Engine problems?

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by Glen

If BMW kick off their F1 career by breaking the widely reported agreement between manufacturers that will be the icing on the cake. My respect for Theissen could hardly be lower, but his would do the trick!

On the other hand, if Minardi (and/or Jordan) enjoy an odd kind of advantage for a season or so that can only be good to my mind. I doubt they will win, much less dominate, anything (maybe Monza?) but the different engine characteristic will give us some great entertainment - more grunt and pick-up out of the corners vs superior handling, braking and grip of the "proper" cars. Sounds good to me.

The FIA could have achieved this too by a massive deregulation. This would have been fairer as well.

[Glen]

Massive deregulation would send costs into the stratosphere! Not on.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by Glen

Massive deregulation would send costs into the stratosphere! Not on.

The massive regulations have sent costs into the stratosphere.

[Glen]

No - the competition and the money available have sent costs up.

For example, under the old qualifying system the top teams were preparing virtually completely different cars, just to do 12 laps. Different engine, brakes, suspension gearbox, aerodynamics - lighter everything with more ballast - the regulations for one lap quali and parc fermé addressed that issue.

Ever more exotic solutions have been brought in by the teams - ultra-expensive metal alloys, space-age (and toxic) coatings, ever more intricate electronics...

There is a tendency to spend the money wherever you are allowed to spend it, but to suggest there is a cause and effect with tighter regulations making costs rise is utter nonsense, especially when one looks at rule like the forthcoming minimum engine weight and CofG, for example - that can only reduce costs.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by Glen

No - the competition and the money available have sent costs up.

For example, under the old qualifying system the top teams were preparing virtually completely different cars, just to do 12 laps. Different engine, brakes, suspension gearbox, aerodynamics - lighter everything with more ballast - the regulations for one lap quali and parc fermé addressed that issue.

The FIA could have resolved this "problem" by banning refueling during the race as well. This would make the race less like than a sprint. During the 1980's and early 1990's smaller teams had more chance of getting in the points or even the podium, because they only concentrated themself on the race.

Ever more exotic solutions have been brought in by the teams - ultra-expensive metal alloys, space-age (and toxic) coatings, ever more intricate electronics...

I agree that the electronics should be restricted. I think it would be a good idea to introduce a standard ECU, but with the possibility for the teams to adapt its software configuration.

Ever more exotic solutions have been brought in by the teams - ultra-expensive metal alloys, space-age (and toxic) coatings, ever more intricate electronics...

Some measures will reduce the costs indeed. But for what price? What will keep Formula 1 more special than IRL? Some measures, like enlarging the life span of the engines and tyres, will only increase the costs, temporary and permanenty.

[Glen]

The issues of specialist qualifying cars and refuelling in the race are completely un-linked as far as I can judge - can you explain?

If you think using one third of the total number of engines is going to increase costs I can't see how this discussion can possibly develop! Huh?

Your belief that rules should be relaxed but that electronics restricted is contradictory to say the least - which do you want - tighter regs or more relaxed regs?

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by Glen

The issues of specialist qualifying cars and refuelling in the race are completely un-linked as far as I can judge - can you explain?

Before 1994 the race wasn't really a sprint. Races were more difficult. Drivers had to look after to the fuel consumption and it was easier to make a mistake. Because of the ban on refueling, drivers had to pay more attention to the race setup. The car's behavior changed during the race more, than now.

Because of the fact that drivers could easier get in trouble, the smaller teams decided to concentrate on the race. Qualifying wasn't that important, because a lot could happen during the race itself. So, for the big teams qualifying was more important. They had the money to come up with specialist qualifying cars. But as long as the big teams can afford it, I don't consider that as a problem.

If you think using one third of the total number of engines is going to increase costs I can't see how this discussion can possibly develop! Huh?

Limits on the usage will only decrease the production costs. But the development costs have increased enormously.

Your belief that rules should be relaxed but that electronics restricted is contradictory to say the least - which do you want - tighter regs or more relaxed regs?

A sensible combination of both. Formula 1 should go back to its roots. That means relaxed regulations for the underbody (restricted ground effect), tires, engines and qualifying. Teams should also be able to sell and buy cars, parts and designes. But tighter regulations are needed to the aerodynamics and fuel consumption, in the way that refueling should be banned.

[sonic]

Intriguing stuff.

Can I ask - what was the original motive to go to V8? It seems we have pretty good engine parity for the first time in ages?

It clearly wasn't cost cutting, teams like Minardi can ill afford a massive change like that.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by sonic

Intriguing stuff.

Can I ask - what was the original motive to go to V8? It seems we have pretty good engine parity for the first time in ages?

It clearly wasn't cost cutting, teams like Minardi can ill afford a massive change like that.

To slow the cars down was the motive.And just lopping two cylinders off a V10 seemed the logical way of doing things.This means that some parts and data from V10 engines can be used on the V8s.Minardi will be using a restricted V10 until they can afford it.But in the long term it is mainly to reduce costs as the V8s are far more restricted in terms of architecture,materials,etc.

[sonic]

Thanks Martyn

again we try and create rules to make this class cheaper, yet if you had a bucket of $??? millions and had to spend it all in a year, you'd find a way, and you'd get an advantage.

In terms of slowing them down, like the one tyre rule, we'll be back to lap record shattering pace before we know it.

The more open a formula is, the better IMHO.

[NO1SPECIAL]

agree with previous post about the more open the better, in general.

on the other hand, i'd love to see a go-kart race at each grand prix with all the current F1 drivers in identical karts except for a small body-weight allowance....i reckon that'd give people something to talk about!!??

Atleast then we'd see some overtaking...