Formula One's Engine Crisis

[dans79]

Dans, we are still entertaining *your* point that you'd rather have the manufacturers in control than Bernie

Did you seriously just refer to yourself in the third person?

1.) Large multi national companies pushing everything to the limit to try and win!
2.) Aging and potential senile used car salesmen who wants the automotive equivalent of WWE.

I'll take #1 every day of the week, and twice on Sunday thank you very much.

- and your later point that you'd rather have 6 competitive cars opposed to 4, which a 3 car team scenario would bring. I'm simply being a realist. If we have both Mercedes and Ferrari supply 3 cars, they will have access to 50% more data. Do you disagree that this will not be any kind of advantage opposed to all other teams that are.

If 3 car teams happen, I believe everyone would have to run them.

[ChrisF1]

Dans, we are still entertaining *your* point that you'd rather have the manufacturers in control than Bernie

Did you seriously just refer to yourself in the third person?

1.) Large multi national companies pushing everything to the limit to try and win!
2.) Aging and potential senile used car salesmen who wants the automotive equivalent of WWE.

I'll take #1 every day of the week, and twice on Sunday thank you very much.

- and your later point that you'd rather have 6 competitive cars opposed to 4, which a 3 car team scenario would bring. I'm simply being a realist. If we have both Mercedes and Ferrari supply 3 cars, they will have access to 50% more data. Do you disagree that this will not be any kind of advantage opposed to all other teams that are.

If 3 car teams happen, I believe everyone would have to run them.

Well that would at least help Sauber out when they sell more seats than cars

Being serious though, look at the struggles that teams have had getting new cars ready for testing, let alone 3 fully built race cars.

[FoxHound]

If they can make 2, they can also have 3. The extra money will more than compensate for the materials. The research and design are the major costs and headaches.

[turbof1]

The issue is time. Big manufacturers will probably be able to do it still at this point, but Williams already said they had to push some parts towards suppliers to be manufactured, when it got announced winter testing will start a couple of weeks earlier. I don't think they can handle manufacturing a third car at this point without increasing the costs disproportional.

[Just_a_fan]

Pessimistic?

Yes! As others have said, you are basing you opinions on the believe that no one or only Ferrari will be able to close the gap to Merc. F1 history has shown that Dominance usually doesn't last long, and the team that becomes the new king of the hill usually isn't who most people expect it to be.

I can see McLaren suddenly running near the front next year. I think Honda will get the PU sorted. Of course it is dependent on McLaren developing their car rather than bringing a new concept every year like they did recently.

[Phil]

Eric Bouiller in 2014 according to James Allen stated "...that for the chassis and third car logistics, “We would need at least six months’ notice."

But no, it is pretty clear that 3 car teams is not a possibility for all teams, certainly not for the teams already in financial crisis. Simple math would suggest that manufacturing 3 cars are more expensive than 2, especially if you also have to buy expensive power units that according to current belief are already too expensive for them. Sure, it makes room for another pay driver, but that pay driver would have to cover all the costs that having a 3rd car includes - from every component to every developed part needed in sums of three without counting spares and what not. Also the costs of logistics, possibly more engineers present on a typical race day.

It's not relevant anyway. According to what we've heard in regards to 3 car teams, it was never a question if all teams would do it, but only those that can. It was believed in 2014 to be Ferrari, RedBull and McLaren. Given it's RedBull who might be causing this hypothesis in the first place, we can rule them out. So it's most likely Mercedes, Ferrari and Mclaren-Honda. None of the other teams have the capacity, besides perhaps Williams who AFAIK was never included into that part of agreement.

It's a fascinating idea - having 3 cars - but I revert back to what further unbalance this would cause vs. the teams that can't financially supply 3 cars.

[FoxHound]

Pessimistic?

Yes! As others have said, you are basing you opinions on the believe that no one or only Ferrari will be able to close the gap to Merc. F1 history has shown that Dominance usually doesn't last long, and the team that becomes the new king of the hill usually isn't who most people expect it to be.

I can see McLaren suddenly running near the front next year. I think Honda will get the PU sorted. Of course it is dependent on McLaren developing their car rather than bringing a new concept every year like they did recently.

I also see a Mclaren resurgence next season. With Prodromou, and the high rake size zero concept, we'll see some continuity.
But the issues Honda have suffered, namely with the turbo, and energy recuperation, have all been isolated with fixes in the pipeline. What helps further is there are now 7 more tokens for them to play with too.

If they aren't 4th or 5th overall next year I'll be massively disappointed.

[langwadt]

I like the customer engine idea.
it is no big deal. Remember F1 used to have teams with different kinds of engine. Times when Turbos fought against NA engines. What is wrong with a different engine?

just like the turbo vs. NA times the regulations will always end up favoring one or the other configuration

so it would either be the ones running cheap engines leaving because they don't have chance, or the big manufacturers leaving because they don't want to waste tons of money developing something that doesn't have a chance

[Andres125sx]

According to what we've heard in regards to 3 car teams, it was never a question if all teams would do it, but only those that can. It was believed in 2014 to be Ferrari, RedBull and McLaren. Given it's RedBull who might be causing this hypothesis in the first place, we can rule them out. So it's most likely Mercedes, Ferrari and Mclaren-Honda. None of the other teams have the capacity, besides perhaps Williams who AFAIK was never included into that part of agreement.

It's a fascinating idea - having 3 cars - but I revert back to what further unbalance this would cause vs. the teams that can't financially supply 3 cars.

Factory teams will always be one or two (or five) steps forward. Teams with no capacity for a 3th car neither have the capacity to catch up, so I don´t see any problem there, as always there will be the factory teams, and then the midfielders.

And you could add Renault to that list if they finally return as a works team. Then you´d get the four works teams (and the four PU manufacturers) with 3 cars, so they´d have same chances to develop their PUs. Then the law of diminishing returns will apply and perfomance will be closer....

... if they allow more development. That´s the real problem of current F1, not the PUs, not the 2/3 car teams, it´s the frozen rules with token systems. Allow free development and differences will be reduced automatically.

[Phil]

Factory teams will always be one or two (or five) steps forward. Teams with no capacity for a 3th car neither have the capacity to catch up, so I don´t see any problem there, as always there will be the factory teams, and then the midfielders.

No Andres, the problem is if the more dominant teams supply 3 cars, it pushes back everyone behind further down the grid. If we continue your thought of logic; "...then you´d get the four works teams (and the four PU manufacturers) with 3 cars....", it renders everyone else redundant. Because Force-India, Sauber, Williams will not be competing for the occasional podium or 4th, 5th, 6th - they'll be pushed further and further down the grid because their chance in competing for (higher) points just decreased significantly as a result of what you are proposing. They will not stick around. With this step, you are basically telling all customer teams to #&%!-off, we're happy to fill the grid with manufacturer teams. And because the sport isn't attractive enough to pull in new manufacturers, we'll just have the 4 we have supply the entire grid.

If you don't agree - tell me what incentive a Sauber, a Force-India, a Williams, a Red-Bull, a Torro-Rosso - any customer-team, any team that will not supply the grid with 3 cars has for taking part in this sport when their chances of competing decreases further and further as a result of what you're proposing.

I'll throw another bone in there while I'm at it; sponsorship. Who would want to sponsor a team at the "back" with only 2 cars from 20, if they can have their logos plastered on 3 cars out of 20? More cars running your logos = more exposure. This further adds to the unbalance I'm speaking of - making the strong/stronger, the weak/weaker.

[Mr. Fahrenheit]

Operating a third car isn't merely a question of production logistics (extra chassis (chassii? ), power-units and spare parts) but also of recruitment. You're can't magic up a good support structure for the third vehicle in a short space of time without:

a) hiring experienced people (from?) to take up these new roles on car 3
or
b) diluting your existing team and spreading that experience across three cars and filling in the blanks with new recruits

a) sounds expensive, b) may drop the overall strength of the team

[NL_Fer]

Operating a third car isn't merely a question of production logistics (extra chassis (chassii? ), power-units and spare parts) but also of recruitment. You're can't magic up a good support structure for the third vehicle in a short space of time without:

a) hiring experienced people (from?) to take up these new roles on car 3
or
b) diluting your existing team and spreading that experience across three cars and filling in the blanks with new recruits

a) sounds expensive, b) may drop the overall strength of the team

If the FIA would ban monitoring of several sensors, teams would have allot of personel redundant.

[dans79]

If you don't agree - tell me what incentive a Sauber, a Force-India, a Williams, a Red-Bull, a Torro-Rosso - any customer-team, any team that will not supply the grid with 3 cars has for taking part in this sport when their chances of competing decreases further and further as a result of what you're proposing.

That's easy to answer, money and the passion to race. take Williams for example, they have won one race in the last decade, and that one win was a fluke, because of the 2012 tire lottery.

[NL_Fer]

If you don't agree - tell me what incentive a Sauber, a Force-India, a Williams, a Red-Bull, a Torro-Rosso - any customer-team, any team that will not supply the grid with 3 cars has for taking part in this sport when their chances of competing decreases further and further as a result of what you're proposing.

That's easy to answer, money and the passion to race. take Williams for example, they have won one race in the last decade, and that one win was a fluke, because of the 2012 tire lottery.

Come in, F1 is no place for amateur entoesiasts. Besides, if nobody sponsers your backmarker team, there is no money either.

[mrluke]

It fundamentally comes down to the distribution of money.

Ferrari receive more $$s in payments each year just for turning up than the mid grid teams spend on their entire season.

We then try and come up with clever ways to stop the big teams spend the extra money that they are being given which just puts the mid grid teams at even more of a disadvantage.

Its completely nonsensical.