Ecclestone to propose V10 comeback

What Bernie and the FIA are missing is that the v10's came about not through tightly enforcing engine rules but because at the time the number of cylinders were free (thanks largerly to Ferrari hanging on to their v12's).

So if F1 wants to discover the next awesome engine, fixing the number of cylinders is not the way to go about it. They need to do the opposite and relax some of the rules and let engineering principles tell us what works best. That is what used to make F1 the best.

And we all know that more rules does not equate to less money spent so there is no argument with not relaxing the rules a bit.
Pete
ps: Who knows, maybe a straight 5 would be the ultimate number of cylinders for an engine size of 1.6 litres and I can still remember the f**ken awesome sound the Audi rally cars used to make ...

 

But we were able to use Fiorano, which helped to validate the changes too. Personally think Ferrari's problems is the inability to test which has affected us a lot since 2009, especially now given our engine is probably as good as the Renault marginally.

 

It's the old chestnut, F1 claims to be the pinnacle of Motorsport, yet the stupid engine rules, no testing, and restricted development makes it so far from the truth it's nuts. We have engines that can't be developed and thus result in the championship being decided before a wheel is turned next year, and kids signed up to race with only a few miles of 'media days' behind them (during which they managed to crash at 15mph of course), oh yeah, sounds like the absolute best racing money can buy eh?

Gets more BS by the year. Bringing in V8 or V10 NA engines and losing all the Eco-BS would bring back proper racing, and testing and development needs to be unfrozen, or at least allowed and monitored.

I'm not about to feel guilty about my 458 and swap it for a Prius anytime soon just because F1 has gone beardy-Eco-nutty, so let's drop the facade and get on with racing. Maybe cut out some of the Grand Prix that struggle for crowd attendance too.

They bang on about costs, and how they must reduce them etc, but then they introduce extra GPs and wonder why the cost of F1 rises - someone has to buy the parts and build the cars for the extra races! If you can't afford f1, don't be in it - simples. Let marussia and Caterham share their entry and resources if they like, but. If there isn't enough money, sorry, bye bye. F1 fans on the whole could care less reckon, those cars are just four back markers potentially together in the way anyway, they won't be missed

 

ERS and turbos make the car faster, that is not the problem and in fact the right direction unless you want technology to stop in F1, which I don't.
Pete

 

I'd say bring part time awd like LeMans too

And more advanced active aero

 

I love the variety that the rules permit in LMP1. The engines of the top cars could not be more different, yet the racing is very exciting. If it came down to a choice between a 2 hour race of todays F1 cars or LMP1 cars. I would probably go for the LMP1 race. Not only are they fast, but the genuine difference between the cars is interesting.

 

It's quite funny reading all of these complaints about these hybrid turbo engines!

Funny because the drivers themselves are mesmerized by the amount of instant torque that they have available and how the cars now accelerate.

David Coulthard drove a 2014 Williams this year for a piece on the BBC and he said that whilst F1 cars in his day had always produced big BHP figures, they were always lacking in torque so you had to rev the nuts off them out of corners.

With the Williams however, he said that the acceleration was instant because the cars now had proper torque to fire you out of the corners.

He was expecting to dislike the modern power-plants but was surprised to find that he loves them, especially as they're so flexible to drive.

Still, what do the drivers know about F1 cars?

 

Not all of the drivers love the new PU, Vettel has been outspoken about his dislike for them, and many have complained about the lift and coast they have to do to make it to the end of the race with enough fuel. The cars are much less physically demanding to drive, enough so Max Verstappen has said that it is allowing him to enter Formula 1 at his age, and that in previous years he would not had been strong enough to make it through the race.

I am not sold on this generation of Formula 1, after following Formula 1 for 40 years, if this year is not significantly better than last year, I think I am done with getting up at 5:00 am every other weekend. Bernie knows they are at a dangerous crossroad, they picked an extremely expensive formula for The PU and it has driven out several teams, with others on the verge of failing and the product is not that great especially live at the track. To make drastic changes now could be the straw that breaks the mid sized teams back and to not make changes may be the beginning of the end for a Formula 1. Formula 1 is in a no win situation, itshould judge its next moves very carefully.

As stated above the entire "green" thing is nothing more than eyewash and laughable, the minor fuel savings that the race cars generate is a pebble in ocean when compared to all of the fuel used for the transportation and private jets.

Manufacturers come and go as it suits their business interests, since 2007 we have lost Toyota, Honda, Renault and BMW. If the product is compelling enough new manufacturers will enter, if not the current ones will leave. The threats of Mercedes and Renault leaving are real, but they will probably leave for some reason in the future.

 

if the Mercedes engine is so dominant, explain Mclaren....?

Mercedes decided to build an engine with aerodynamic disadvantages, in return for better cooling. Ferrari and Renault both came up with superior aerodynamic designs to Mercedes in the engine package.

An engine redesign, would require a CAR redesign for for Ferrari, as a Mercedes PU wouldn't fit.

I like the engine freeze myself, as you get to compare cars and drivers from race to race better.

 

I don't really understand this........ The Mercedes car is built around the engine, with a specific design flow in mind, whereas McLaren get an engine to bolt into their design, with no knowledge of the way merc may have designed their car around it, hence the difference in performance.

No one is proposing Ferrari want a Mercedes engine, nor the Renault teams, what every one except Mercedes wants is the ability to develop engines through the season, and if this happened, then you would be able to compare drivers and cars race to race. At the moment, you can say with absolute certainty Mercedes factory team are one and two, and the rest are scrapping for third onwards unless there's a failure or a crash

 

Knowing that Macca was due to hook up with Honda MB didn't share as much data as they normally would have.

 

We've had lots of talks about "cutting costs" - the freeze limits costs. Lift the freeze...what happens?

The teams agreed, they thought they each had their ace in the hole. You can develop under the rules, leave it be. Spending huge sums, then changing the format again - nuts.

 

+1.

It is the right direction. The days of the combustion engine are numbered, F1 has to remain relevant and these hybrid power units DO make the cars faster. Nothing to do with saving fuel, it is about being current and the fastest possible.

Next year will be better because others will have closed the gap to Mercedes. Maybe just Williams but that is all we need. All you need is 2 or 3 cars racing and F1 is suddenly great again

F1 since 1900 has always been like this. A couple of years ago you needed to be sitting in a RedBull, a few years earlier in a Ferrari and back in 1950 you needed to be sitting in an Alfa Romeo, in the late 30's you needed to be sitting in a Mercedes or Auto Union, and so on.

This season was ruined from Spa onwards because Mercedes neutered Nico. Up to that point it was a very interesting season.
Pete

 

We became aware that the season was ruined from Aust. With hindsight, it was ruined when the FiA capitulated to Mercedes demands to make F1 a hybrid econo series.

The definition of the season for me was "lift and coast" which became the mantra of F1 radio communications.

Hybrid may suit Mercedes and some production car manufacturers previous investment strategies, but:-
1) Like the F1 viewing public I'm turned off by it.
2) Like the car buying public, after 20 years of trying, I see it as a failure
3) I believe its a failure mostly because it isn't green and has no real benefit

 

And a lot if us said so from the get-go.
F1 signed a deal with the devil when they accepted the big engine makers demands. A deal that the sport will continue paying for a while.

 

Mate, you and a few others seem to have a reading comprehension issue.

This technology makes the cars FASTER, considerably so, because they are using otherwise wasted energy. If these cars were just 1.6 litre naturally asperated, or even turbocharged without the electric motor they would be heaps slower. So I struggle to understand where you are coming from.

Do you want F1 to stick to the combustion engine and become a dinosaur and compete with historic racing?. Surely you want F1 to move forward and be relevant.

I don't like the sound of the current cars too, but that can be fixed, but I very much am a fan of the technology involved. This is not even the future, it is current technology and it is NOT just used to save fuel. Look at the Ferrari LaFerrari, McLaren P1, etc. awesome cars that are BETTER because of this technology.

If F1 does not maintain itself as current or leading edge with technology it will cease to exist very quickly as there are many other series out there that try and play the "entertainment only angle" and it plain simply does not work. F1 has more because it is intreging (spelling?) technology wise and us gear heads can't leave it alone.
Pete
ps: You do realise how inefficient the internal combustion engine is, don't you? It is from memory only about 30% efficient. This technology improves that number and therefore the resulting package is faster and better.

Following your argument angle we also need to remove the following:
1. paddle shift gear changing ... was more entertaining when the drivers ocassionally missed a gear.
2. disc brakes ... was more entertaining when they used to have brake failures/fade and fall off the track.
3. coil sprung suspension involving shock absorbers ... heck when they were bouncing all over the track out of control, way more entertaining.
4. I could go on for hours ...

 

Ouch. LOL no probs mate, but you look a bit of a dill when your best and leading point is an insult.

They can produce all the power and plenty more from the engine.

The 4 pot turbo donks from the 80's produced more power than the current PU.

Rhetoric and platitudes don't make hybrid or electric the future any more than they made the hindenburg to future or aviation. The fact is hybrid/electric is a massive fail. 20 years on, massive subsidies and nobody wants them and they aren't green.

Technology yes, but the right technology. Hybrid is a fail in terms of value and green credentials.

So you think everything tried in F1 was a success and great idea? Some are good some not. Remember Smokey Yunicks sidecar? Lucky the FiA didn't make a 5 year commitment to capsule cars after they saw that beaut

We need to back a winner, not a loser, and for now, Hybrid, whilst it suits the historic investment commitments of Mercedes, is a loser with the public and isn't green.

 

V Good post, like it or not, I agree.

 

Lets agree to disagree then, but I've posted the same thing more than once in this thread and you and others keep waxing on about the good old days ...

BTW remember Sony and the Walkman? The internal combustion engine is in the same position and hybrids, etc. are the iTunes. Only us oldies like the old reciprocating engines, but the new younger generation, who F1 must sell to, are very much not interested in those noisy inefficient things. At least now F1 is interesting for them.

Times are changing mate, F1 needs to also. Fix the sound and you would not be complaining.
Pete
ps: I wonder though with the lack of interest in the automobile with the young, will motorsport continue to attract the audience and sponsorship money whatever rules they implement.

 

I enjoy chatting and reading other opinions - that's why I frequent this dive and hang out with all the reprobates around here

In the end I just think the hybrid wont fly. A system that creates toxic waste, relies on incredibly rare resources, that are mined in the worst slave labor conditions on the planet is just the wrong way to go. It's had plenty of opportunity and support but people just don't want to buy it.

The ICE has been hugely successful. It also has some great new technology that people want to develop - lets encourage that. Interestingly some of the more recent green technology places the pure ICE at the forefront of the greenest solutions available to the planet.

 

Ridiculous assumption.

I don't know anyone that disliked F1 before and suddenly likes it now because they are so green and hybridey suddenly. The (young) hippies save the earth generation haven't a clue what it is and at best tell us ''why do you watch a bunch of cars go round in circles?''.

If F1 announced tomorrow they're going full electric they won't watch it. If F1 announced they will go full V6 1.6 turbo hydrogen they won't watch it. If F1 goes full 3 liter V10 NA direct injection hydrogen with the most glorious noise...they won't watch it.

Motorsport is not interesting to these people. The technology isn't interesting to them either.

There's a terrifying amount of these (young) tree huggers around all around the world (a lot more than kids of even 10 years ago where all they care about the car is the noise it makes, what it looks like etc. Now how far it can drive on 3 drops of fuel). Please tell me how F1 viewing numbers has dropped significantly since the intro of fuel efficient F1 cars this year.


What F1 needs is a proper rivalry between 2 drivers of 2 different teams racing in shouty cars which go incredibly fast (a car that HEROES drive). So we need more power, more noise, less radios about saving the fuel, less robotic drone drivers who say exactly what their team of PR nerds tell them and more Kimi Raikkonen falling of yachts (preferably after winning a race).

 

Well, maybe hybrid car aren't welcome by the purists in motor racing, but the technology is certainly not irrelevant for the future of the motor car, and they will be forced upon us BY LAW!

I don't know where you post from, but here in Europe, the future indicates that maybe before the end of this decade, only zero pollution vehicles will be allowed in large cities like Paris, London, Rome, etc... A trend that will probably catch up in other major conurbations in the world.

 

I'm an Aussie with Italian parents living in the Philippines - but I travel a lot

Hybrid/battery cars may have less chance of achieving zero emissions than standard ICEs in the future.

 

Any formula that artificially prohibits drivers from driving flat out is flawed.

 

I live in London, and travel quite often in France.

Paris intends to adopt a zero emission policy from 2020, which means that only electric vehicles will be allowed to circulate in the capital, or hybrids UNDER ELECTRIC POWER only.
Already London is contemplating to follow up on that, and other large towns are showing interest. ICE power in town will be banned!

So, the only way to be able to keep a vehicle able to run long distances will be to buy an hybrid car - Toyota Prius, for example.
Running on electric power in town and for short runs, and switch to ICE for long distances.

You tell us that hybrid technology is irrelevant, but it will be the only way to keep individual transport soon. The motorcycle industry is already at work on hybrid bikes!