Ferrari vetoes engine cost cap; Indycar? engines incoming to F1... | FerrariChat

Ferrari vetoes engine cost cap; Indycar? engines incoming to F1...

Discussion in 'F1' started by singletrack, Oct 27, 2015.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

  1. singletrack

    singletrack F1 Veteran

    Mar 16, 2011
    5,805
    Pittsburgh, PA
    FIA goes ahead with new engine plans after Ferrari vetoes cost cap

    Thoughts?

    If the Indy engines can be made to be competitive, then why would anyone buy the F1 engines at 3x the cost? Can they really be made competitive? How will they regulate fuel flow and all that crap? What about the weight and packaging difference?

    F1 - 1.6L single turbo V6
    Indy - 2.2L twin turbo V6

    I mean I'm ASSuming they are going to go after Indy engines because it would seem a logical way to drive down costs vs asking the suppliers to produce another engine at higher cost.
     
  2. william

    william Two Time F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Jun 3, 2006
    27,691

    Ferrari may have put itself in a corner there.
     
  3. DeSoto

    DeSoto F1 Veteran

    Nov 26, 2003
    7,796
    Ferrari didn´t want to sell engines at a loss, but now probably won´t sell engines at all.

    Anyway, Bernie may want to piss Ferrari for this but he can´t piss Ferrari, Mercedes, Renault and Honda at the same time so the cheap engines are going to be way worse than the expensive ones.
     
  4. toil

    toil F1 Rookie
    BANNED

    Apr 23, 2014
    3,534
    This is stupid. 2.2l vs 1.6...


    They have no idea where they are going for f1s long term plan they are just improvising blind
     
  5. singletrack

    singletrack F1 Veteran

    Mar 16, 2011
    5,805
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Yah, would seem to open a lot of risk to engine suppliers. I understand refusing a cap when a new formula is being developed, but they should have an idea of cost at this point and should be able to come up with a reasonable price estimate/cap for the remaining years of the formula that still makes them money.

    If someone like Force India or Sauber is allowed to have a heavier, thirstier, but more powerful, 2.2L engine, then Ferrrari's pricey engines aren't going to make them money. Seems like they will have to re-write all the engine regulations.

    I do find it a bit funny that it is all down to engine cost. Bernie could also cut up the pie in a more equitable fashion which would make the engines more affordable, because all the smaller teams would have more money. Of course, this would also hurt Ferrari and potentially result in a veto as well? I'm not clear on what they can veto and what they cannot.
     
  6. singletrack

    singletrack F1 Veteran

    Mar 16, 2011
    5,805
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Was it really a loss? What is that statement based on? If so, then yah that is idiotic. You come up with an insanely complicated engine which costs a ton to make, then ask the makers to sell at a loss?
     
  7. singletrack

    singletrack F1 Veteran

    Mar 16, 2011
    5,805
    Pittsburgh, PA
    To be fair, they are just saying "bigger" and "twin turbo" and "basic ERS", but I think it is a fair assumption. Agreed on the total lack of direction.
     
  8. brian.s

    brian.s F1 Rookie
    Professional Ferrari Technician

    Nov 3, 2003
    3,809
    Midwest
    Full Name:
    Brian
    In packaging alone there would be huge disadvantages
     
  9. DF1

    DF1 Three Time F1 World Champ

    +1 as my good sailing friend in LA told me last week- F1 is rudderless!
     
  10. Igor Ound

    Igor Ound F1 Veteran

    Sep 30, 2012
    8,102
    The Horn
    Full Name:
    Igor Ound
    I did think a cost cap on engine supplies was coming. Anyone knows how and if suppliers are forced to sell their engines already? Remember reading about it recently regarding Honda.
     
  11. BMWairhead

    BMWairhead Formula 3

    Sep 11, 2009
    1,062
    Portland, OR
    Full Name:
    Ted
    Bernie recently implied that he had made Honda promise to supply more than one team, but that Honda had promised Ron Dennis that he could veto the supply going to a particular team. So, they've promised Bernie that they are willing, but RD can dictate the who and the who nots.
     
  12. Ney

    Ney F1 Veteran
    Silver Subscribed

    Apr 20, 2004
    7,378
    Having a basic default engine, not supplied by a team on the grid is not a bad way to go and it seems to me that since the FIA controls the ECU they would have the ability to raise and lower the performance of the default engine or set slightly different rules ala MotoGP for factory vs open class. Back in the day the Cosworth DFV gave rise to some of the teams currently on the grid. Ferrari and Mercedes developing their own engines is a good thing, but a cost cap with no ability to recover costs would be dumb....of course they will veto that. They are not going to develop an engine, sell it at half price and have it beat the factory team. If the cost is too high, they will not have any customers either, so it cuts both ways.

    If you wandered around the Masters F1 paddock in Austin over this past weekend, I think almost all but one car (the Stanley BRM V12) were DFV cars or a variant of...That was not a bad thing.

    I think allowing greater variation in engine development would be good for manufacturers as well, as it would allow for testing of different engine architectures. Requiring a V6 turbo with ERS only allows tinkering with the placement of the bits. Write a formula that allows V or inline 4, 5, 6 or 8 and let them figure it out. Different ideas and variation is good for the formula.
     
  13. Igor Ound

    Igor Ound F1 Veteran

    Sep 30, 2012
    8,102
    The Horn
    Full Name:
    Igor Ound
    I see, tnx. So there are no obligations for anybody (just yet) to supply. Just a promise Honda made.
     
  14. singletrack

    singletrack F1 Veteran

    Mar 16, 2011
    5,805
    Pittsburgh, PA
    I agree...and it would be really interesting for the fans. On the other hand, what will they do with all the fuel efficiency stuff? They will have to throw that out or modify it substantially I would think.
     
  15. Ney

    Ney F1 Veteran
    Silver Subscribed

    Apr 20, 2004
    7,378
    Set the size of the fuel tank and hp on the ers motor. If they run out of fuel, that is on them. The more efficient they make it, they can short fuel the car and carry less weight. The fuel flow restriction is silly IMHO as it arbitrarily caps HP and acceleration at open throttle conditions. If it doesn't, it is a nonsensical parameter to measure and if it does, you are essentially limiting HP and therefore can match traction and downforce to the fuel flow rate rather than relying on the driver to modulate throttle, essentially a high speed traction control. Driver still has to modulate low speed as the aero downforce is less.
     
  16. william

    william Two Time F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Jun 3, 2006
    27,691
    +1


    Imposing engine configuration is one of the most stupid ideas in the present rules.
     
  17. Fast_ian

    Fast_ian Two Time F1 World Champ

    Sep 25, 2006
    23,397
    Campbell, CA
    Full Name:
    Ian Anderson
    +1

    Throw in the Matra 16 & the Ferrari 12's and strange "man things" happen! :D

    Another +1

    Many have said, many times, "give 'em a fuel flow limit & let 'em at it!"

    What they do have to be careful of though (IMO) is any "artificial leveling" of the field (as we have in Motogp for example.)

    Cheers,
    Ian
     
  18. subirg

    subirg F1 Rookie

    Dec 19, 2003
    4,370
    Cheshire
    It doesn't take a genius to work out that what Ferrari are really saying is that they don't want to give away their engine performance advantage by being forced to supply identical units to several teams.

    The 2.2l twin turbos will never be allowed to be as capable as the 1.6l engines - so that protects the current leaders of the pack. Net result - no increase in competition and another utter f1 shambles...
     
  19. Kiwi Nick

    Kiwi Nick Formula 3

    Jun 13, 2014
    1,325
    Durango, CO
    Full Name:
    Jeff
    This is all driven by the fact that the new PUs are way to complicated, even esoteric, for a sporting application. Add to this that the PU accounts for 3/4 the cost of an F1 customer car, there are great disparities between available units and the fact that at least 2 (Mercedes and Ferrari)of the manufacturers will not sell the latest versions to customers, and you have a recipe for a catastrophe.
     
  20. william

    william Two Time F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Jun 3, 2006
    27,691


    True, true, but introducing an "alernative" source, will stop car manufacturers from blackmailing private teams, and ensure -hopefully - a supply of cheaper engines.

    At the moment, Williams, Force India, Sauber, Manor at least pay a lot of their budget to receive customer engines from Mercedes, Ferrari, whilst Red Bull and Toro Rosso have none yet - shame, eh?

    If there was an available over-the-counter type of Cosworth DFV (as an example), private teams wouldn't spend so much to have allegedly inferior engines.

    Not every team wants to be a "B team" like Haas will become for Ferrari apparently.
     
  21. ScuderiaWithStickPlease

    ScuderiaWithStickPlease F1 World Champ

    Dec 17, 2007
    10,263
    NY Metro
    I've hated watching the races this year. The engine sound . . . no hair standing on the back of neck -- and games on Turn 1 aren't enough.
     
  22. islerodreaming

    islerodreaming Formula 3

    Aug 11, 2007
    1,740
    Full Name:
    John - a proud Australian man
    Why not a spec engine and let the rest be free within a length, width, height envelope. That way everyone would have the same power but we would see the smart ideas of bright individuals and the skill of the drivers. Imagine what Newey could do with that..

    John
     
  23. SPEEDCORE

    SPEEDCORE Four Time F1 World Champ

    Jul 11, 2005
    46,182
    Full Name:
    Toe Knee
    #23 SPEEDCORE, Oct 28, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 7, 2017
  24. DeSoto

    DeSoto F1 Veteran

    Nov 26, 2003
    7,796
    #24 DeSoto, Oct 28, 2015
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2015
    The manufacturers build engines to win, not to get money. Of course, customer engines help them to pay the bills, but that´s secondary, they build the best engine they can for their own car, if the customers can´t afford it, it´s not their problem.

    Maybe a good idea would be setting different rules for customer engines so they could reuse as much components as possible from the factory engines but in a simplified form, i.e. no KERS but higher flow limits. Probably they´ll only could do this in 2017, with the new rules, as the current engines are designed around the hybrid stuff. Of course, the balance of performance should be made in a way that it would be impossible for the customers to win races, to not spoil the big guys.
     

Share This Page