planetf1.com

It is currently Thu Nov 23, 2017 4:05 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 7:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7774
If they don't have their way with the new engines.
No doubt with in a few weeks VW will be back too.

Helmet, just go if you are going to. People are getting sick of it. Remember the tale of the bay who cried woolf (No, not Toto)



http://www.planetf1.com/news/marko-threatens-red-bull-exit-over-engine-rules/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 7:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 1406
we are forgetting about red bull nowadays , and they don't much of a mention ,well not like they use to , so what do they want that they don't have

just read it and helmut does kick off on a regular basis , I wonder how new owners will react to this threat


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 8:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 6721
I predicted quite wrongly in 2014 that they would hit a downward spiral, pulling investment and eventually leave the sport. They've proved me wrong and held their own pretty well in coming back to be the 2nd best team and a genuine contender on merit at points last year.

I imagine it's an empty threat for now and I hope they stick around long enough for us to compare with the Renault works team. I suspect that being a works team with these complex power units is worth quite a bit of time in intergration between chassis & PU and the way that they can design the two around an overall concept, rather than as a customer team be given the dimensions of the PU and work the car around that.

If Red Bull continue with their current budget and Renault continue their climb to be a top team again as they seem to be trying to do, it will be interesting to compare them. I think if Renault overtake Red Bull they will seriously think about quitting.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 9:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 11:51 am
Posts: 4209
It's OK if they leave. The team will be sold to someone else, and it will continue to be alive in one form or another, competing under some other name in F1.

Only a few teams in last 30 years have folded for real.

_________________
The end is near


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 12:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23736
Red Bull want a level playing field with engines but not a level playing field with budgets, even with the Renault engine they are so much faster than the other 7 teams in F1, this play on the driver should make the difference is just total rubbish on their behalf, what chance is there say of Sainz or Kvyat of ever beating Verstappen or Ricciardo even though they have the same engine, and were in their proposals would this ever change?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: Currently 15th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 1:05 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 5838
Location: Nebraska, USA
moby wrote:
If they don't have their way with the new engines.
No doubt with in a few weeks VW will be back too.

Helmet, just go if you are going to. People are getting sick of it. Remember the tale of the bay who cried woolf (No, not Toto)



http://www.planetf1.com/news/marko-threatens-red-bull-exit-over-engine-rules/


I seem to recall another team that quite insistent about having their way with new engines too. With three straight dominate F1 Championships in both categories, I'd say their insistence worked out quite well for them.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 2:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 6:34 pm
Posts: 107
Location: Ohio, USA
Nothing really to see here, just Red Bull's annual empty threat to leave because they're not winning everything.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 6:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 11:39 am
Posts: 1300
Question is, who cares?

Atleast this year we will probably not hear Ferrari make this threat, other than if they lose the developmentrace. :lol:

_________________
Winner of the [Charging Hamilton Trophy] !
Winner of the [Dominant Hamilton Trophy] !

Lewis Hamilton 4 x WDC


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 8:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 11:37 am
Posts: 177
Just a thought - if they continually threaten to leave, wouldn't it be a great opportunity for teams such as Ferrari/McLaren/Renault to poach some of their more talented staff just by virtue of giving them better job security? I don't understand why Helmut Marko would destabilize his own team, unless of course there is a different story being told inside the company.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 9:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:29 am
Posts: 1728
My initial reaction was 'here we go again', but when I thought about it, he does have a point.

Independent teams haven't got a hope in hell against the manufacturers. In a few years we'll see just Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault filling the top 6 places, and 'customer' teams trailing some way behind. It's really a shame when Mercedes and Ferrari refused to provide Red Bull with an engine, knowing full well they'd have a fight on their hands whichever PU was bolted into the back of the RBR.

They basically have two options: either build their own PU or convince Cosworth/Ilmor to sign an exclusive deal with them. It's the only way they'll get to win again.

_________________
#KeepFightingMichael


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 10:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 1568
MistaVega23 wrote:
My initial reaction was 'here we go again', but when I thought about it, he does have a point.

Independent teams haven't got a hope in hell against the manufacturers. In a few years we'll see just Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault filling the top 6 places, and 'customer' teams trailing some way behind. It's really a shame when Mercedes and Ferrari refused to provide Red Bull with an engine, knowing full well they'd have a fight on their hands whichever PU was bolted into the back of the RBR.

They basically have two options: either build their own PU or convince Cosworth/Ilmor to sign an exclusive deal with them. It's the only way they'll get to win again.


This engine formula HAS to go. The formula clearly and irrevocably favors the manufacturers over the independents. Whatever formula comes next, it must allow for companies like Cosworth to get back in the game. Anything else only maintains the status quo.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 11:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23736
Blake wrote:
moby wrote:
If they don't have their way with the new engines.
No doubt with in a few weeks VW will be back too.

Helmet, just go if you are going to. People are getting sick of it. Remember the tale of the bay who cried woolf (No, not Toto)



http://www.planetf1.com/news/marko-threatens-red-bull-exit-over-engine-rules/


I seem to recall another team that quite insistent about having their way with new engines too. With three straight dominate F1 Championships in both categories, I'd say their insistence worked out quite well for them.

I don't recall Renault winning any titles recently as they are actually the ones that threatened to leave and Mercedes never actually campaigned for hybrid engines they just wanted turbo engines, it was Todt that wanted the hybrids

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: Currently 15th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 11:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23736
MistaVega23 wrote:
My initial reaction was 'here we go again', but when I thought about it, he does have a point.

Independent teams haven't got a hope in hell against the manufacturers. In a few years we'll see just Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault filling the top 6 places, and 'customer' teams trailing some way behind. It's really a shame when Mercedes and Ferrari refused to provide Red Bull with an engine, knowing full well they'd have a fight on their hands whichever PU was bolted into the back of the RBR.

They basically have two options: either build their own PU or convince Cosworth/Ilmor to sign an exclusive deal with them. It's the only way they'll get to win again.

It would make for a better argument if it wasn't coming from such a self centred team as Red Bull who left FOCA so they could secure a better deal for themselves from the commercial rights holder.

Part of FOCA's objective was to make F1 fairer for all the teams in F1 so the smaller teams could be more competitive.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: Currently 15th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 11:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7774
A.J. wrote:
Just a thought - if they continually threaten to leave, wouldn't it be a great opportunity for teams such as Ferrari/McLaren/Renault to poach some of their more talented staff just by virtue of giving them better job security? I don't understand why Helmut Marko would destabilize his own team, unless of course there is a different story being told inside the company.


Or, for Honda to start on-the-fly and ready to go :nod:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 11:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23736
moby wrote:
A.J. wrote:
Just a thought - if they continually threaten to leave, wouldn't it be a great opportunity for teams such as Ferrari/McLaren/Renault to poach some of their more talented staff just by virtue of giving them better job security? I don't understand why Helmut Marko would destabilize his own team, unless of course there is a different story being told inside the company.


Or, for Honda to start on-the-fly and ready to go :nod:

I like your thinking. ;)

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: Currently 15th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 11:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 1:00 pm
Posts: 4507
moby wrote:
A.J. wrote:
Just a thought - if they continually threaten to leave, wouldn't it be a great opportunity for teams such as Ferrari/McLaren/Renault to poach some of their more talented staff just by virtue of giving them better job security? I don't understand why Helmut Marko would destabilize his own team, unless of course there is a different story being told inside the company.


Or, for Honda to start on-the-fly and ready to go :nod:

Since one of Honda's biggest problems is still with the combustion chamber I don't know that if it was a regular I4 or V6 turbo ICE they'd have done any better.

_________________
{Insert clever sig line here}


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 11:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 8:42 am
Posts: 894
Herb Tarlik wrote:
MistaVega23 wrote:
My initial reaction was 'here we go again', but when I thought about it, he does have a point.

Independent teams haven't got a hope in hell against the manufacturers. In a few years we'll see just Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault filling the top 6 places, and 'customer' teams trailing some way behind. It's really a shame when Mercedes and Ferrari refused to provide Red Bull with an engine, knowing full well they'd have a fight on their hands whichever PU was bolted into the back of the RBR.

They basically have two options: either build their own PU or convince Cosworth/Ilmor to sign an exclusive deal with them. It's the only way they'll get to win again.


This engine formula HAS to go. The formula clearly and irrevocably favors the manufacturers over the independents. Whatever formula comes next, it must allow for companies like Cosworth to get back in the game. Anything else only maintains the status quo.



Agree, people should not use their hate for RBR to disregard a valid point that they are making.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 12:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2003 1:36 pm
Posts: 2238
Nothing he says in this article is in any way wrong, we may not like him but he's 100% right. We need a (competitive) independent engine supplier more than anything else.

_________________
Shoot999: "And anyone who puts a Y on the end of his name as a nickname should be punched in the face repeatedly."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 12:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4272
There's a saying that when you make your bed you must lie in it. Red Bull were a works team and through their own impatience and public ridicule of their engine partner, they lost that status. Now they are facing the repercussions of their own rash decision making.

Their dominance from 2010-2013 seemed to leave them unwilling to even be second best for a year (they did finish second overall in 2014). By 2015, they were bad-mouthing Renault and their miscalculated assumption that either Mercedes or Ferrari would agree to supply them with an engine was their fault and no one else's. Mercedes and Ferrari devote hundreds of millions to the development of those power units. Why would they simply hand them over to their biggest competitors?

Red Bull are responsible for the situation that they find themselves in and they are not somehow entitled to being at the front.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 12:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 6:28 pm
Posts: 674
MistaVega23 wrote:
My initial reaction was 'here we go again', but when I thought about it, he does have a point.

Independent teams haven't got a hope in hell against the manufacturers. In a few years we'll see just Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault filling the top 6 places, and 'customer' teams trailing some way behind. It's really a shame when Mercedes and Ferrari refused to provide Red Bull with an engine, knowing full well they'd have a fight on their hands whichever PU was bolted into the back of the RBR.

They basically have two options: either build their own PU or convince Cosworth/Ilmor to sign an exclusive deal with them. It's the only way they'll get to win again.


I had the same thoughts...

There needs to be the option of a Cosworth / Ilmor engine supplier, and that's never going to happen with the current engine regs and costs.

It's a tough balance on the engine side of things, and I can't see an easy way out, short of going backwards on technology - which wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing in my mind.

_________________
Should I grow a beard?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 12:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23736
Yellowbin74 wrote:
MistaVega23 wrote:
My initial reaction was 'here we go again', but when I thought about it, he does have a point.

Independent teams haven't got a hope in hell against the manufacturers. In a few years we'll see just Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault filling the top 6 places, and 'customer' teams trailing some way behind. It's really a shame when Mercedes and Ferrari refused to provide Red Bull with an engine, knowing full well they'd have a fight on their hands whichever PU was bolted into the back of the RBR.

They basically have two options: either build their own PU or convince Cosworth/Ilmor to sign an exclusive deal with them. It's the only way they'll get to win again.


I had the same thoughts...

There needs to be the option of a Cosworth / Ilmor engine supplier, and that's never going to happen with the current engine regs and costs.

It's a tough balance on the engine side of things, and I can't see an easy way out, short of going backwards on technology - which wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing in my mind.

Ross Brawn has already said there is a balance to be reached, here we have Red Bull on one side and the engine manufacturers on the other, the engine manufacturers want the engines to be relevant to future technology otherwise they may not see a reason to be in F1.

Renault threatened to quit because they were not happy with the 2.4L V8 engines, Mercedes were not happy either, Honda entered because the of the engine technology, if the engines don't interest them then there may be no reason for them to be there?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: Currently 15th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 12:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7774
AravJ wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
MistaVega23 wrote:
My initial reaction was 'here we go again', but when I thought about it, he does have a point.

Independent teams haven't got a hope in hell against the manufacturers. In a few years we'll see just Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault filling the top 6 places, and 'customer' teams trailing some way behind. It's really a shame when Mercedes and Ferrari refused to provide Red Bull with an engine, knowing full well they'd have a fight on their hands whichever PU was bolted into the back of the RBR.

They basically have two options: either build their own PU or convince Cosworth/Ilmor to sign an exclusive deal with them. It's the only way they'll get to win again.


This engine formula HAS to go. The formula clearly and irrevocably favors the manufacturers over the independents. Whatever formula comes next, it must allow for companies like Cosworth to get back in the game. Anything else only maintains the status quo.



Agree, people should not use their hate for RBR to disregard a valid point that they are making.


I do not "hate" Red Bull, just getting Pee'd off with them screaming and tantrums when they cannot get their own way. When was the last time you hear any team threaten to leave, and how many times have they pulled it? Once a decade? or once a month.

I also see a difference to an engine manufacturer saying if the motor is not what they want to make, they will not. That at least has good reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 1:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20912
pokerman wrote:
Yellowbin74 wrote:
MistaVega23 wrote:
My initial reaction was 'here we go again', but when I thought about it, he does have a point.

Independent teams haven't got a hope in hell against the manufacturers. In a few years we'll see just Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault filling the top 6 places, and 'customer' teams trailing some way behind. It's really a shame when Mercedes and Ferrari refused to provide Red Bull with an engine, knowing full well they'd have a fight on their hands whichever PU was bolted into the back of the RBR.

They basically have two options: either build their own PU or convince Cosworth/Ilmor to sign an exclusive deal with them. It's the only way they'll get to win again.


I had the same thoughts...

There needs to be the option of a Cosworth / Ilmor engine supplier, and that's never going to happen with the current engine regs and costs.

It's a tough balance on the engine side of things, and I can't see an easy way out, short of going backwards on technology - which wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing in my mind.

Ross Brawn has already said there is a balance to be reached, here we have Red Bull on one side and the engine manufacturers on the other, the engine manufacturers want the engines to be relevant to future technology otherwise they may not see a reason to be in F1.

Renault threatened to quit because they were not happy with the 2.4L V8 engines, Mercedes were not happy either, Honda entered because the of the engine technology, if the engines don't interest them then there may be no reason for them to be there?

And yet they, and other manufacturers, do other series. Honda provides engines for Indy and they aren't the cutting edge R&D black holes the F1 ones are.

There appears to be this myth built up that unless F1 takes technology into the space age then everyone will just leave and it will die. And maybe some will leave. But cheaper technology would doubtless attract others in their stead.

Much as I don't like the drama around Marko's announcement, I do think he has a point. The tech has taken over to such an extent that only manufacturers have a real chance anymore. And even then they could be pouring money into something with no guarantee of success. Enter Honda.

Williams will never, IMO, recover their glory days while being a customer to Mercedes. If McLaren don't succeed with Honda, then they too will end up a customer also-ran. Anyone with aspirations to win is on a hiding to nothing unless they have a manufacturer to back them up, and no manufacturer will join after seeing Honda's experience. it's a legitimate question to ask whether the technology has gone too far and a simpler, less expensive alternative might suit the sport more. And I'm not talking going back to carburetors, either. Surely a better balance between cutting edge and affordability/accessibility can be made? At this point I think F1 needs more competition more than it needs a NASA environment


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 3:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1562
Location: Miami, Florida
Yellowbin74 wrote:
MistaVega23 wrote:
My initial reaction was 'here we go again', but when I thought about it, he does have a point.

Independent teams haven't got a hope in hell against the manufacturers. In a few years we'll see just Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault filling the top 6 places, and 'customer' teams trailing some way behind. It's really a shame when Mercedes and Ferrari refused to provide Red Bull with an engine, knowing full well they'd have a fight on their hands whichever PU was bolted into the back of the RBR.

They basically have two options: either build their own PU or convince Cosworth/Ilmor to sign an exclusive deal with them. It's the only way they'll get to win again.


I had the same thoughts...

There needs to be the option of a Cosworth / Ilmor engine supplier, and that's never going to happen with the current engine regs and costs.

It's a tough balance on the engine side of things, and I can't see an easy way out, short of going backwards on technology - which wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing in my mind.

The only viable supplier would be Cosworth who did begin development on a v6 Hybrid for the current formula but ended up abandoning the project altogether due to financial issues and lack of guarantees from Bernie.

Ilmor was bought outright by Mercedes long ago and co-founder Mario Illien ended up buying back some of the non-f1 divisions with Roger Penske to develop Indy engines and I remember Honda was involved with that project to some extent, and they also ventured into MotoGP but eventually ran into financial issues and stopped the MotoGP operations. Not sure if they started that back up but I haven't heard anything more on it, so I doubt it.

Mercedes still employs ALL of Ilmor's F1 engine staff so they are the ones behind the current Hybrids run by Mercedes, Williams and FI. So the only other company with a shot in the dark would be Cosworth at this point, unless Liberty decides to invest/loan Mario Illien the money to develop a PU for the current formula, which I highly doubt. Either way, Liberty seems to realize the costs of the current units is absurdly ridiculous so they may be phasing them out and re-introducing higher tech NA or SC engines that produce just as much HP and a MUCH reduced cost, and oh yeah… sound much better.

_________________
HAMILTON :: VETTEL :: ROSBERG :: RAIKKONEN :: VERSTAPPEN :: SAINZ :: MASSA :: BOTTAS :: NASR
ALONSO :: BUTTON :: PEREZ :: RICCIARDO :: GROSJEAN :: KVYAT :: HULKENBERG :: MALDONADO
THE REST… THERE ARE FAR BETTER DRIVERS THAT SHOULD BE IN FORMULA 1


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 4:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:17 pm
Posts: 411
Location: illinois
i think red bull should contact mclaren and williams, and decide if they want to pool money together to build engines.
or pool their money together and have ilmor build an engine for them.
or have all the independent teams pool their money together for engines
or stop the yearly "we will leave" stuff


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 4:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7774
This is the only period in F1 history where there has not been an equivalence option for engines.
If there were 2 options, being high- tec and brute force, there would be 2 ways to go (or more). One
for the manufacturers to keep it relevant, and one for the guys in sheds.

Dumping the H would reduce the complexity considerably, and if one of the companies would make a standard "lego" style ERS, there would be several options and a range of costs and involvement.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 7:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:48 pm
Posts: 2538
Location: UK
RaggedMan wrote:
moby wrote:
A.J. wrote:
Just a thought - if they continually threaten to leave, wouldn't it be a great opportunity for teams such as Ferrari/McLaren/Renault to poach some of their more talented staff just by virtue of giving them better job security? I don't understand why Helmut Marko would destabilize his own team, unless of course there is a different story being told inside the company.


Or, for Honda to start on-the-fly and ready to go :nod:

Since one of Honda's biggest problems is still with the combustion chamber I don't know that if it was a regular I4 or V6 turbo ICE they'd have done any better.

Indeed.

In fact I believe this has accounted for much of the difference between the engines since the new rules were introduced and the complexity of the hybrid systems is often overstated. When there's a limit on peak fuel flow, combustion efficiency will always be the dominant factor.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 7:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 6:08 pm
Posts: 1836
pokerman wrote:
It would make for a better argument if it wasn't coming from such a self centred team as Red Bull who left FOCA so they could secure a better deal for themselves from the commercial rights holder.

Part of FOCA's objective was to make F1 fairer for all the teams in F1 so the smaller teams could be more competitive.


While that may be true, it doesn't diminish their argument. Unless you're in a Mercedes or a Ferrari, you're pretty much stuck in a battle to come 5th for the rest of the engine formula unless they have a drama. If you're a customer team that is perceived to be a threat, you're denied an engine because you'll stop the manufacturer from winning.
What's the point of burning through hundreds of millions every year to continually bounce off a ceiling? It's not just them either. Mclaren are completely screwed by this until at least 2020 because the Honda is a dud, and they have no one to switch to.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 7:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23736
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Yellowbin74 wrote:
MistaVega23 wrote:
My initial reaction was 'here we go again', but when I thought about it, he does have a point.

Independent teams haven't got a hope in hell against the manufacturers. In a few years we'll see just Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault filling the top 6 places, and 'customer' teams trailing some way behind. It's really a shame when Mercedes and Ferrari refused to provide Red Bull with an engine, knowing full well they'd have a fight on their hands whichever PU was bolted into the back of the RBR.

They basically have two options: either build their own PU or convince Cosworth/Ilmor to sign an exclusive deal with them. It's the only way they'll get to win again.


I had the same thoughts...

There needs to be the option of a Cosworth / Ilmor engine supplier, and that's never going to happen with the current engine regs and costs.

It's a tough balance on the engine side of things, and I can't see an easy way out, short of going backwards on technology - which wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing in my mind.

Ross Brawn has already said there is a balance to be reached, here we have Red Bull on one side and the engine manufacturers on the other, the engine manufacturers want the engines to be relevant to future technology otherwise they may not see a reason to be in F1.

Renault threatened to quit because they were not happy with the 2.4L V8 engines, Mercedes were not happy either, Honda entered because the of the engine technology, if the engines don't interest them then there may be no reason for them to be there?

And yet they, and other manufacturers, do other series. Honda provides engines for Indy and they aren't the cutting edge R&D black holes the F1 ones are.

There appears to be this myth built up that unless F1 takes technology into the space age then everyone will just leave and it will die. And maybe some will leave. But cheaper technology would doubtless attract others in their stead.

Much as I don't like the drama around Marko's announcement, I do think he has a point. The tech has taken over to such an extent that only manufacturers have a real chance anymore. And even then they could be pouring money into something with no guarantee of success. Enter Honda.

Williams will never, IMO, recover their glory days while being a customer to Mercedes. If McLaren don't succeed with Honda, then they too will end up a customer also-ran. Anyone with aspirations to win is on a hiding to nothing unless they have a manufacturer to back them up, and no manufacturer will join after seeing Honda's experience. it's a legitimate question to ask whether the technology has gone too far and a simpler, less expensive alternative might suit the sport more. And I'm not talking going back to carburetors, either. Surely a better balance between cutting edge and affordability/accessibility can be made? At this point I think F1 needs more competition more than it needs a NASA environment

No one is saying that F1 would die without the engine manufacturers just that it might hold no interest for them.

Indycar is not F1 it's a spec series, engine manufacturers provide engines for other spec series as well whilst F1 is clearly not a spec series it's always supposed to be cutting edge and has a long history of engine manufacturers competing against one another, it's not a competition if the engines have to run to a performance spec.

Regarding Williams they can't even compete against Red Bull even though they have a better engine so what chance with spec engines, do you think it's the engines that are holding Williams back?

What is this more competition that would magically make the likes of Williams, Force India, STR etc being able to compete for race wins?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: Currently 15th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 8:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23736
moby wrote:
This is the only period in F1 history where there has not been an equivalence option for engines.
If there were 2 options, being high- tec and brute force, there would be 2 ways to go (or more). One
for the manufacturers to keep it relevant, and one for the guys in sheds.

Dumping the H would reduce the complexity considerably, and if one of the companies would make a standard "lego" style ERS, there would be several options and a range of costs and involvement.

Only period in history?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: Currently 15th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 8:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23736
huggybear wrote:
pokerman wrote:
It would make for a better argument if it wasn't coming from such a self centred team as Red Bull who left FOCA so they could secure a better deal for themselves from the commercial rights holder.

Part of FOCA's objective was to make F1 fairer for all the teams in F1 so the smaller teams could be more competitive.


While that may be true, it doesn't diminish their argument. Unless you're in a Mercedes or a Ferrari, you're pretty much stuck in a battle to come 5th for the rest of the engine formula unless they have a drama. If you're a customer team that is perceived to be a threat, you're denied an engine because you'll stop the manufacturer from winning.
What's the point of burning through hundreds of millions every year to continually bounce off a ceiling? It's not just them either. Mclaren are completely screwed by this until at least 2020 because the Honda is a dud, and they have no one to switch to.

All these arguments are just for Red Bull and McLaren what about the rest of the grid that have no chance of winning even with spec engines, is F1 a meritocracy or not, or is it just certain bits of it that should be kept that way?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: Currently 15th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 8:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20912
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Yellowbin74 wrote:
MistaVega23 wrote:
My initial reaction was 'here we go again', but when I thought about it, he does have a point.

Independent teams haven't got a hope in hell against the manufacturers. In a few years we'll see just Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault filling the top 6 places, and 'customer' teams trailing some way behind. It's really a shame when Mercedes and Ferrari refused to provide Red Bull with an engine, knowing full well they'd have a fight on their hands whichever PU was bolted into the back of the RBR.

They basically have two options: either build their own PU or convince Cosworth/Ilmor to sign an exclusive deal with them. It's the only way they'll get to win again.


I had the same thoughts...

There needs to be the option of a Cosworth / Ilmor engine supplier, and that's never going to happen with the current engine regs and costs.

It's a tough balance on the engine side of things, and I can't see an easy way out, short of going backwards on technology - which wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing in my mind.

Ross Brawn has already said there is a balance to be reached, here we have Red Bull on one side and the engine manufacturers on the other, the engine manufacturers want the engines to be relevant to future technology otherwise they may not see a reason to be in F1.

Renault threatened to quit because they were not happy with the 2.4L V8 engines, Mercedes were not happy either, Honda entered because the of the engine technology, if the engines don't interest them then there may be no reason for them to be there?

And yet they, and other manufacturers, do other series. Honda provides engines for Indy and they aren't the cutting edge R&D black holes the F1 ones are.

There appears to be this myth built up that unless F1 takes technology into the space age then everyone will just leave and it will die. And maybe some will leave. But cheaper technology would doubtless attract others in their stead.

Much as I don't like the drama around Marko's announcement, I do think he has a point. The tech has taken over to such an extent that only manufacturers have a real chance anymore. And even then they could be pouring money into something with no guarantee of success. Enter Honda.

Williams will never, IMO, recover their glory days while being a customer to Mercedes. If McLaren don't succeed with Honda, then they too will end up a customer also-ran. Anyone with aspirations to win is on a hiding to nothing unless they have a manufacturer to back them up, and no manufacturer will join after seeing Honda's experience. it's a legitimate question to ask whether the technology has gone too far and a simpler, less expensive alternative might suit the sport more. And I'm not talking going back to carburetors, either. Surely a better balance between cutting edge and affordability/accessibility can be made? At this point I think F1 needs more competition more than it needs a NASA environment

No one is saying that F1 would die without the engine manufacturers just that it might hold no interest for them.

Indycar is not F1 it's a spec series, engine manufacturers provide engines for other spec series as well whilst F1 is clearly not a spec series it's always supposed to be cutting edge and has a long history of engine manufacturers competing against one another, it's not a competition if the engines have to run to a performance spec.

Regarding Williams they can't even compete against Red Bull even though they have a better engine so what chance with spec engines, do you think it's the engines that are holding Williams back?

What is this more competition that would magically make the likes of Williams, Force India, STR etc being able to compete for race wins?

I don't see why it wouldn't hold interest. F1 has a long tradition of manufacturers going in and out of the sport, but it's only comparatively recently that the regulations have mandated space-age technology for the engines. There's no reason to think that if more freedom of expression was allowed, such as they have done with e.g. LMP1, manufacturers would no longer be interested. Insisting on using technology that hasn't even been invented yet is what has made costs soar.

Indycar was an example. It's a spec series, but with more than one engine manufacturer. So from an engine viewpoint, what's the difference?

Do you believe Williams would ever be allowed to beat Mercedes? Do you believe that any customer would ever be allowed to beat Ferrari? And why bring magic into it?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 8:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20912
pokerman wrote:
huggybear wrote:
pokerman wrote:
It would make for a better argument if it wasn't coming from such a self centred team as Red Bull who left FOCA so they could secure a better deal for themselves from the commercial rights holder.

Part of FOCA's objective was to make F1 fairer for all the teams in F1 so the smaller teams could be more competitive.


While that may be true, it doesn't diminish their argument. Unless you're in a Mercedes or a Ferrari, you're pretty much stuck in a battle to come 5th for the rest of the engine formula unless they have a drama. If you're a customer team that is perceived to be a threat, you're denied an engine because you'll stop the manufacturer from winning.
What's the point of burning through hundreds of millions every year to continually bounce off a ceiling? It's not just them either. Mclaren are completely screwed by this until at least 2020 because the Honda is a dud, and they have no one to switch to.

All these arguments are just for Red Bull and McLaren what about the rest of the grid that have no chance of winning even with spec engines, is F1 a meritocracy or not, or is it just certain bits of it that should be kept that way?
I'm sure they are just given as examples. There's no real reason why other teams can't be included


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 8:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7774
pokerman wrote:
moby wrote:
This is the only period in F1 history where there has not been an equivalence option for engines.
If there were 2 options, being high- tec and brute force, there would be 2 ways to go (or more). One
for the manufacturers to keep it relevant, and one for the guys in sheds.

Dumping the H would reduce the complexity considerably, and if one of the companies would make a standard "lego" style ERS, there would be several options and a range of costs and involvement.

Only period in history?


Is it not?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 10:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4415
Location: Michigan, USA
moby wrote:
pokerman wrote:
moby wrote:
This is the only period in F1 history where there has not been an equivalence option for engines.

Only period in history?

Is it not?

Um... yeah?

Aside from in the glory days of the Cosworth DFV, there has never been engine equivalence in Formula 1.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2017: Don't Ask| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
Wins: 3 | Podiums: 11

PF1 Top Three Constructor's Championship
2015 (No Limit Excedrin Racing): CHAMPIONS


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 11:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7774
Exediron wrote:
moby wrote:
pokerman wrote:
moby wrote:
This is the only period in F1 history where there has not been an equivalence option for engines.

Only period in history?

Is it not?

Um... yeah?

Aside from in the glory days of the Cosworth DFV, there has never been engine equivalence in Formula 1.


I think there has always been an equivalence formula since the very early days, just it has not often been used.
For instance, if it did not exist when DFV's were run, how was Renault able to use the equivalent to run a turbo in the first place?

I dont like using wiki as source, but a quick look says-

1947 - 1953 4.5 L atmospheric and 1.5 L supercharged engines later 4.5 L atmospheric and 3.0 L supercharged/turbo engines.

1954–1960 2.5 atmospheric. 750 cc supercharged/turbo

1966 - 1986 3.0 atmospheric and 1.5 supercharged/turbo

From then on, turbo ruled the roost but atmospheric were allowed.

1989 turbo's were banned, and we know the tale from then


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formula_One_engines


Last edited by moby on Thu May 18, 2017 11:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 11:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 12300
moby wrote:
Exediron wrote:
moby wrote:
pokerman wrote:
moby wrote:
This is the only period in F1 history where there has not been an equivalence option for engines.

Only period in history?

Is it not?

Um... yeah?

Aside from in the glory days of the Cosworth DFV, there has never been engine equivalence in Formula 1.


I think there has always been an equivalence formula since the very early days, just it has not often been used.
For instance, if it did not exist when DFV's were run, how was Renault able to use the equivalent to run a turbo in the first place?


I think you are getting your wires crossed about what is meant by "equivalence".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 11:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7774
mikeyg123 wrote:

I think you are getting your wires crossed about what is meant by "equivalence".



I am using the term as it has always been used in F1. the so called equivalence formula for atmo engines v forced induction engines.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 19, 2017 6:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 8:04 am
Posts: 1774
Lets be honest, we are never going back to conventional fuel ONLY engine formula ever again in F1. Thats gone. Its done, its dusted. Its not coming back.

We will either have hybrid turbo, hybrid naturally aspirated, Hybrid Fuel Cell / Electric fuel cell formula going forward. Nobody has any incentive to go back to old formula.

So that leaves road car manufacturers as the only people interested to be F1 engine supplier. So our current 4 suppliers which include Ferrari, Renault, Mercedes and Honda along with VW group are the only viable engine suppliers going forward.

So if RedBull is to want to be dominant again, they better start talking with VW and get works deal with them or give up on winning championship.

To be honest, this year RedBull is being left behind in not just engine development, but aero as well. They are getting same spec engine as works team this year. So, best Renault engine is in their car. It might be behind Mercedes and Honda, but gap is still too large for engine to be the only cause of the deficit. I would start looking very hard internally before making threats to leave F1. RedBull is no longer the brand it used to be in F1 to make such thread and be taken seriously.

There are loyal fans of their drivers, but they dont have fanatic fan following like Ferrari or loyal fans like McLaren; nor are they the dominant force in F1 like Mercedes anymore.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 19, 2017 8:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7774
Looking around in the real world, it seems that by far the highest number of hybrids are Toyota, and they seem to have no interest in F1.

Absolutely no good reason for it other than observation, but I suspect the next F1 engine will be Korean as Hyundai and Kia are introducing hybrid models soon


Last edited by moby on Fri May 19, 2017 9:24 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Blake, Google Adsense [Bot], UnlikeUday and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group