Customer Engines...

[DKGandBH]

What are their cost and which ones would be better

Ford - Well obviously they are Really Really good
Honda - Probably the most unreliable engine at the moment
Mercedes - Don't offer one (But have suggested that they could)
Toyota - Don't offer one
Renault - Don't offer one
Ferrari - Sauber don't seem to have the performance this year

David

[hubert]

I've heard $10-15 million for the season. Not sure what ammenaties are afforded with that, but I'd presume rebuilds and maintenance are included (couple of engineers watching the data, and so forth).

Ford - Well obviously they are Really Really good

Hmmm...

Honda - Probably the most unreliable engine at the moment

Depends on who's driving, I'd say. Button seems to do well; Taku ... not so much.

Mercedes - Don't offer one (But have suggested that they could)
Toyota - Don't offer one
Renault - Don't offer one

Toyota and MB both have some of the more powerful engines out; out of the two, I'd give Toyota the nod if I was betting on dyno results, but as you said, they're not on the market.

Ferrari - Sauber don't seem to have the performance this year

Could be the powerplant, or the pkg. The f2003 wasn't as dominating as the f2002, so the engine/powerplant/geabox could be to blame, in part , for Sauber's maligned season. Who is to say, tho?

[Woolley]

Should be compulsory for all manufacturers to make their engines available at a fixed cost to a second team in their third year, and up to four from the next. It's ludicrous that the smaler teams get turned over struggling to persuade anyone to even supply them an unreliable year-old engine.

[sduke]

I can understand why a manufacturer would NOT want to supply engines to other teams. (imagine a Mercedes in a Minardi) But it would spice up the proceedings I believe.

Is there a profit for Ferrari in supplying Sauber, or is it a break even proposition? I understand that the Cosworth power (for what it is worth) provided to Jordan and Minardi is a profitable situation, so it seems the other manufacturers could supply other teams if profit was a motive.

But will such an arrangement actually help the lower placed compete at the front, or save anyone any money, except of course, the engine manufacturers?

[DKGandBH]

I imagine that there is a significant savings in not designing / building your own engine. However, you do have to make do with a lesser engine than the "factory" team.

As the factory teams probably only have to build the engines (as opposed to having to design them as well - This would have been done for the factory engines previously) this would result ina cost savings as well.

David

[Stephen Green]

David, Honda don't offer a customer engine either.

[Kicking-back]

The Ferrari/Petronas in the Sauber is an 04 not 03 spec.

[Cougar]

'04 Spec from the start of teh season though isnt it?

[ASCII Man]

I think Sauber did get an engine upgrade recently.

[Dani Filth]

Silverstone .. with Fisico starting last

[Lotusonpole]

Now there's the rub....
New regulation- ALL motor manufacturers must supply at least one other team with engines.

Mill Grist...pass the pepper please.

Cheers
Peter

[Kicking-back]

That may drive some manufacturers out of the sport and discourage others from coming in, but in principle I agree.

[DKGandBH]

Lotusonpole,

Is that Manufacturers who "are the team" as in Ferrari,
Toyota, Renault, Jaguar

Or does it also include Manufactures who suppy engines to a team as in Mercedes (McLaren), Honda (BAR), BMW (Williams)

David

[Lotusonpole]

Hi DKGandBh
I suppose I mean any major engine manufacturer, so that means all of them.
Each one is a team in itself or is a major partner but this leaves many smaller teams at a disadvantage and at a risk of not being able to carry on.
It's basically just in the interests of the sport as a whole.

If the smaller teams disappeared the alternative maybe the seven teams with secure engine supplies would run 3 cars a piece in each GP.

Just a thought...lol.

Cheers
Peter

[Lotusonpole]

Hi Kicking-back
I tend to agree with you.
The irony is that without all the teams including the smaller ones, F1 would suffer and potentially become less attractive to the major engine builders anyway.
So if each did supply a second, smaller team it would in the long run maintain the attractiveness of the sport.
After all F1 is in theory greater than the total sum of parts and no team or group of teams should be viewed as more important than the sport itself.

Thats if the seven could cope with the possibility of say a Jordan Mercedes beating the Mclarens...lol.

Cheers
Peter

[Snrub]

I think there should be a Jordan/Minardi rule. If you can prove that your budget is <$60M and you come in last or second last place then you should be allowed to have a ~1.2L turbo engine.

[nkh]

or a Judd V10 3.2 or something...

[Nizmo32_josh]

Arnt they 1.5L Turbos???

[Snrub]

Aren't what 1.5L turbos? F1 use to have 1.5L turbos, but those probably produce too much power (especially with modern technolgoy) to be on equal footing with a n/a 3.0L V10, so I said ~1.2L.

[dubby99]

Originally posted by Snrub
Aren't what 1.5L turbos? F1 use to have 1.5L turbos, but those probably produce too much power (especially with modern technolgoy) to be on equal footing with a n/a 3.0L V10, so I said ~1.2L.

What about a 12a turbo

[Nizmo32_josh]

I was thinking of them using 1985 spec motors.... So we could have the awesome turbo failure fires again!