It's not just the number of cylinders: Mercedes had a lot to say about the hybrid recovery systems, specially about the MGU-H. Bernie said that Mercedes even knew how the final regulations were going to be before the others, although as many things Bernie says, I'd take it with a grain of salt. In any case, you're right in that the others could have complained but they let Mercedes do as they pleased.
Newey is working on the 2017 red bull, Horner estimated his input is as high as 70% compared to say 20-30% for the current car. They also switched to 2017 development before Mercedes. I think they will be serious challengers next year. As a blown diffuser prod, I think Vettel will benefit a lot from the increased down force. Even if Ferrari do not make a particularly good car he should be able to sling this one around okay
So in your mind, because Vettel won his WDC during the EBD period he is a guy that is good only under high downforce conditions? You remain a champion in simplifying stuff beyond hope.
Formula One has always been about one team over the others... domination if you like. from 1950 it was Alfa, then Ferrari, then Mercedes, then British teams - mostly Lotus through the 60's. & 70's then Ferrari, McLaren, in the 80's, Williams, Ferrari etc... I think it is more rare to find a year where there were consistently a variety of winners... 1982 stands out as the championship nobody wanted... ( Ferrari won Constructors ) ... F-1 has always been about a team who reads the rules and comes up with the best package. sometimes the package is ok, and the driver is phenominal, and the reverse is true. I think today we see that Mercedes is clearly well beyond all the others.. and the drivers are reaping the benefit. Ferrari with Lauda & Schumacher were usually ok cars and great drivers... This to me is what makes F-1 special and interesting over other racing series. I do agree the technology ahs been "put down" for the past 10 years, and I' all for the 2017 rules opening up the look of the car making them 5-6 seconds faster.... it needs to be more of a challenge than it is today.... but it will always be one team who has the edge over the others. as for the drivers - Hamilton is a good driver.. but not one of the greats, he is a benefactor of Mercedes engineering... as much as Rosberg is as well. Vettel on the other had - is suffering from a poor car that he cant make work - same for Alonso - actually Alonso is a case of average driver in a poor car.
' actually Alonso is a case of average driver in a poor car.' Hmm not too sure about that one, a bit sulky but also a bit better than 'average'.Agree on the car!
Very true, Gordon Murray tilted the 4-cylinde turbo BMW to lower the centre of gravity on the Brabham with mixed results. I think poor Elio de Angelis died in one of them. To me, it doesn't mean that the configuration is wrong per se. The BMW engine was never designed to that effect, and it was a Brabham experiment with mixed blessing from the Germans. The fact is that horizontal engines car work perfectly, if they are designed from the outset, and oil scavange made a priority. There are many examples. I don't think that a horizontal 4-cylinder is beyond the scope of modern engineers.
The problem with an inline 4 is that it's always to be taller (wider if you put it horizontally) and even worse, longer than a V6. And you still have to put at least a turbine and a gearbox behind it so the coke bottle shape gets spoiled. Probably it would be more efficient but I don't know if that overcomes the packaging issues, I'll let that question to the engineers in the forum.
It could be that tilting and putting it across (cylinder head near the cockpit) with a transversal gearbox could be the solution. If that was allowed, a narrow angle V4 could be the solution to reduce the length. A narrow angle V engine allows one cylinder head, and doesn't need to have inlets and exhaust both sides. I find that small capacity V6, V8 or V12 carry a lot of unnecessary plumbing between induction and exhaust systems.
Agreed except with the very last bit. Should be ''excellent driver in a poor car (even though it's getting better and better, surely looks to be on par with the Toro Rosso now, when the engine doesn't give up...)''
Hummm, how long can you live on past reputation? That's the question. Years driving uncompetitive cars (McLaren) far from the front may have taken the edge of Alonso's skills and motivation. It may be that when you have been just "making the number" away from the leaders, you slowly decline. Alonso's titles were a decade ago.
Porsche was making horizontal 4 cyl engines for ever... 356 series cars... Murray's problem was that BMW did not want to design a new engine with no money from Brabham...but Murrays packaging was spot on - witness the McLaren MP4/4... same low line concept, Honda was able to package the engine very low in the car. Flat 4 cyl turbo engine for F-1 should be easy to design & develop... just hire Porsche I think they have something on the shelf waiting for funding.
I think Alonso is an average driver ... in F-1 terms ... in the case of Racing drivers per se -he is very good. however Williams note above is true. he was with Renault when they were "switched on" ... and sadly who knows how much they were really cheating ( Piquetgate) ... but I digress. Alonso's performance at Imola keeping Schumacher behind him was masterful. sadly he has not had those many masterful days since then. He can drive a good car to be a winner... but he is not able to bring an average car up ... Schumacher for example was able to do that with Ferrari in 96-98... arguably the Ferrari was the class of the field from 99 - 2005 ish... My father - who has followed F-1 since its modern inception ( and before the war a bit) made the perceptive comment that wherever Alonso goes - after a while there is trouble... Renault, McLaren, Ferrari etc... he leaves a team in a wake of debris of people and machines. I want to like him but the more you study him ... not so much. there is one thing as being selfish like Lauda or Prost, Senna etc... but there is another as to being un sporting - as Alonso was when he held up Hamilton in the pits ... he was simply bitter that McLaren were behind the new superstar....the other greats just put their head down and focused on beating them out on the track. For me that was when I lost any respect for Alonso.
Titles yes. His relentless speed at Ferrari showed he still is no slouch. Regarding motivation, I see your point. In the last 2 seasons he's been on the radio plenty of times asking when he can just pit and give up on pointless race (insert number). That is a very good and true point. I don't think that takes away anything from his outright speed, but as a complete package it does.
Alonso doesn't look like a happy camper these days; he is constantly sulking. That's certainly not the kind of image sponsors want to see. I know that he very little to cheer about at Mc-Honda, but even Button manages to put a brave face. I think his best years were at Renault under Briatore. He has been a disaster since.
One of you thinks alonso is average and the next says he is a disaster. Could expect such an opinion from William but not from spirot. I think you will both find that such a view is completely unfounded. But then I also get a lot of people don't base their opinion on fact or analysis but rather what they want to think (bas is much the same). Ah well.
I see you're determined not to make friends upon your return. I'm also astonished that you're surprised that passion factors into people's analyses in F1. For someone who claims to be highly analytical and to know so much about the sport, that's a pretty big aspect of it to overlook. All the best, Andrew.
It appears you are trying real hard to be a good Shepard [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-spzlAoHJTI[/ame]
Compared to a 4-in-line, you are very limited with what you can do with a flat-4, I think. Also, a flat-4 needs 2 heads, and there is still the problem of plumbing to solve (inlet and exhaust). So, apart from better balance, a flat-4 wouldn't be vastly superior to a 4-in-line titled at 90 degree, IMO, and probably heavier.
Sorry to disappoint, but just because you are quick does not make you a great driver. Gilles Villeneuve is one of my hero's but he is not one of the Greats ... he simply made too many errors ( one that was fatal ) the greats use their head as well as their God given talents. Alonso uses his talents, but I don't think he has matured as a professional. he is too emotional, and moody. YOU show your true strength when the chips are down... and he shows weakness. When you go to Ferrari- you know you will deal with way more Crap than champagne... even Schumacher went through that. Alonso could not handle it at all. If he were in a Mercedes - I'm sure he'd be a 4 time world Champion... but I don't think he would be remembered as one of the greats. We'll need more time & perspective for his true persona to come through.
Are you serious? His 2012 season alone is a top 10 season in the history of F1 by any driver. He almost won the title in the 3rd/4th best car. Not able to bring an average car up...you have to be kidding me. You must really think Hamilton and Vettel are garbage then because they haven't done anything close to as amazing as what Alonso did in that 2012 Ferrari. It was like what MSC did in 1997/98 but probably better.
all good points. I don't really know for sure. but Porsche has shown it can be done. given the architecture of the modern cars, I would think the flat 4 would give you the best packaging from a height perspective and now that the cars are wider you can package turbo, and intercoolers on opposite sides. with central power take off and a gear box that is very compact. it would be interesting to see how that all would work out. Sadly I sell food products not design race cars.
