Two engine rule: Stupid or benefit to the 'little guys' | FerrariChat
Buy

Two engine rule: Stupid or benefit to the 'little guys'

Discussion in 'Other Racing' started by Beta Scorpion, Aug 25, 2008.

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

  1. Beta Scorpion

    Beta Scorpion Formula 3

    Jun 22, 2006
    1,379
    #1 Beta Scorpion, Aug 25, 2008
    I saw the Speed interview about he Mercedes engine and how they make about 100 engines for the season, which is obviously more than two per race. From that standpoint it seems like just another stupid rule to add randomness to the racing results. But I wondered if anyone knew how much of a cost savings there would be for a smaller team and how many engines they would order for a season? Wouldn't these 'two-race' engines for the little teams be priced higher (per usual marketing strategies?)
     
  2. 1_can_dream

    1_can_dream F1 Veteran

    Jan 7, 2006
    8,051
    Colorado
    Full Name:
    Kyle
    #2 1_can_dream, Aug 25, 2008
    IMO it's a stupid rule because they passed it to "cut costs" but with the budgets of F1 teams if they're not spending the money on engines they'll spend it somewhere else.
     
  3. texasmr2

    texasmr2 Two Time F1 World Champ
    BANNED

    Oct 22, 2007
    22,232
    Houston
    Full Name:
    Gregg
    #3 texasmr2, Aug 25, 2008
    That has alway's been the issue with F1's 'cost cutting' rule's and it is a farce imho.
     
  4. Mr Payne

    Mr Payne F1 Rookie

    Jan 8, 2004
    2,878
    Bakersfield, CA
    Full Name:
    Payne
    #4 Mr Payne, Aug 25, 2008
    I don't have a problem with it. I think retirements due to engine failures is governed more by points structure and better engineering techniques than 2-3-4 race engines.
     
  5. texasmr2

    texasmr2 Two Time F1 World Champ
    BANNED

    Oct 22, 2007
    22,232
    Houston
    Full Name:
    Gregg
    #5 texasmr2, Aug 25, 2008
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2008
    I long for the old day's when turbo's and N/A's competed side by side. Just limit the cc and boost on forced induction engine's and limit the cc on n/a engine's with no number of cylinder limit's, kinda like a 'run what ya brung' deal. The reason we have so little excitement, aka passing, in F1 for the last decade is imho because of the engine limitation's not because of the aero reg's.
     
  6. PhilNotHill

    PhilNotHill Two Time F1 World Champ
    Owner

    Jul 3, 2006
    27,855
    Aspen CO 81611
    Full Name:
    FelipeNotMassa
    #6 PhilNotHill, Aug 25, 2008
    Unless you think engine failures are fun to watch...it's a stupid rule.

    Did anybody find out what the powder Pevney was putting in the engines?
     
  7. Whisky

    Whisky Three Time F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Jan 27, 2006
    31,857
    In the flight path to Offutt
    Full Name:
    The original Fernando
    #7 Whisky, Aug 25, 2008
    Would we be having this conversation if Louis was always blowing up and Kimi was not ?

    Kimi is TOUGH on motors - he was at McLaren, too. Go look at his history.

    Beyond that, yes, I think it is a silly rule.
     
  8. PhilNotHill

    PhilNotHill Two Time F1 World Champ
    Owner

    Jul 3, 2006
    27,855
    Aspen CO 81611
    Full Name:
    FelipeNotMassa
    #8 PhilNotHill, Aug 25, 2008

    Has Pevney been lurking around the Ferrari garage? :D
     
  9. 1_can_dream

    1_can_dream F1 Veteran

    Jan 7, 2006
    8,051
    Colorado
    Full Name:
    Kyle
    #9 1_can_dream, Aug 25, 2008
    This would be a good comment if Felipe hadn't blown up the race before.
     
  10. ferraridude615

    ferraridude615 F1 Veteran

    May 4, 2006
    5,836
    Texas
    #10 ferraridude615, Aug 25, 2008
    The two engine rule is designed to be cost cutting. However it results in more money being spent making the engines more reliable. Engine failures suck, just think of how they screw with the season.

    Most of the little guys are using the big boys engines anyway.
     
  11. DGS

    DGS Seven Time F1 World Champ
    Rossa Subscribed

    May 27, 2003
    71,809
    MidTN
    Full Name:
    DGS
    #11 DGS, Aug 26, 2008
    Last edited: Aug 26, 2008
    Don't client engines come at a "per season" package cost, not per block?

    Did the package prices come down with the two race rule? I doubt it. Clients can still use more engines than one per race (with two cars): there are practice engines, replacements after failures (crashes) etc.

    I've said it before: It's not what they spend, it's what technology they get for the money.
    FIA has to avoid bureaucrat syndrome: leave engineering to the engineers. Do *not* mandate solutions in a "spec" series.

    For that matter, putting a lid on displacement is understandable. But why does FIA need to decide whether the engineers use four, six, eight, or twelve cylinders that add up to that displacement?
     

Share This Page