"Formula 1 needs equalisation moves says Red Bull's Christian Horner"

Just to clarify, March 1, 2015 was the deadline for the teams to change the rules for 2016 by a majority vote. No consensus was reached.
Therefore, there is no realistic chance to adjust the rules until the 2017 season since a unanimous vote would be required. This will not happen so we will have the current format for 2016 with teams attempting to close the gap to MB but with dwindling tokens and a greater % of the engine being frozen from now to 2017.

 

So basically all the teams besides Merc have shot themselves on the foot

Lewis may end up with four titles

 

I've said this elsewhere but it will be a massive faux pas by Mercedes if their ill-gotten gain evaporates this year.

 

I think, F1 is the only sport where you can 99% predict the outcome of the results these days. There's no more shocking results, like how you find in football, for example.

 

Where's the "cutting edge" technology in the current F1? Advanced F1-document loophole analysis?

One of the big problems in F1 IMO is that "cutting edge" has been replaced with "relevant to production cars".

 

Utter rubbish.

F1 is pushing the boundaries of what is possible with a hybrid powertrain. This means interesting drivers cars in the future, not just Prius's, will be hybrid.

The electrically powered turbo also is a fantastic way to solve the lag problems with old fashioned turbo designs. Soon all cars will be turbo charged because of this newly developed by F1 technology.
Pete

 

Excellent opener - you've really stamped the quality of your post with this entry line

You've just proved my point. The first technology you point to in F1 is technology from a Prius that has been around for yonks. Love those "cutting edge" Prius family cars ROFL. People are flocking to ancient batteries as a solution for their cars about the same as they are flocking to F1 - in their negative droves.

Ah, so solving lag on "cutting edge" turbo (you do know how long turbo has been around?) is F1's exciting new technology?
You're entitled to an opinion that these new engines are great. But it is fact that there is zero new cutting edge tech involved.

 

No your opinion is a tad flawed but not wrong. You realize that electric turbocharging technology has been around for decades. This is racing for Gods sake and hybrid technology via F1 is not needed nor was it desired, my opinion of course.

I appreciate your opinion/input but you cannot expect everyone to agree.

 

Twisting my words. The fact is the technology involved is very different from a Prius. If you don't agree we can start a discussion about the F1 technology in those v10 engines being from a 1899 Mercedes ...

Yes the turbo was invented in the 1920's I believe but it has taken to 2014 to make them perfect.

And you are entitled to your opinion, but it is not just the components but their use that can be cutting edge.

Lets have some fun with F1 technology:
1. Internal combustion engine - 1823 ... yeah those v10's are soooo cutting edge.
2. Aerodynamics - study in the modern sense started in the 18th century.
3. Tyres - 1888 by Dunlop or 1845 by Thomson, and yeah those early ones were slicks too!
4. Monocoque - 1912 with aircraft.
5. Disc brake - 1950's
6. 4 valves per cylinder - ~1913
7. Carbon fibre - late 1800s

New technology in 2014:
1. Using an electric motor to power a turbo charger.
2. I think this was the first split turbo charger also.
3. Energy harvesting off a turbo charger.

All clever stuff and far more technically interesting than the v10 dinosaurs where the only real difference between those first car engines of Mercedes was the use of pneumatics instead of metal valve springs ... oh and computerised engine management.
Pete

 

If you are a techy I can see the interest and said defense but others could not care less.
F1 for decades has been all about cost reduction when in fact it has increased. When I first heard that turbochargers were returning I said great and engines could be dusted off, I am a dreamer.

Horner has mad and tossing.

 

Based on the Australian TV channel 'Ten' broadcast of the Aussie GP, it appears that most just watch F1 to see which celebrities are spectators ... wtf ... unbelievably pathetic

I'll leave this comment alone because I'm not sure what you are trying to say.
Pete

 

Pete, you're all over the shop with your logic. You have a go at the V10 because they're ~100 years old, then you acclaim turbo's for taking about 100 years to perfect. And of course you love the 1000 year old battery/hybrid technology.

Caterpillar used this over a decade ago. Perhaps its cutting edge F1 heavy machinery technology It's an old idea that was dumped in favour of the many other/better solutions.

Staged/split turbos have been built and used in many turbines. It has been around for ages. Both Mercedes and Ferrari have splits. I think Ferrari's implementation is way better and that Merc's complex/heavy solution may well become their albatross. Either way nothing new or cutting edge here.

Oh come on! Really? You're going to claim this thermal harvesting as new?? The problem here is that the penalty in weight, complexity, danger and cost for the given return is more a testimony to how poor this idea is. There's a reason GDI's give way better energy outcomes than hybrids. Now that was an opportunity to get some really useful and true leading edge technology happening again in F1.

 

Just to be clear, I think there was plenty of scope for Turbo's to be a huge boom for F1. When I first heard turbo as the new PU I thought twin turbo's howling at really high revs using GDI. Even now it peaks my interest thinking about the options with that format and how it might sound.

 

" ill-gotten " you might want to rethink that quote my friend

 

Yep, it probably is a little soft

 

Is this Christian Horner in disguise ???

 

I do find myself attracted to centerfold posing....

 

From the article posted "Horner claimed that rule changes were regularly made to hold his team back during its years of dominance in 2010-13, so the same should be done to Mercedes."

Now my simple mind takes this comment as a tad odd because the rule changes did not keep the best chassis/engine package from winning. Now that he is not winning ie dominating he cry's wolf? I do not dislike Horner even 1% but doesn't this sound a tad hypocritical (could be wrong terminology) , what am I not understanding?

Remember I am simple so please keep it simple.

 

I think he forgot 2013, when Ferrari had a great car, designed around the new tyres...then they changed tyres again, and sudenly Red bull was once more the best car and Ferrari sucked!!! Are you sure it wasn't him inside that Mclaren that crashed instead of Alonso!!!?

 

Waaay haaay I walked into the psychiatrist wearing only cling film for shorts.
The shrink says, "Well, I can clearly see you're nuts....

 

PSk is living in dreamland.

Guess what, the FANS DON'T WANT THIS FORMULA. It's not F1's job to save the world.

 

BINGO!!!!

Finally someone gets it.

 

When has f1 ever been about being equal?

Hilarious considering the source.

Why do people think turbos are new to f1?

I think Ferrari will be competitive with Merc in 2016, then they will likely change the engine formula again for 2017. Hoping BMW rejoins at that time as well.

 

Fuel flow isn't sexy to you!? ; P

Bernie made a recent comment to the effect of - "we are worried about fuel flow on these cars and the teams show up with 20 trailers each." LOL!

 

If you believe anything that Bernie spits out....well.