May we also compare the fuel consumption and the carbon emission of both types of power unit ? [/QUOTE] Why not compare the fuel consumption of all the fans who arrive at the track. This is 100× greater than that consumed by the cars on track. As to carbon emissions, 200L of gasoline in a 3L V10 creates exactly the same carbon output as 200L of gasoline in a 1.6L V6.
I [/QUOTE I disagree. I think the Ethos of F1 is the best and highest in motorsport.... opening up the tech regs, and minimize rules, but set a cost cap. that is how you innovate and win.
Most of the world where people will live in future will be virtual. This is just round the corner, and I am sure that Liberty is already gearing for it. In UK, some football clubs of the Premier League are already considering it to catch a larger audience. Like many people already can work from home, most people in the developed world will attend school, university, libraries, holidays, doctor, museums, concerts, sport events, virtually from home, without any need to travel. F1 followers will pay subscription, hire special equipment and watch GPs in 3D from home .
I'll bet heavily against the vision you're describing. More will be virtual, for sure. But people are social creatures. We tried the school from home, empty stadiums, etc. No one liked it. Unless there's another pandemic or a war or something, if there's an F1 race in my lifetime without crowds in the stands, I'll eat my shirt.
I am not saying spectators will disappear, simply there could be less of them because some people could prefer to see the race virtually without the hassle or the cost of travelling long distances. For example, after 30 years of going to 3 or 5 GPs every year, I stopped attending at the turn of this century. I found that the TV channels (BBC, then ITV and now SKY) offered me better reporting and information to follow the races than I could get sitting in the grandstand, I save transport and hotel money, and I don't waste a whole weekend for a few hours of track action.
I think you´re missing the point: for most places the GP is just a tourist trap. Even here, where we´re supposed to be die hard fans, you often read comments like "the track is fine but there is no good party at the city".
Three F1 teams would have no engines if 2026 rules scrapped McLaren, Williams and Alpine would have no engines next year if the planned 2026 Formula 1 regulations were to be scrapped, their supplier Mercedes has warned
Watched the Chinese GP. Dreary. Boring, no action. I come from the 70's 80's, F1. that was so much better, blown engines and unfortunately badly hurt pilots, but what a show. To me, this sucks. Regards, Alberto
Engines should be strerched to their limits, which means they should blow up sometimes. There should be natural consequences for mistakes, not penalties doled out by referees. Cars should stall when a driver spins. They should get stuck or damaged when they go off track. Danger has a place in the sport. I don't want a return to '60s or '70s safety standards. But we should be dazzled by the drivers' skill and bravery. If we're not, we've lost something fundamental.
Thats not a Mercedes problem but 1 for the other teams potentially. No one knows yet as is. Speculation. F1 will survive as the FIA will move to end a dominant period most likely. Liberty would politely ask them if viewing and ticket sales declined. Cannot soak circuit owners and sell TV rights if viewers and fans lose interest!
All teams don´t want a rule change now that they´ve already spent the money in the other rule change.
agree. As much as I despise the 2026 rule set it's FAR too late changing now. Even if it wasn't for Audi coming in, the money has already been spend by others. Audi wouldn't even have an alternative engine for 2026. I however very much welcome a V10 for 2028, and the rest of the manufacturers can threaten to leave all they want, if they do...that's very much their loss.
Probably I´m in the minority, but I´m not sure that going two steps backwards is a good idea. They should concentrate on making the new formulas interesting instead of reusing an old one, there are still many ways of making an hybrid engine more interesting than what we have now.
I don't think high revving V10s is a step backwards. Low-revving V6s were a step backwards. This would just be a correction. That said, I agree thay you don't necessarily have to abandon hybrids or add cylinders or displacement. TBC, I'd like that. But the most important thing is to stop handicapping the ICE component of the powertrain. Just getting rid of fuel limits would go a long way to making the engines more interesting again. You'd hear a lot fewer complaints if the regs encouraged the V6s to rev freely. (And fewer still if they made them NA ICE + Hybrid.) If the cars don't give you goose bumps when you hear them approach, something is wrong.
This seems to be the exact opposite of what F1 has been doing for the past few years. They have been moving races away from purpose-built racetracks that are located in the rural country-side to street tracks in larger cities precisely because these cities offer an entertainment hub that turns a 2 hour race on Sunday into a 5 day destination experience. All those VIP suites, parties, concerts, etc aren't for the virtual viewer, as a matter of fact, they are specifically intended to separate the virtual viewer from the physical attendee. In the US, the Superbowl is the most expensive sporting event to attend. Their ticket prices are the envy of F1, and the money brought into the game location for the week of the game is obscene. People are willing to pay overly inflated prices for game tickets, hotels, transportation, dining, and event access just to be part of the experience. I've never met one person who said the game was better live than watching at home on TV, but they never regret spending the money to go. What remains to be seen is if F1 can sell that experience 24 times a year, year after year. The NFL only has to do it once a year.
Yes fully agree. Please do not go nostalgic and admit your are out of idea's. The V-10's had their day and that was years ago. There are options. MBS is trying to distract Liberty when races are well attended and viewers are watching at home/online. His timing offering this is interesting and has alot to do with his influence over F1. The FIA and F1 are not better with him at all. He hates being marginal in impact. Utterly obvious.
Recently departed Eddie Jordan said it best... Eddie Jordan speaking facts #f1 #motorsport There's no reason the V6 couldn't be exciting...like you say remove the fuel limits (or at least up them significantly), go back to more conventional turbos and get rid of the truly expensive bits (mguh) would've been a huge step forward. For 2026 they remvoed the mguh but made the rest so complicated the wow factor will be gone again, the ICE will just be used as a V6 generator for the batteries. V6 Turbo, let those turbos boost to oblivion, 1300+bhp and when they go pop they go pop, only a few hundred grand down the drain rather than 10 million....
An ICE on 100% eco fuel is NOT an old formula. It's brand new. People go on about road relevance but the current engines also have ZERO road relevancy. Even when Ferrari/Mercedes claim their cars have F1 engine tech they are talking utter BS, it doesn't operate anywhere near the same, it's a basic function that already existed before F1 went with hoover engines.
The world hates change, but it's the only way to move forward. also Any failure is a step towards success. Mankind is splt into two sides: those who want to maintain traditions, and those who dare to take risks to progress. Any innovation met strong opposition initially.
Change is necessary for progress. Not all change is progress. Racing focused on efficiency is not progress.
