Mclaren MP4-29H

[CBeck113]

Here's the regs for 2015, and this case is covered:

22) TRACK RUNNING TIME OUTSIDE AN EVENT AND WIND TUNNEL TESTING
22.1 Testing of Current Cars (TCC) shall be defined as any track running time, not part of an Event,
in which a competitor entered in the Championship participates (or in which a third party
participates on behalf of a competitor), using cars which were designed and built in order to
comply with the 2014, 2015 or 2016 Formula One Technical Regulations. No competitor may
sell or make available a car of the current year to any third party without the full knowledge of
the FIA.
Each competitor will also be permitted to carry out two Promotional Events (PE) with the
above cars which will not be considered TCC. A PE shall be defined as an event in which a
competitor participates purely for marketing or promotional purposes. No such test may
exceed 100km in length and only tyres manufactured specifically for this purpose by the
appointed supplier may be used.
In order that an FIA observer may be appointed, competitors must inform the FIA of any
planned TCC or PE at least 72 hours before it is due to commence, the following information
should be provided :
i) The precise specification of the car(s) to be used.
ii) The name(s) of the driver(s) if known.
iii) The nature of the test.
iv) The date(s) and intended duration of the test.2015 F1 Sporting Regulations 11/56 29 June 2014
© 2014 Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile
v) The purpose of the test.
22.2 Testing of Previous Cars (TPC) shall be defined as any track running time, not part of an Event,
in which a competitor entered in the Championship participates (or in which a third party
participates on behalf of a competitor), using cars which were designed and built in order to
comply with the 2011, 2012 or 2013 Formula One Technical Regulations.
TPC may only be carried out with cars built to the specification of the period and only tyres
manufactured specifically for this purpose may be used.
In order that an FIA observer may be appointed, where possible competitors must inform the
FIA of any planned TPC at least 72 hours before it is due to commence, the following
information should be provided :
i) The precise specification of the car(s) to be used.
ii) The name(s) of the driver(s) if known.
iii) The nature of the test.
iv) The date(s) and intended duration of the test.
v) The purpose of the test.

[turbof1]

Here's the regs for 2015, and this case is covered:

Nope, it isn't:

Each competitor will also be permitted to carry out two Promotional Events (PE) with the
above cars which will not be considered TCC.

So you are basically allowed to do whatever you wish with the car during PE, since the car isn't viewed a TCC. The line that is confusing people is this:

A PE shall be defined as an event in which a
competitor participates purely for marketing or promotional purposes.

One interpretation is that you aren't allowed to test new parts. However, by simply giving the beast a marketing name you are perfectly fine with the rules. Goes of course completely against the spirit of the rules, but it has been done many times so it has become a standard 100km test. With a few camera's to give it a flair of a promotional event.

[CBeck113]

One interpretation is that you aren't allowed to test new parts. However, by simply giving the beast a marketing name you are perfectly fine with the rules. Goes of course completely against the spirit of the rules, but it has been done many times so it has become a standard 100km test. With a few camera's to give it a flair of a promotional event.

...and how can you test "old" parts on a 2016-spec car?

[turbof1]

One interpretation is that you aren't allowed to test new parts. However, by simply giving the beast a marketing name you are perfectly fine with the rules. Goes of course completely against the spirit of the rules, but it has been done many times so it has become a standard 100km test. With a few camera's to give it a flair of a promotional event.

...and how can you test "old" parts on a 2016-spec car?

Again it doesn't matter what they want to test. The rules clearly state that the normal testing TCC, doesn't apply on a promotional event. They can test a hybrid nascar/2016 f1 car if they wish. Basically a PE is "do-whatever-you-want" grounds.

EDIT: I get it now . I assume that the rules will be updated each year, so the rules for 2016 will be 2015, 2016 and 2017. Again, for clarity, has nothing to do with a promotional event.

[CjC]

Is it my imagination, or is the engine much louder than current 2014 engines ??

More noise, more power

[marcush.]

Here's the regs for 2015, and this case is covered:

22) TRACK RUNNING TIME OUTSIDE AN EVENT AND WIND TUNNEL TESTING
22.1 Testing of Current Cars (TCC) shall be defined as any track running time, not part of an Event,
in which a competitor entered in the Championship participates (or in which a third party
participates on behalf of a competitor), using cars which were designed and built in order to
comply with the 2014, 2015 or 2016 Formula One Technical Regulations. No competitor may
sell or make available a car of the current year to any third party without the full knowledge of
the FIA.
Each competitor will also be permitted to carry out two Promotional Events (PE) with the
above cars which will not be considered TCC. A PE shall be defined as an event in which a
competitor participates purely for marketing or promotional purposes. No such test may
exceed 100km in length and only tyres manufactured specifically for this purpose by the
appointed supplier may be used.
In order that an FIA observer may be appointed, competitors must inform the FIA of any
planned TCC or PE at least 72 hours before it is due to commence, the following information
should be provided :
i) The precise specification of the car(s) to be used.
ii) The name(s) of the driver(s) if known.
iii) The nature of the test.
iv) The date(s) and intended duration of the test.2015 F1 Sporting Regulations 11/56 29 June 2014
© 2014 Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile
v) The purpose of the test.
22.2 Testing of Previous Cars (TPC) shall be defined as any track running time, not part of an Event,
in which a competitor entered in the Championship participates (or in which a third party
participates on behalf of a competitor), using cars which were designed and built in order to
comply with the 2011, 2012 or 2013 Formula One Technical Regulations.
TPC may only be carried out with cars built to the specification of the period and only tyres
manufactured specifically for this purpose may be used.
In order that an FIA observer may be appointed, where possible competitors must inform the
FIA of any planned TPC at least 72 hours before it is due to commence, the following
information should be provided :
i) The precise specification of the car(s) to be used.
ii) The name(s) of the driver(s) if known.
iii) The nature of the test.
iv) The date(s) and intended duration of the test.
v) The purpose of the test.

what is this..a promotional event only purpose is marketing and promo... only to go on and ask for the purpose/nature of the test ? Isn´t this contradicting the claim a PE is NOT a test?...

I think the FIA have never learned to write a specification .......

First rule : be precise and leave no room for interpretation (the following information -should- be provided....I´m laughing my socks off here with a horde of specialists wading through the Fia paperwork looking for loopholes ...and they come up with such precious diamonds like name of the driver if known... was there ever a "chance" driver apearing from Mars who filled Ron Dennis bill within 72hours before a test taking place... what a nonsense.
If you want to test ,name the driver .full stop. We are FIA and need to know .No questions allowed.end of story.

[turbof1]

First rule : be precise and leave no room for interpretation (the following information -should- be provided....I´m laughing my socks off here with a horde of specialists wading through the Fia paperwork looking for loopholes ...and they come up with such precious diamonds like name of the driver if known... was there ever a "chance" driver apearing from Mars who filled Ron Dennis bill within 72hours before a test taking place... what a nonsense.

I really can't help but think that the FIA is getting lobbied into having rules with loopholes, which results in such bizarre rules. I mean we had the platipus noses in 2012, which got predicted by a lot of our members, tech journo's, etc. We got the finger noses of which also got predicted by... well most of us. And we have this rule that allows for very obvious abuse.

And that all comes from an organisation that tests jetfighter canopies to increase safety? Either they have a stupid person on the payroll who writes this down and which they can't fire without paying a hefty compensation, or they are getting lobbied into doing this.

[Richard]

Regarding the noise, the various youtube amateur videos usually sound better than the TV feed. I remember the Ted Kravitz reports from winter testing picked up so many hi-tech different sounds, almost as if a spaceship was passing when he stood next to the track, but FOM can only give a dull drone from mics probably designed for the old V10

It's the same with the so called wide angle cameras, they're just the old field of view with the top and bottom cropped off, ie FOM widescreen shows less than standard format

[zorog]

the sound is similar to my personal recordings on my phone from Melbourne, I believe a lot of the problem in the FOM feed is over compression, having to commentary louder then the on track action is also a problem for the English feed.

Is the FOTA 2010 clarification on demo days still in effect?

McLaren team principal Martin Whitmarsh confirmed the changes had taken place, and was pleased that everyone was now in agreement about what was and was not allowed.

"I personally did not feel there was any ambiguity, but others argued that there was," he said. "But that is pressure, and when people are under pressure they try and take a different view.

"It is now clear that, if you are doing a demo run, then you must use components that have been raced before - and it has to be a legitimate demo run."

[CBeck113]

Apparently not, since you can run a future spec.

[Wayne DR]

I would place it somewhere between the Merc and the Ferrari. It isn't as deep a grunt as the Merc, but also lacks the higher noises of the Ferrari. But of course you would need to hear it at full throttle to make a proper comparison. It may also be that they are running more with an opened wastegate, than they would at a later stage.

I imagine the tone of the exhaust note is linked to the size of the turbine. The larger the turbine, the lower the exhaust note...

Having said this, I would be surprised if they were running above 75-80% of maximum power, so it may possibly be quieter when they are in full power scavenging mode for sustainable output...

[Moose]

Is it my imagination, or is the engine much louder than current 2014 engines ??

More noise, more power

No, quite the opposite in fact.

[turbof1]

More noise means more wasted energy. It's not necessarily good or bad in terms of raw power (for instance a V12 will always make more noise then a V6), but it does mean the mgu-h isn't harvesting enough as it should be.

But that means nothing at this point, for all we know they didn't run any mgu's.

[CBeck113]

More noise means more wasted energy. It's not necessarily good or bad in terms of raw power (for instance a V12 will always make more noise then a V6), but it does mean the mgu-h isn't harvesting enough as it should be.

But that means nothing at this point, for all we know they didn't run any mgu's.

Please explain this a bit more for me - I was always under the impression that the noise from a combustion engine came from the combustion. Thanks in advance!

[Richard]

If we removed the turbo from the current engines the cars would be louder but less powerful, if we remove the MGH-H the exhaust would be even louder but less powerful again.

Perfect exhaust energy recovery would result in no noise from the exhaust.