrain rules. Then the motorsport industry could be capable of paying more than just lip service to the automotive industry. I hope at least Formula E goes down this path.

You have a technical background WB. Do you really think that, with an impending freeze, the new powertrains in F1 are going to have any positive effect on road car development?

[WhiteBlue]

...Do you really think that, with an impending freeze, the new powertrains in F1 are going to have any positive effect on road car development?

It is possible. The injection system and the turbo compound are two things that could become relevant. But I would be happier if there would be more freedom like in Lmp1. ATM we have to be happy that we get any freedom and hope for he best in the future. Fuel flow limitation is a very important step I think. It can stimulate combustion methods. But to give it more momentum variable valves, new ignition technology should be allowed. More freedom of turbo design, engine design and AW kinetic recovery are also points.
I hope that there can be a new approach in 2019 or even earlier if we see a new balance in the f1 power game in the years to come.

[Tim.Wright]

It is possible. The injection system and the turbo compound are two things that could become relevant.

Well we will have to wait and see I suppose.

2 already existing technologies is not a great return on such a massive investment...

[hollus]

The FiA is not a commercial organization which thinks in marketing categories. Their objectives were based on strategic and political motives. You do have a bigger voice in a political arena if you cannot be attacked for running a motor racing series that is famous for disregarding all environmental and sustainability concerns. With a 35 % reduction target the FiA was well positioned to fight off any polemics that it might have faced by running F1.

That's not marketing in the sense that it doesn't aim at increasing sales and then profit for the FIA, at least not directly. But it is marketing in the sense that the energy savings achieved during actual F1 car running must account to something like 0.01% of the total energy consumption associated with F1. It is marketing in the same way that Pirelli making people think that their road performance tires have anything to do with the Pzeros used in F1 is marketing.
This energy saving is not selling you a real product, but an idea. Only that they are pretending to sell a real product (a real and significant energy saving).
On the other side, it is a powerful idea, not only aimed at avoiding future trouble due to a bad environmental image, but actually aimed at creating the image that energy savings are cool and not directly in conflict with high performance (which is BS if you ask me, they are neither).
So, to summarize, they are utterly lying in saying that this will achieve energy savings (within F1 itself), and as a result of the naivety of the masses, this is likely to result in huge energy savings in the real world when millions of people buy cars with smaller and less hungry engines.

[xpensive]

It is possible. The injection system and the turbo compound are two things that could become relevant.

Well we will have to wait and see I suppose.

2 already existing technologies is not a great return on such a massive investment...

I have difficulties myself to see the point of all this, if engine development was free it would have had a legitimate purpose,
but just look at the engine rules next year? Almost everything is locked, they should have gone for the fuel-flow limit, period.

[WhiteBlue]

It is possible. The injection system and the turbo compound are two things that could become relevant.

Well we will have to wait and see I suppose. 2 already existing technologies is not a great return on such a massive investment...

That again is a false statement in my view. The type of injection system used by f1 did not exist and the electric turbo compounding technology for petrol engines neither.

[WhiteBlue]

It is possible. The injection system and the turbo compound are two things that could become relevant.

Well we will have to wait and see I suppose.

2 already existing technologies is not a great return on such a massive investment...

I have difficulties myself to see the point of all this, if engine development was free it would have had a legitimate purpose,
but just look at the engine rules next year? Almost everything is locked, they should have gone for the fuel-flow limit, period.

In an ideal world they would have done that. But legislation had to pass the F1 commission which is dominated by Ecclestone and his constructor cartel. In order to make he engines pass certain compromises had to be made.

[xpensive]

I doubt very much that was the reason, why would the "F1 comission" and the manufacturers object to more freedom,
if Ferrari, Mercedes, Renault and now Honda are to spend money, the would surely have liked the opportunity to xcel?

I think Audi/Porsche has xpressed the same sentiments.

Naah, the lock on developments smells like the FIA a long way, all the way back to MrM as a matter of fact.

[Tim.Wright]

It is possible. The injection system and the turbo compound are two things that could become relevant.

Well we will have to wait and see I suppose. 2 already existing technologies is not a great return on such a massive investment...

That again is a false statement in my view. The type of injection system used by f1 did not exist and the electric turbo compounding technology for petrol engines neither.

They are in F1 because they are essentially forced to be there due of the rules. Hardly the trait of a system which has real performance advantages to offer.

[Tim.Wright]

I doubt very much that was the reason, why would the "F1 comission" and the manufacturers object to more freedom,
if Ferrari, Mercedes, Renault and now Honda are to spend money, the would surely have liked the opportunity to xcel?

I think Audi/Porsche has xpressed the same sentiments.

Naah, the lock on developments smells like the FIA a long way, all the way back to MrM as a matter of fact.

I try not to get too involved in the politics but from memory it has always been the teams who have been crying out for cost control in the last few years not the FIA. The teams even opposed the idea of deregulating the in season testing ban on cost grounds. I hope this attitude is only temporary and due to the global financial climate because its causing a load of crippling rules in F1.

I have always found it strange that the teams aren't able to compete with a more open rulebook without destroying themselves financially.

[xpensive]

Engine development is not xactly performed by the teams.

[WhiteBlue]

I doubt very much that was the reason, why would the "F1 comission" and the manufacturers object to more freedom, if Ferrari, Mercedes, Renault and now Honda are to spend money, the would surely have liked the opportunity to xcel?

The answer X is very simple because all constructors and in particular Red Bull have a great fear of a manufacturer team gaining a significant competitive advantage that they have no access to. They also fear the cost of more intensive research and spending on power trains because it will always show up in their customer bill somehow. Todt is no Mosley and his personal style is compromising on non essential to achieve the primary goals. His goal in this case was getting the fuel flow regulation in place and setting the flow as low as 25 g/s. He obviously made some compromises there as well because now we have 27.6 g/s.

[xpensive]

Your staunch defense of everything the FIA say or do is nothing but heartbreaking WB, so all is done for a greater purpose?

[Lightknight]

It was not just for marketing reasons but that was not the sole consideration. When I say marketing what I mean is that the FIA wanted to attract more top brands into the sport. A V8 reving to 18,000 RPM is of NO interest to anyone outside of the sport - it sets the barrier to entry too high without any means to make the investment relative to a companies products.
The Turbo V6 with advanced Hybrid technology does just that. Honda is now in and it would surprise me if VAG is not weighing up the odds very carefully.
I predict that from 2015 you will see the Ferrari, Renault and possibly Mercedes power units in a number of LMP1 endurance racers and people like Audi will need to respond because the energy recovery side will eat into their own efforts in this area with Williams.

[WhiteBlue]

Your staunch defense of everything the FIA say or do is nothing but heartbreaking WB, so all is done for a greater purpose?

Sounds condescending when you run out of points to defend your earlier statements that became untenable. I have explained in great detail what the motivation was and how the project was diluted by necessary compromise. Proof of that theory is the other high level regulation the FiA under Todt negotiated with the ACO. It is deliberately providing greater freedom of design because the two parties found more common ground, which is not surprising for anybody who knows how difficult anything is to agree with the teams and Ecclestone.