Costs doubled moving to V6

In what has to be the stupidest decision of all time, the move to save money by getting rid of V8's to go with V6's has actually INCREASED costs TWICE as much, according to Williams.

Not only are the cars slower and the sound terrible, the costs have gone up. So, what was the purpose?

'Costs doubled after V6 engine move'


Williams finance director Alan Kinch has revealed that Formula 1 costs escalated on the back of the move from V8 engines to V6 power units.

In an attempt to reduce costs, F1 switched from 2.4l V8 units to the more economically friendly 1.6-litre turbo-charged V6 hybrid units at the start of the 2014 season.

The change didn't go down well with a lot of people, but it played into Williams' hands as it co-incided with their switch from Renault engines to Mercedes with the German manufacturer one step ahead of their rivals.

The Grove squad went on to finish the 2014 campaign third in the Constructors' Championship, but they still posted a financial loss of £34.3million.

Kinch, though, says the engine change played a major role in those results as the costs doubled.

"Costs went up by about £20m and the reasons for that were three-fold," Kinch told the Independent. "The first one and the most significant one of all of them was the increase in costs in the power unit.

"So, moving from the traditional V8 engine to the new V6 hybrid essentially doubled the costs of the power unit and that was the biggest chunk."

 

Well done to F1 financial mathematicians who are in charge of cost cutting.

 

It's not that a V6 is more expensive than a conventional V8 per se, in fact it's probably the opposite.

It's allowing complex technologies around it that tipped the balance and saw the costs rocketing high. There are several sophisticated systems around the engine in what is now a power unit and they cost a fortune to develop and made to work together.

Obviously the decision to go ahead with that was a huge mistake, mostly in a cost conscious environment.

 

Ditching the V8s was never about cutting costs. It was about making the formula more relevant to road car manufacturers to encourage them not to quit the sport. It achieved that.

Now - speaking personally, I agree the current formula is way too expensive, unnecessarily complex and lacks emotion. That needs sorting out ASAP.

 

Good intentions gone horribly wrong.

A familiar pattern.

Kai

 

It wasn't necessary to have the road car manufacturers on board at all. F1 can live without them, and would be in better shape without them.

Road car manufacturers come and go at will, and have no loyalty to F1 has they have demonstrated many times in the past. They impose their will, and with their almost unlimited finances squeeze the small teams out of business. Then they leave once their marketing department are satisfied by the results, if the economy hits a downturn, or when they are tired of losing. Ford, BMW, Mercedes, Honda, Toyota, Renault come and go as it suits them.

What F1 needs is independent teams like McLaren, Williams, Force India, Sauver, etc... a couple of engine suppliers like Cosworth, Ilmor, Judd, etc... whose sole business is motor racing.

I do not see why car manufacturers needed to be encouraged in F1.

 

It's all history now. The sport needs to sort itself out ASAP or it will lose prominence. Anyone who watched today's Nurburgring 24 will know that there is really great racing out there that doesn't need the excessive financial risks of F1 or it's contrived engine forumla.

 

and they get to refuel..... Its racing as it should be. I did not attend this years event but I could not stop watching it. I slept and that is the only part of the Ring24hr I missed. F1 needs help.

 

Slower? Nope,at least not compared to the v8's with pirellis.

I may be in the minority but I'm glad they are actually on the bleeding edge of technology again. The v8's were of little interest once they artificially limited rpm's and locked development making them essentially equalized spec motors. It's much more exciting now than the rb years.

 

Muppets.

 

Change the format again, the Development costs sink and and sky rocket costs.

Every change, will raise costs. You either ride it out, or spike costs yet AGAIN.

I think a major area of costs, is the lack of testing. This means you need to hire very expensive simulation experts, instead of driving a very expensive race car.

And by the way, no matter WHAT you do, teams with bigger budgets will find a way to spend it to gain an advantage somewhere.

 

Stupid. But relevant!

 

Could the powers that be in F1 even run a popcorn stand?

 

All done for the ******* tree huggers. Like i said, just leave F1 as it was back in 1999-2004. Great looking simple cars, superb sounds, and superb powerful engines.

 

Very well said my friend. Manufactures presence are just bernie's fake idea.

 

To a certain degree, yes. It just needs some tweaks; keep the ERS, wider wheels and a bit less aero so cars can overtake better.

1000+ hp with great noise, overtaking, close following...it's a simple formula that won't get through the thick, titanium shelled, granite filled heads of the F1 ''strategic'' group.

 

In the past thirty (or more) years, how many times has the FIA implemented rules with
the intention of cutting costs?

More times than I can remember.

And, each of these times, the exact opposite effect has actually been the case.

Now, they're talking about cutting more testing time, banning wind tunnels, all this. What
effect do they really think this will have? As we're seeing in Indy Cars now, cutting testing
has had near disastrous results.

BHW

 

Once the tokens run out development costs will plummet
They will lift the fuel flow restrictions for 2017 in order to
hit the 1000hp goal which in turn will let the engines rev
higher and make real noise.Pain in the ass to wait that long
But there maybe some hope Nobody knows for sure though :-/

 

What you describe is what is at the root of the problem...the FIA know best;

They know best how to cut costs.

They know best what materials to use.

They know best what the designs specs should be, right down to the valve angles.

They know best how to spec a car that requires little or no testing.

They know best how to make cars reliable.

F1 teams have, or at least claim to have, some of the best and most innovative engineers and designers in the world. Yet, they buy into this notion that a Formula One car can or should be designed by a committee in a meeting room. So, the teams get what they deserve. But, that doesn't mean it is the right way to do it.

 

But didn't all the teams (or the majority of them) have to
agree to the (engine) changes ala something like 'the Concord Agreement'????

 

It's over we have seen the best 1990 Thur 2006 . There is no way to save f1 refueling is great but we have been down the turbo route before and Noone wanted it because of costs and now look at f1 . Bernard knew from day one that the turbo was going to hurt f1 and FIA won't listen impo the FIA should be the one shown the door let Bernie run the rules . Before Bernie was given the tv rights f1 was crap no safety no money no nothing . With a real leader like Bernie everyone has made money drivers and team owners live like kings fans where safe and had bathrooms at the track . I think the world of Bernie from used motorcycle shop owner to a man that made the greatest sport in the world

 

I think you see Ecclestone through rose tinted glasses...

 

I think you see Bernie Ecclestone through tunnel vision glasses that only allow you to see the most recent things he's done in F1 rather than everything he's ever done for the sport!

Try reading: "No Angel - The secret life of Bernie Ecclestone" by Tom Bower (A book that could have just as easily been titled: "Bernie Ecclestone: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly!")

There's a whole lot more to Bernie Ecclestone than what you've read on the internet!

 

I think the point is that at the time, the idea of going V6 was that costs would go DOWN. But, they haven't.

 

Not only I read Tom Boyer's book, but also "Bernie" by Suzan Watkins.
I was also living until recently not far from Bexleyheath where Bernie grew up and started his business in the 50s. My neighbour, for almost 20 years, was a cop who knew Bernie very well. He used to tell me that Bernie was investigated several times by the police when he was second-hand car dealer, for insurance scams, credit fraud, suspicious arson, etc...
His reputation in the community here at the border of Kent isn't great; he conned several people and some of his former partners don't have much good to say about him. He left unpaid bills behind, etc...
All the halmarks of a rogue character.


The books, incidently, don't gloss too much about the begining of his career. How he tricked Ron Tauranac to obtain full ownership of the Brabham team gives an insight about his methods. He manoeuvered to become the leader of FOCA, and then switched side to ally with the FIA to obtain F1 commercial rights ; the poacher becoming gamekeeper!

Indeniably, he did a lot to the sport. But much could have been achieved without his dictatorial methods. Although, he took the glory for other people's efforts in reforming the sport too. Jackie Stewart, Lou Stanley, Syd Watkins and a few others worked to make F1 safer. Bernie mostly worked at making the sport paying for itself and make him rich.