F1 now & then: engine vs aero formula pro/contra

[turbof1]

One particular tweet that very much plays into the subject:
https://twitter.com/adamcooperF1/status ... 2398060544

[alexx_88]

1. Williams are punching above their category thanks to the Mercedes engine and getting tenths of millions of euros.

How are they punching above their weight? The "getting tenths of millions of euros" i don´t understand one bit.
you´re saying Mercedes pays Williams to have their engines? News to me.

In 2013 they finished 9th and got ~50m$. In 2014 they finished 5th and got ~65m$. Given that it was mostly the difference between PUs that allowed them to make the jump, I'd say that the contract with Merc has pocketed them ~15m$ in additional revenue just from prize money. Not to mention the additional advertising money. No point in damaging this very fruitful relationship for nothing.

Those few percent that separate their PU from Merc's is irrelevant to them, but it's very relevant if you're a team that wants to fight Merc for victories.

Which is exactly what Williams intends to do. But what are they missing? Just downforce really.

Fight for victories against Mercedes? Very unlikely if you ask me. They'd have to match them in PU integration and pass them in aero. With all the jokers of past years gone (surprise tires mostly) and with 1s of aero/PU gap to be recovered and with a smaller budget, I'd say that's very unlikely. What they can hope for is that Merc fails in some race and they are the best of the rest to pick up the pieces.

2. Indeed, but that doesn't change the fact that the PU will be more optimized for the aero of the works team.

Are you just making stuff up by now? Please expand a bit on this please.

Really? Seems like you are trolling now. The PU's layout is optimized for the packaging of the works team, while the customer teams have to create their chassis around it. Better packaging creates better aero.

Does it seem so far-fetched to think that a separate entity, that doesn't direct access to the people who built and tuned the PU, could only get 98% of the performance that a much bigger entity, with more people and direct access to all that information, gets?

I´m not interested in how something seems in this case.

So what should we do if not make logical assumptions supported by arguments? Anyway, let's agree to disagree, makes no point continuing this off-topic discussion. What turbof1 has posted seems more interesting and to the point.

@turbof1: The first paragraph seems pretty much spot on for me and pretty much explains why the casual F1 fans are moving away from the sport. The uncertainty of not knowing who is going to win, the remote possibility that an underdog might snatch victory in certain conditions are basic entertainment ingredients. F1 doesn't have them anymore and is simply being replaced with entertainment that has it. How many entertainment choices were available in the '90s at 1PM on a Sunday and how many are now? Saying that races in the '90s were much boring than now means nothing. Everything is judged in comparison and if F1 sticks only to what it knows, it runs the risk of not being around for much longer. Fans going away is the start of a hemorrhage that will be very hard to stop once it gets going.

[Andres125sx]

Phil, after reading your loooooong post (I should be rewarded for reading it entirely ) I really don´t get what you´re trying to say...

You´re playing devil´s advocate both sides, and I´ve lost myself inbetween. You started the thread arguing now engines are even a bigger factor than aero previously was and you´d prefer if some team with better aero/chasis could fight with best engine, but now say RB proved engine is not the only factor because they won 3 races and finished 2nd thanks to their great car

So what´s your point? engines are too dominant? or there´s a nice balance wich allow teams like RBR (2014) to fight Mercedes engines?

IMO there´s a nice balance. Mercedes is dominating but only because they have best engine, best aero and a great chasis so it´s not the engine itself wich makes such a big difference, while with aero formula it was aero itself wich made that big difference

[FoxHound]

This business of suggesting it's unlikely a customer team won't beat the manufacturer team, when did it last happen?
And how many times and what were the circumstances?

McLaren beat Mercedes from 2010 to 2012. But this is almost entirely due to the reshaping of the former Honda/Brawn team by Ross brawn to get them where they are today, and the fact that the Honda team was gutted between 2008/09 and shed more than 40% of it's team excluding engines.

If we look at Renault, they beat Red Bull 2 out of the 3 seasons they raced with the same engines, I discount 2010, as Renault was already sold to Genii Capital.
In 2009, it was the first season of the wider front wing and narrower rear wing....and the start of the Red Bull design dynasty.

I then look through the history of F1, and find rare instances of customers beating the manufacturer supplier.
So why is this held up as a reason for changing the current rules?
Do Mercedes have to disband, as Honda did then have it shed it's staff to replicate those conditions for a customer to beat it?

Do Renault buy a team, run it for a few years, with waning interest year on year then lose to a customer who go on to use the design language from a big rule change to rule them all for 4 seasons?

These are extenuating circumstances, to pretend it's the rules or some kind of foul play is mind mindbogglingly short sighted.
Factory teams generally outdo there customers, it aint the rules, it aint foul play, it aint even rocket science.

[dans79]

In 2013 they finished 9th and got ~50m$. In 2014 they finished 5th and got ~65m$. Given that it was mostly the difference between PUs that allowed them to make the jump, I'd say that the contract with Merc has pocketed them ~15m$ in additional revenue just from prize money. Not to mention the additional advertising money. No point in damaging this very fruitful relationship for nothing.

First off they finished 3rd in 2014 not 5th, secondly if you haven't heard expenditures went way up in 2014.

[FoxHound]

Really? Seems like you are trolling now. The PU's layout is optimized for the packaging of the works team, while the customer teams have to create their chassis around it. Better packaging creates better aero.

So you want the manufacturer to give the customer not only a PU, but the blueprints to their chassis?

[alexx_88]

Would have they participated in F1 in 2014 anyway? Yes. So those expenditures would have existed nonetheless. Difference being that, instead of spending 20m on Renault PUs and earn 50m$ again, they've spent 20m on Mercedes and earned 80m, or whatever the prize money is for 3rd. That's the difference. They spend the same amount as teams that get Renault PUs, but get millions in revenue more.

[alexx_88]

Really? Seems like you are trolling now. The PU's layout is optimized for the packaging of the works team, while the customer teams have to create their chassis around it. Better packaging creates better aero.

So you want the manufacturer to give the customer not only a PU, but the blueprints to their chassis?

No, but the effect is the same. Manufacturer gets a chassis that works best with their PU, while customers have to make compromises. Nobody blames Merc for this (Ferrari and Renault do the same), it's just the way it is.

[dans79]

Would have they participated in F1 in 2014 anyway? Yes. So those expenditures would have existed nonetheless. Difference being that, instead of spending 20m on Renault PUs and earn 50m$ again, they've spent 20m on Mercedes and earned 80m, or whatever the prize money is for 3rd. That's the difference. They spend the same amount as teams that get Renault PUs, but get millions in revenue more.

Without knowing how much they actually spent, you have no idea how much money they actually made. revenue is not the same thing as profit.

[alexx_88]

Would have they participated in F1 in 2014 anyway? Yes. So those expenditures would have existed nonetheless. Difference being that, instead of spending 20m on Renault PUs and earn 50m$ again, they've spent 20m on Mercedes and earned 80m, or whatever the prize money is for 3rd. That's the difference. They spend the same amount as teams that get Renault PUs, but get millions in revenue more.

Without knowing how much they actually spent, you have no idea how much money they actually made. revenue is not the same thing as profit.

No, it's not relevant. For the same 20m they've spent on engines, they've got to 3rd, rather than being 9th. That has gave them an additional 30m just in revenue. There's no reason to think that all their other expenses would've been lower had they used another engine supplier.

[dans79]

Without knowing how much they actually spent, you have no idea how much money they actually made. revenue is not the same thing as profit.

No, it's not relevant. For the same 20m they've spent on engines, they've got to 3rd, rather than being 9th. That has gave them an additional 30m just in revenue. There's no reason to think that all their other expenses would've been lower had they used another engine supplier.

The thing is, you can't quantify how much of their improvement is because they have a merc engine, and how much is because of an aero or chassis decision. Also Unless you work in the Williams accounting department you have no idea what their revenue & expenditure numbers really are.

Also if it's all about the engine how come FI isn't much better? They finished 7th in 2013 (ahead of Williams), and 6th in 2014. Surely if All you had to have was a Merc engine, then FI who has been a Merc customer since 2009 would have done much better.

[SectorOne]

In 2013 they finished 9th and got ~50m$. In 2014 they finished 5th and got ~65m$. Given that it was mostly the difference between PUs that allowed them to make the jump, I'd say that the contract with Merc has pocketed them ~15m$ in additional revenue just from prize money. Not to mention the additional advertising money. No point in damaging this very fruitful relationship for nothing.

You´re making these crazy connections as if Mercedes was some kind of mafia boss where people don´t dare speak their mind on the engine they have.

Fight for victories against Mercedes? Very unlikely if you ask me. They'd have to match them in PU integration and pass them in aero. With all the jokers of past years gone (surprise tires mostly) and with 1s of aero/PU gap to be recovered and with a smaller budget, I'd say that's very unlikely. What they can hope for is that Merc fails in some race and they are the best of the rest to pick up the pieces.

PU integration is something you have decided is lightyears away from Mercedes even though they´ve had two full years to optimize it.
Yea they are missing downforce, possibly a bit on the chassis side and tire management but that might come from the extra downforce.

Really? Seems like you are trolling now. The PU's layout is optimized for the packaging of the works team, while the customer teams have to create their chassis around it. Better packaging creates better aero.

I´m trolling? You Manoha2u and realfan or whatever his name was has made wild statements without an ounce of evidence.
And somehow i´m the troll?

Williams have a year plus experience in how the Mercedes looks, the only big change exterior wise was the variable intake and the new exhaust this year.
Explain why the Mercedes is better packaged. Be specific.
The cooling setup being different was a conscious decision taken by Williams FYI.

So what should we do if not make logical assumptions supported by arguments?

Provide evidence to your claims obviously.

[alexx_88]

In 2013 they finished 9th and got ~50m$. In 2014 they finished 5th and got ~65m$. Given that it was mostly the difference between PUs that allowed them to make the jump, I'd say that the contract with Merc has pocketed them ~15m$ in additional revenue just from prize money. Not to mention the additional advertising money. No point in damaging this very fruitful relationship for nothing.

You´re making these crazy connections as if Mercedes was some kind of mafia boss where people don´t dare speak their mind on the engine they have.

What would be the point and what would they say? That Mercedes doesn't put Williams' needs above those of the works team. That Mercedes AMG HPP doesn't give them access to Mercedes F1's team engine mappings? It would be pointless, these are things that you accept when you are a customer team.

Fight for victories against Mercedes? Very unlikely if you ask me. They'd have to match them in PU integration and pass them in aero. With all the jokers of past years gone (surprise tires mostly) and with 1s of aero/PU gap to be recovered and with a smaller budget, I'd say that's very unlikely. What they can hope for is that Merc fails in some race and they are the best of the rest to pick up the pieces.

PU integration is something you have decided is lightyears away from Mercedes even though they´ve had two full years to optimize it.
Yea they are missing downforce, possibly a bit on the chassis side and tire management but that might come from the extra downforce.

Every gain helps. 1% difference in laptime and maybe 2% in engine power doesn't count as lightyears. Also, then why is everyone in F1 saying that being a works team is better? Cost is much higher than being a customer and it also forces you to stick to your supplier even if it's totally crap (look at RB). Also, this is what the Merc bosses had to say on the subject:

Mercedes is confident that being able to develop the engine in tandem with the chassis has given its team an advantage this year.

"I think so, yes," managing director of Mercedes High Performance Powertrains Andy Cowell said. "The Mercedes power unit is designed in close collaboration with Bob Bell the technical director [of Mercedes], and has been right from the release of the regulations. Every nut, bolt, washer and cable is designed around this car. That provides an advantage."
Mercedes executive director (technical) Paddy Lowe said working closely with the engine team based in Brixworth had allowed his team to tightly package the rear of the car to maximise downforce.
"That's been one of the big challenges because there's been so much extra equipment to fit in, particularly cooling," he explained. "Bigger hybrid system cooling is required and then the charged air cooling to cover, so everything was pushing towards a bigger package at the rear end. The big area of research was to try to find our way through that to prevent growth. That's where we come into the territory where the combination of effort between the teams at Brackley [chassis] and Brixworth [engine] has been very, very helpful."

Really? Seems like you are trolling now. The PU's layout is optimized for the packaging of the works team, while the customer teams have to create their chassis around it. Better packaging creates better aero.

I´m trolling? You Manoha2u and realfan or whatever his name was has made wild statements without an ounce of evidence.
And somehow i´m the troll?

Williams have a year plus experience in how the Mercedes looks, the only big change exterior wise was the variable intake and the new exhaust this year.
Explain why the Mercedes is better packaged. Be specific.
The cooling setup being different was a conscious decision taken by Williams FYI.

I said you were trolling because you asked how could the PU be optimized for the aero of the works team. I thought that such an established member of a technical F1 community would not ask how the PU influences packaing, thus aero and how the works team is able to get more information than a customer team.

I agree that, layout wise, they'd have been able to claw something back compared to last year, but I didn't say that aero influenced by PU layout is where they lose compared to the works team. I said that the software is different, as in the maps of the PU are different and that is a very valid assumption to make. Control strategies are heavily influenced by temperature which is heavily influenced by cooling choices. Secondly, working closely with the engine team allows you to push the maps a little bit closer to the edge. How can you do that as a customer team in a formula with a limited number of engines per season.

Honestly, I can't understand what kind of evidence you're looking for. I'd like to be able to show you maps from Williams and Mercedes, but that's not possible. Besides pictures of aero that allows us to make comments about that, there isn't much information available, so everybody tries to pitch in from their own professional experience to fill in the blanks. I've seen first hand how a Garage 56 entry from one of the past years failed miserably because of integration and software issues.

[FoxHound]

@Alexgt

You agreed this has always been the case with Manufacturers/Customers. So can we can scratch this argument from debate?

[Phil]

Phil, after reading your loooooong post (I should be rewarded for reading it entirely ) I really don´t get what you´re trying to say...

My point is rather simple: This topic was started to discuss the pros and cons of an aero dominated formula with frozen engines, as we had prior to 2014, to an arguably engine dominated formula, wherein the engines are a huge differenciating factor between the performances of the teams.

There has been some discussion centered around the belief that this "performance difference" isn't there, pointing to RedBulls 3 victories in 2014 and therefore concluding that engine dominated formula isn't quite accurate. I've disagreed with this, and thus brought the stats that show how Mercedes engined teams all made jumps in the WCC, where as all Renault & Ferrari engined teams either stayed or lost out.

This establishes that the engine must be indeed a significant factor.

The topic also raises Horners point if the engine being such a factor is good for the sport. I don't think so. You see, in an aero dominated formula, like i.e. 2010-2013, if a team underperformed, the season wasn't exactly a right off, unless perhaps there were inherent faults within the chassis and too big to solve. Assuming they weren't, a team still had the ability to evolve the car aerodynamically, as they do race after race, by bringing new, better parts to the track.

In 2014, an engine dominated season, this wasn't really possible, since the biggest performance differentiator, the engines, were frozen throughout the year. I.e. Sauber, with the Ferrari engine, had absolutely no chance to make up any real deficit by bringing new parts to the car, because essentially, the engine was too big of a factor. RedBull was also quite limited - they never came close to challenging Mercedes. They might have picked up points relative to Williams when Mercedes encountered technical problems (the 3 races they won), but that was all there ever was. At the end of the day, the performance gap between the Mercedes engined Mercedes and the Renault engined RedBull was too big and never really decreased throughout 2014.

In 2015, the good thing is that the rate of development of the engine isn't completely frozen. But it is yet to be seen if the token system allows for enough development to actually catch up and rival Mercedes. An aero dominated Formula doesn't have this problem, because it's essentially in the teams hands to dictate how competitive they are and remain over the course of a season.

So what´s your point? engines are too dominant? or there´s a nice balance wich allow teams like RBR (2014) to fight Mercedes engines?

Yes, they are too dominant. RedBull never stood a chance to compete with Mercedes in 2014 because the engines were frozen for a year and no chassis/aero changes they made would bring the gap down. They were only "competitive" with Williams due to much better execution in their races (the races RedBull won could have easily been won by Williams) and the fact that Williams probably didn't have anywhere near as good chassis/aero as RedBull.

If I were to guess, I'd sum up 2014 like this:

Mercedes: very good chassis, very good aero, excellent engine
Williams: okay chassis, okay aero, excellent engine
RedBull: very good chassis, very good aero (though run compromised to limit the deficit of the engine), okay engine

Mercedes aced everything, which is why there was such a huge gap to the next performing Mercedes engined team. RedBull aced many things, apart from the engine that underperformed and forced them to compromise their aero.

Forget who won the races in 2014 - look at the qualifying pace of these teams. RedBull might have walked away with 3 wins, but Williams was closer to Mercedes over one lap than RedBull was.