Formula One's Engine Crisis

[dans79]

Therefore, I surmise that the thread be renamed the F1 management crisis.
1 teams dissatisfaction with engines does not make a crisis.

Anyone having a problem with that, please let me know by PM. If I don't get any complaints I'll change the title tomorrow.

I agree, it needs to be changed, as it's not an engine specific problem.

[Facts Only]

Therefore, I surmise that the thread be renamed the F1 management crisis.
1 teams dissatisfaction with engines does not make a crisis.

Anyone having a problem with that, please let me know by PM. If I don't get any complaints I'll change the title tomorrow.

I agree, it needs to be changed, as it's not an engine specific problem.

Do I get a prize for getting to the crux of the matter? More importantly can I get an extra column 1 prize for being extra important and a veto over any future thread name changes?

[dans79]

Do I get a prize for getting to the crux of the matter? More importantly can I get an extra column 1 prize for being extra important and a veto over any future thread name changes?

The most you're getting is a gold star!

[turbof1]

Do I get a prize for getting to the crux of the matter? More importantly can I get an extra column 1 prize for being extra important and a veto over any future thread name changes?

You want even more? We already made a concorde agreement where you get 35% of F1Technical's revenue, 2/3 of the decision making power and a fresh blue-eyed Hublot every month!

Fine, we'll work out a deal. Just don't tell the other members since they might lodge a complaint at the European Commission .

[FoxHound]

It was my summation! I claim at least 50% ownership, and associated revenues along with a veto right!

[Facts Only]

Do I get a prize for getting to the crux of the matter? More importantly can I get an extra column 1 prize for being extra important and a veto over any future thread name changes?

You want even more? We already made a concorde agreement where you get 35% of F1Technical's revenue, 2/3 of the decision making power and a fresh blue-eyed Hublot every month!

Fine, we'll work out a deal. Just don't tell the other members since they might lodge a complaint at the European Commission .

Excellent. And I assume that when the qaulity of my posts decreases you will change the forum rules so that I can be back at the top again?

Or I'll threaten to quit! (over and over again but never actully go through with it)

[gridwalker]

You'd better not make the rules too complex, or you'll drive us casual posters away

[Andres125sx]

What teams lacked in resources, they could make up with ingenuity at times and successfully so.

It also allowed teams like RedBull that started in the midfield to rise through the field. Mercedes too (speaking purely prior to 2014). And Brawn in 2009. Yes, Brawn had a ridiculously high budget, but it wasn't that budget that ultimately brought them their success, it was ingenuity of the double diffuser. Another example is Renault too.

And another example is Mercedes with their split turbo. Any reason you take into account Brawn ingenuity with double diffusers but not Mercedes ingenuity with split turbo?

Having A-spec and B-spec engines is what would create a 2-tier championship. It effectively means that those on a B-spec engine would not match the performance of those with A-spec engines irregardless what ingenuity, creativity, money or resources they come up with - because in this formula, the engine is the predominant performance differentiator.

As I said previously in this thread, you´re assuming Mercedes advantage will be there forever, when it shouldn´t

Well, at least if they allow some development. If not then you´re right, but then the problem is that, the lack of development

Sorry but...

2013 WCC:

1- Red Bull Racing.......596
2- Mercedes............. 360
3- Ferrari.................354
4- Lotus-Renault.........315
5- McLaren-Mercedes...117
6- Force India-Merc......77
7- Sauber-Ferrari.........57
8- Toro Rosso-Ferrari....33
9- Williams-Renault.......5
10- Marusia-Cosworth.....0
11- CAterham-Renault....0

4th in the championship got more points than the 7 teams below togheter. It was same as always, four top teams on a different league than the rest

Err Andres - what you're seeing here is the simple and obvious result on how the point distribution is. Let me remind you of the point scoring mechanism we have in place: 25-18-15-12-10-8-6-4-2-1.

Phil, that´s a clear 2-tier championship. You can´t explain the two groups, one scoring more than 300 points and the second scoring less than 150 with the scoring system.

The scoring system explains the advantage RBR got over second, not the step between top four and the rest

I'll say it again - a real 2 tier championship with A-spec and B-spec engines makes this rather impossible of happening (under a engine dominated formula) and is anti-competitive.

You´re explaining this as if A-spec and B-spec engines is new to F1 and past times where better because this didn´t exist, when it has always existed


The problem is not because of A-spec and B-spec engines, the problem is because of a huge perfomance difference between Mercedes and the rest, and the token system impeding manufacturers to catch up. With free development all of them would be much closer, and with closer perfomances B-spec engines wouldn´t be a huge problem

[Phil]

Sorry but...

2013 WCC:

1- Red Bull Racing.......596
2- Mercedes............. 360
3- Ferrari.................354
4- Lotus-Renault.........315
5- McLaren-Mercedes...117
6- Force India-Merc......77
7- Sauber-Ferrari.........57
8- Toro Rosso-Ferrari....33
9- Williams-Renault.......5
10- Marusia-Cosworth.....0
11- CAterham-Renault....0

4th in the championship got more points than the 7 teams below togheter. It was same as always, four top teams on a different league than the rest

Err Andres - what you're seeing here is the simple and obvious result on how the point distribution is. Let me remind you of the point scoring mechanism we have in place: 25-18-15-12-10-8-6-4-2-1.

Phil, that´s a clear 2-tier championship. You can´t explain the two groups, one scoring more than 300 points and the second scoring less than 150 with the scoring system.

The scoring system explains the advantage RBR got over second, not the step between top four and the rest

Of course i can. It's simple. let me spell it out for you: Top 4 teams equals 8 cars. Assuming most of them regularly finish in the points, leaves only 9th and 10th position for points. Anyone below 10th gets zero points. It's only logical that there is a drop-off. As i said, it's not linear. With 20 cars on the grid by 10 teams, 10 cars are always outside the points. 1-2 = 43 points, 3-4 = 27 points. That's a roughly 40% difference. I'll let you conclude the rest.

My advice: stop fixating on the end points of a season that are a logical consequence of an unlinear point scoring system. It has absolutely nothing to do with what we are discussing and zero to do with a 2-tier championship.

As I said previously in this thread, you´re assuming Mercedes advantage will be there forever, when it shouldn´t

We are talking about a 2-tier championship. It is irrelevant if other engine manufacturers close the gap or not - the issue we are discussing here is solely between a factory car with an A spec engine and its customer team of that same manufacturer with a B-spec engine. That customer team will have no equal ground to challenge, irregardless how many resources they spend, due to the artificial handicap by the supplier. That is what makes it a 2-tier system, hence the topic at hand.

[FrukostScones]

AMuS inside on engine crisis:

4 Teams still in engine limbo:

Red Bull
TR
Lotus
Manor (yep, owner change will cancel Merc deal and apparently parties want to sell, recent resigning of Booth Lowdon not a good sign for the deal...)

https://translate.google.de/translate?s ... t=&act=url

[FoxHound]

Mercedes are making a substantial loss on supply to their customers.

http://m.autosport.com/news/report.php/ ... f1-engines

Wolff also raises the poignant issue of customers demanding competitive engines, with the latest developments, forcing Mercedes deeper into the red.

With all this focus on customers, are we missing the lengths manufacturers are going to, to ensure a balanced supply?

[hollus]

I call BS on that one. If Mercedes is taking its engine R&D expenditure and dividing it by 4 (as they supply 4 teams), sure, they are selling at a loss. But does that imply that if they were not supplying the other teams they wouldn't spend the same amount of R&D just for their own engine?
Also, having the world saying for two years now that Mercedes engines can destroy rivals with names like Ferrari, Renault and Honda sounds like an excellent marketing investment. And they wouldn't get that image if it was just Mercedes GP dominating, they get it because their engines have managed to make Williams and Force India really really good.
So not only they are not losing money in selling their power units for something between 10-20M$ per team (it is the research costs, not the manufacture and operation costs that are that high), but they are getting an awesome image return for it.

[Tim.Wright]

Mercedes can hardly complain about making losses on their engines. They decided for themselves a: how much they were going to spend on the new engines amd b: how much they were selling them for. It was their own choice to make b << a and its exactly this type of overspending which is the cause of the sport's sustainability problems and the lack of competition at the front of the grid.

[FoxHound]

Mercedes can hardly complain about making losses on their engines. They decided for themselves a: how much they were going to spend on the new engines amd b: how much they were selling them for. It was their own choice to make b << a and its exactly this type of overspending which is the cause of the sport's sustainability problems and the lack of competition at the front of the grid.

Maybe the point is that they're selling at a loss to keep some level of sustainability. Mercedes know the cost of supplying and to my reading of the story aren't complaining, but outlining manufacturers side of the story.

[mrluke]

The backdrop to this is pressure for manufacturers to reduce the costs of their pus.