Ecclestone wants to-impose V8s in F1 for 2016

It sounds great!

BUT is it possible?!

Ecclestone wants to impose V8s in F1 for 2016 - Formula 1 News

 

For 2016, no.

2017 and beyond, certainly. Just needs to play dictator a little.

 

2017 will be too late for Red Bull and Toro Rosso.

They need to know what engines they will get in 2016 NOW !!!

 

I suppose F1 could ask Chevy and Honda to supply a modified version of their 2.2 liter twin-turbo IndyCar engine. Those engines are significantly less expensive vs. F1.

So nearly as I can tell a seasons worth of F1 engines costs a team $7.5mm to $8mm. Whereas IndyCar engines cost about $1.5mm to $2mm per season. Even with some respecting to get the hp up to a competitive level, the Chevy and Honda 2,2 turbos would be half the price.

The big problem for 2016 is figuring out how to package an engine/PU that is not the same spec as the current systems.

 

I think that if 2017 guarantees different engines, they'll stick with the renault for another year, or even 2015 merc/ferrari units.

 

The development budget spent on these worth more than gold save a few kg's of fuel engines, what happens to that waste? I'm sure the bean counters at Mercedes, Renault, and Ferrari, would love to see that huge outlay of money for just two years of engines.

 

we are slightly over 4 months away from the first tests thats not enough time to develop everything that would be necessary to make the switch

 

I think this is PR, he likes to read his name in the news...

He does not own it, any more.

 

I think Renault has been scalded by Red Bull and don't want to have anything to do with them anymore.

There seems to be a concesus that Red Bull put itself in that position, and neither Mercedes nor Ferrari want to work with it either.

If Bernie doesn't pull something out of the hat, RB and TR may become history soon.

 

Red Bull has a contract with F-1 that if they leave early then will pay up big time... basically it nets F-1 back all the "prize money - end of year bonuses." so while I get that Billionaires can be flippant with their cash- I dont know many that actually are. I think this is just a ploy to keep RB in - at the expense of Mercedes - who has stated that if F-1 goes back to atmo engines - they are out ....

after Tomorrow - Ferrari will be looking at its cash position in a much different light... so it will definatly be interesting.

 

nice idea, but they would never work Indy Car engines are way bigger than F-1 - and dont have any power units attached.... even if you scale them down to the 1.4 L engines - they are physically huge compared to F-1 power plants...

 

+1

Fine of close to half a bilion if they pull out. That hurts. Even for the can sales man.

 

Bernie trying to look nice to the fans who don´t like current rules (and there a lot of them).

It´s way too late for this.

 

Knowing Bernie - there has to be an alterior motive to all this ... perhaps he is looking to get CVC to come off its price for a sale to a company he can control better? what better way than to engineer a "crisis" ... Red Bull leaving more lawyers etc... all that crap more erosion of CVC's money... ?

 

I am so over it with Bernie. I want the V-10 or V-12--those were the good days of F-1. Why tinker with success?

 

I agree, it was great when you had V-8, V-10 and V-12's... the sounds were awsome.

there has to be some way of regulating the size of the engine vs. atmo & turbo... why cant they both run together... 1.6 L turbo or 4L atmo? with a EPU. or make it a 1.2 L turbo... While I hate to say I kind of agree with Bernie on the rules he would not like the rules i would want - which is just to say open season - open wheels, and driver safety is monitored like fighter pilots - and if you cross the G threshold - the car stops.

 

With the bad press out of RB, why would Renault lease them engines in 2016?

 

If Red Bull do pull out and the Renault purchase of Lotus does not go through (not a done deal) there would be no cars running the Renault PU next year, interesting thought to ponder...

 

Could FOM enforce the liquidated damages clause of RBR's contract if they are forced out of F1 because nobody will sell them engines that comport with the FIA rules requiring those engines to be current year engines?

 

ok, so 488 replacment need to be V8 NA because Ferrari road cars always follow F1

 

I think F1 will prove that loss of engines is because of their own doing...

 

Almost any change from the current engine formula would be an improvement. But for 2016? This is not even remotely possible; it's the 3rd week of October already! Bernie has been eating the wrong kind of mushrooms on his salad if he thinks an engine could be designed, built, tested, and assimilated into EVERY vehicle's design in 3 1/2 months. Has he lost his bloody mind?????

 

Bring back v10s

 

He is right on the issue of needing an independent engine supplier.

The fans and, I suspect, many of the drivers would welcome a reintroduction of the V8s. However, we're too close to the end of 2015 for this to be introduced for 2016. Many teams will already be quite far along in their development for their 2016 engines, shooting for the homologation inspection on February 28th.

If V8s were introduced at all for next year in any form, I think some teams would still need to be permitted to run the complicated hybrid-turbos that they've already been developing, so you'd have a mixture of engine specifications on the grid. That in itself might be an exciting prospect.

Most likely is a return of the V8 as either the standard or an option for 2017. If fans want to hear screaming V8s and the likes of Mercedes want to continue with hybrid turbos, then the solution to keep the most teams on the grid might be to allow both engine technologies and let the teams opt for whatever system they feel will give them the most reliability, power, and results.

All the best,
Andrew.

 

Bring back refueling, bring back NA engines, and bring back testing....bring back a sense that the cars are on the very edge of control for the whole of the race.



Mark