planetf1.com

It is currently Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:09 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri May 19, 2017 9:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20199
moby wrote:
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

VW and BMW are also investing heavily in hybrids, but are also not in F1. I don't think being hybrid is the problem, but the ridiculously complicated way they've gone about it.

F1 has always used tech in the quest for higher performance, but the way these hybrids were introduced was more about the tech itself than the performance gains. It was done as an R&D exercise, not a sporting one.

Where I live I see VW hybrids everywhere. Toyota and BMW, too. Even Mitsubishi. But Renault ones are rare, which is ironic seeing as how they were the biggest proponents of hybrid technology for the rule changes back in 2011.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 19, 2017 9:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7509
Zoue wrote:
moby wrote:
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

VW and BMW are also investing heavily in hybrids, but are also not in F1. I don't think being hybrid is the problem, but the ridiculously complicated way they've gone about it.

F1 has always used tech in the quest for higher performance, but the way these hybrids were introduced was more about the tech itself than the performance gains. It was done as an R&D exercise, not a sporting one.

Where I live I see VW hybrids everywhere. Toyota and BMW, too. Even Mitsubishi. But Renault ones are rare, which is ironic seeing as how they were the biggest proponents of hybrid technology for the rule changes back in 2011.


Probably area specific. I hardly ever see VW hybrids, and only a few BMW. Could maybe be a town/country thing?

If there was some form of stand alone option for energy recovery and motors and not allowed to take power directly from the engine, any engine could then be used with the system. I can not see that happening though as the whole thing is interwoven to such an extent.

Possible option, energy is recovered via axle or wheel units, stored separately and redeployed to the same units, in effect giving 4 wheel drive with recovered power.

This would be genuine 'recovered' energy too, and not just pumped in from the engine. But.. as I said, I can not see it happening.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 19, 2017 10:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20199
moby wrote:
Zoue wrote:
moby wrote:
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

VW and BMW are also investing heavily in hybrids, but are also not in F1. I don't think being hybrid is the problem, but the ridiculously complicated way they've gone about it.

F1 has always used tech in the quest for higher performance, but the way these hybrids were introduced was more about the tech itself than the performance gains. It was done as an R&D exercise, not a sporting one.

Where I live I see VW hybrids everywhere. Toyota and BMW, too. Even Mitsubishi. But Renault ones are rare, which is ironic seeing as how they were the biggest proponents of hybrid technology for the rule changes back in 2011.


Probably area specific. I hardly ever see VW hybrids, and only a few BMW. Could maybe be a town/country thing?

If there was some form of stand alone option for energy recovery and motors and not allowed to take power directly from the engine, any engine could then be used with the system. I can not see that happening though as the whole thing is interwoven to such an extent.

Possible option, energy is recovered via axle or wheel units, stored separately and redeployed to the same units, in effect giving 4 wheel drive with recovered power.

This would be genuine 'recovered' energy too, and not just pumped in from the engine. But.. as I said, I can not see it happening.

Yes, I probably should have elaborated!

I recently moved to the Netherlands. There is excellent infrastructure here for electric, or part electric vehicles, and there have been fairly hefty tax incentives for people to take advantage of this. And, unlike the UK, public charging points don't charge the equivalent of petrol prices to "fill 'er up." As a result, (part-) electric vehicles abound. I myself had a VW Golf GTE recently, initially because the company car tax was laughably low. Sadly, I had to return it when I left the job, but it was one of the best cars I've ever driven.

But I digress. The point is, in an infrastructure which heavily supports hybrids, it stands to reason that manufacturers who have invested in the technology would be falling over themselves to sell their vehicles. It's notable that the most electric cars you see are those by VW, Volvo, BMW, Tesla (I think I read a report last year that said they outsold the Mercedes E Class and BMW 5 series), Toyota, Mitsubishi (the best selling PHEV). Even Opel are in on the act. But, other than the one Zoe I see down my street, Renault are fairly conspicuous by their absence. I've seen more Porsche hybrids, to be frank. Mercedes don't fare that much better, either. So the two manufacturers who pushed for hybrid vehicles in F1 seem to be the the ones who don't actually translate that technology into vehicle sales. Which is more than a little odd.

There is a market for hybrid technology, clearly. Maybe it's the way they've gone about introducing it into F1: aren't the hybrids they use in LMP1 a fraction of the cost of F1 engines? So if they do it in a way which doesn't cost the GDP of a small country, then I see F1 opening up to a whole lot more potential entrants, without having to go back to engines used in the Ford Model T. Whatever they choose, it's clear they need to reduce the complexity, so that we don't get a repeat of the troubles that Honda and, to a lesser extent, Renault, have encountered. Your idea might be one such (I think they use something like that in LMP1, too, although can't be sure).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 19, 2017 12:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 11:03 am
Posts: 305
Something has to be done in the next formula about the PU situation, it's just simply not possible for a non works team to win the championship anymore. Why would a team like RB want to stay when they know they are zero chance of ever winning if things stay the same? The PU's are so complicated now, no new manufacturers are interested in joining.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 19, 2017 12:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 6:28 pm
Posts: 639
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?


Personally, I think the "road relevance" line they use is just a smokescreen.

The manufacturers want to have all the power (excuse the pun) to ensure they can't get beaten by a customer team. I can't say I blame them, but it is a shame...

_________________
Should I grow a beard?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 19, 2017 1:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2003 1:36 pm
Posts: 2168
Yellowbin74 wrote:
The manufacturers want to have all the power (excuse the pun) to ensure they can't get beaten by a customer team. I can't say I blame them, but it is a shame...


Unfortunately, the manufacturers have the attitude that they 'put all the money in' to the sport, so they are 'entitled' to win it. This must be addressed if the sport is ever going to sort itself out and actually become a 'sport'.

_________________
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: Fri May 19, 2017 1:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7509
[quote="Yellowbin74"]

Ref your sig?

Hair today goon tomorrow.

Your pics will be about for ever :twisted: . ( says the guy who had a curly perm at 30 )


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 19, 2017 2:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 8:31 am
Posts: 1548
For me the onus on performance should always be on the engine never the aero. What is a race car without an engine?? just a shell! You put a good engine in any chassis and you got yourself a race car.

Maybe its time F1 does move away from the independents? and focus on attracting other factory teams. I think Red Bull is miffed more than anyone because they compete at the pointy end of the spectrum and invest way more than say FI does and given the fact prize money drops significantly if you don't win they will feel the pinch more than any.

What does moto gp do? i'm aware they have factory and non factory bike teams?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 19, 2017 3:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 22323
Zoue wrote:
moby wrote:
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

VW and BMW are also investing heavily in hybrids, but are also not in F1. I don't think being hybrid is the problem, but the ridiculously complicated way they've gone about it.

F1 has always used tech in the quest for higher performance, but the way these hybrids were introduced was more about the tech itself than the performance gains. It was done as an R&D exercise, not a sporting one.

Where I live I see VW hybrids everywhere. Toyota and BMW, too. Even Mitsubishi. But Renault ones are rare, which is ironic seeing as how they were the biggest proponents of hybrid technology for the rule changes back in 2011.

If you remember it was actually Todt that wanted hybrid engines.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: Currently 14th

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 19, 2017 3:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 22323
rivf1 wrote:
Something has to be done in the next formula about the PU situation, it's just simply not possible for a non works team to win the championship anymore. Why would a team like RB want to stay when they know they are zero chance of ever winning if things stay the same? The PU's are so complicated now, no new manufacturers are interested in joining.

What are the chances of Williams, Force India, STR, Haas or Sauber ever winning in F1 even with spec engines?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: Currently 14th

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 19, 2017 3:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 22323
Yellowbin74 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?


Personally, I think the "road relevance" line they use is just a smokescreen.

The manufacturers want to have all the power (excuse the pun) to ensure they can't get beaten by a customer team. I can't say I blame them, but it is a shame...

Renault didn't have their own team, they were just suppliers when they threatened to pull out of F1 unless the engines were changed.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: Currently 14th

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 19, 2017 3:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 22323
ALESI wrote:
Yellowbin74 wrote:
The manufacturers want to have all the power (excuse the pun) to ensure they can't get beaten by a customer team. I can't say I blame them, but it is a shame...


Unfortunately, the manufacturers have the attitude that they 'put all the money in' to the sport, so they are 'entitled' to win it. This must be addressed if the sport is ever going to sort itself out and actually become a 'sport'.

But then again this entitlement leads us back to Red Bull and what defines as F1 being a sport, every team having equal opportunity?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: Currently 14th

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 19, 2017 3:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 22323
stevey wrote:
For me the onus on performance should always be on the engine never the aero. What is a race car without an engine?? just a shell! You put a good engine in any chassis and you got yourself a race car.

Maybe its time F1 does move away from the independents? and focus on attracting other factory teams. I think Red Bull is miffed more than anyone because they compete at the pointy end of the spectrum and invest way more than say FI does and given the fact prize money drops significantly if you don't win they will feel the pinch more than any.

What does moto gp do? i'm aware they have factory and non factory bike teams?

The money pay out is not a problem for Red Bull because they get paid for their historically 10 year value to F1.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: Currently 14th

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 19, 2017 3:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20199
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
moby wrote:
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

VW and BMW are also investing heavily in hybrids, but are also not in F1. I don't think being hybrid is the problem, but the ridiculously complicated way they've gone about it.

F1 has always used tech in the quest for higher performance, but the way these hybrids were introduced was more about the tech itself than the performance gains. It was done as an R&D exercise, not a sporting one.

Where I live I see VW hybrids everywhere. Toyota and BMW, too. Even Mitsubishi. But Renault ones are rare, which is ironic seeing as how they were the biggest proponents of hybrid technology for the rule changes back in 2011.

If you remember it was actually Todt that wanted hybrid engines.

Todt and Renault, IIRC. I believe Renault threatened to pull out unless hybrids were adopted. Can't remember who initiated it, but think it was Renault and Todt supported it. Other teams put forward twin-turbos, partly because of cost (I believe Martin Whitmarsh mentioned this i an interview), but Renault threw their toys out of the pram and the others went along with it. I wish they'd gone with twin turbos, but Pandora's box has been opened now

Just one of the reasons why Todt was a terrible choice for FIA president from an F1 perspective.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 19, 2017 3:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20199
pokerman wrote:
rivf1 wrote:
Something has to be done in the next formula about the PU situation, it's just simply not possible for a non works team to win the championship anymore. Why would a team like RB want to stay when they know they are zero chance of ever winning if things stay the same? The PU's are so complicated now, no new manufacturers are interested in joining.

What are the chances of Williams, Force India, STR, Haas or Sauber ever winning in F1 even with spec engines?

I think they are much, much higher than the chances of them ever winning with today's situation


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 19, 2017 3:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2003 1:36 pm
Posts: 2168
pokerman wrote:
ALESI wrote:
Yellowbin74 wrote:
The manufacturers want to have all the power (excuse the pun) to ensure they can't get beaten by a customer team. I can't say I blame them, but it is a shame...


Unfortunately, the manufacturers have the attitude that they 'put all the money in' to the sport, so they are 'entitled' to win it. This must be addressed if the sport is ever going to sort itself out and actually become a 'sport'.

But then again this entitlement leads us back to Red Bull and what defines as F1 being a sport, every team having equal opportunity?


True, they feel entitled as well... and they probably don't want 'equality' among 'all' the teams either.

_________________
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: Fri May 19, 2017 6:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 9:20 pm
Posts: 1565
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.

All formulas since the initial turbo era have favoured manufacturers.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 19, 2017 10:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 11:03 am
Posts: 305
pokerman wrote:
rivf1 wrote:
Something has to be done in the next formula about the PU situation, it's just simply not possible for a non works team to win the championship anymore. Why would a team like RB want to stay when they know they are zero chance of ever winning if things stay the same? The PU's are so complicated now, no new manufacturers are interested in joining.

What are the chances of Williams, Force India, STR, Haas or Sauber ever winning in F1 even with spec engines?


Would certainly be a lot higher than they are now, wouldn't it be great if they had a far better chance of at least reaching the podium here or there without relying on half the field crashing or breaking down?. Also making the PU less complicated and cheaper opens the door for more manufacturers to come back to F1 and possibly working more closely with teams like williams, FI, RB etc etc. Currently the PU manufactures yield too much power and practically control the sport, that is not a good thing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 21, 2017 12:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 22323
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
moby wrote:
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

VW and BMW are also investing heavily in hybrids, but are also not in F1. I don't think being hybrid is the problem, but the ridiculously complicated way they've gone about it.

F1 has always used tech in the quest for higher performance, but the way these hybrids were introduced was more about the tech itself than the performance gains. It was done as an R&D exercise, not a sporting one.

Where I live I see VW hybrids everywhere. Toyota and BMW, too. Even Mitsubishi. But Renault ones are rare, which is ironic seeing as how they were the biggest proponents of hybrid technology for the rule changes back in 2011.

If you remember it was actually Todt that wanted hybrid engines.

Todt and Renault, IIRC. I believe Renault threatened to pull out unless hybrids were adopted. Can't remember who initiated it, but think it was Renault and Todt supported it. Other teams put forward twin-turbos, partly because of cost (I believe Martin Whitmarsh mentioned this i an interview), but Renault threw their toys out of the pram and the others went along with it. I wish they'd gone with twin turbos, but Pandora's box has been opened now

Just one of the reasons why Todt was a terrible choice for FIA president from an F1 perspective.

I thought it was Todt's idea initially then like you say maybe Renault then wanted to push it through?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: Currently 14th

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 21, 2017 12:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 22323
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
rivf1 wrote:
Something has to be done in the next formula about the PU situation, it's just simply not possible for a non works team to win the championship anymore. Why would a team like RB want to stay when they know they are zero chance of ever winning if things stay the same? The PU's are so complicated now, no new manufacturers are interested in joining.

What are the chances of Williams, Force India, STR, Haas or Sauber ever winning in F1 even with spec engines?

I think they are much, much higher than the chances of them ever winning with today's situation

Much, much higher which takes them from not a cat's chance to no chance, maybe one more much thrown in would have been even more convincing? ;)

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: Currently 14th

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 21, 2017 12:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 22323
ALESI wrote:
pokerman wrote:
ALESI wrote:
Yellowbin74 wrote:
The manufacturers want to have all the power (excuse the pun) to ensure they can't get beaten by a customer team. I can't say I blame them, but it is a shame...


Unfortunately, the manufacturers have the attitude that they 'put all the money in' to the sport, so they are 'entitled' to win it. This must be addressed if the sport is ever going to sort itself out and actually become a 'sport'.

But then again this entitlement leads us back to Red Bull and what defines as F1 being a sport, every team having equal opportunity?


True, they feel entitled as well... and they probably don't want 'equality' among 'all' the teams either.

No just for themselves.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: Currently 14th

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 21, 2017 12:48 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 22323
GingerFurball 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.

All formulas since the initial turbo era have favoured manufacturers.

F1 actually started with the engine manufacturers.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: Currently 14th

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 21, 2017 12:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 22323
rivf1 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
rivf1 wrote:
Something has to be done in the next formula about the PU situation, it's just simply not possible for a non works team to win the championship anymore. Why would a team like RB want to stay when they know they are zero chance of ever winning if things stay the same? The PU's are so complicated now, no new manufacturers are interested in joining.

What are the chances of Williams, Force India, STR, Haas or Sauber ever winning in F1 even with spec engines?


Would certainly be a lot higher than they are now, wouldn't it be great if they had a far better chance of at least reaching the podium here or there without relying on half the field crashing or breaking down?. Also making the PU less complicated and cheaper opens the door for more manufacturers to come back to F1 and possibly working more closely with teams like williams, FI, RB etc etc. Currently the PU manufactures yield too much power and practically control the sport, that is not a good thing.

Were was the engine manufacturers during the frozen spec 2.4L V8's, no one entered but plenty left and 2 of the 3 that were left were not happy with the engines.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: Currently 14th

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 23, 2017 12:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 6:28 pm
Posts: 639
pokerman wrote:
ALESI wrote:
Yellowbin74 wrote:
The manufacturers want to have all the power (excuse the pun) to ensure they can't get beaten by a customer team. I can't say I blame them, but it is a shame...


Unfortunately, the manufacturers have the attitude that they 'put all the money in' to the sport, so they are 'entitled' to win it. This must be addressed if the sport is ever going to sort itself out and actually become a 'sport'.

But then again this entitlement leads us back to Red Bull and what defines as F1 being a sport, every team having equal opportunity?


Equal opportunity, no...

But I'd like things to be a little closer, without losing the essence of F1.

Go back to when we had dual tyre suppliers - in the right conditions (damp, drying track) the Bridgestone inters were often in a class of their own - and the smaller teams could often perform at a higher level than usual.

Things like this could often give us the excitement we wanted, without it being artificial.

A reasonable engine at an affordable cost could really help - but it's probably not doable...

_________________
Should I grow a beard?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 23, 2017 12:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 22323
Yellowbin74 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
ALESI wrote:
Yellowbin74 wrote:
The manufacturers want to have all the power (excuse the pun) to ensure they can't get beaten by a customer team. I can't say I blame them, but it is a shame...


Unfortunately, the manufacturers have the attitude that they 'put all the money in' to the sport, so they are 'entitled' to win it. This must be addressed if the sport is ever going to sort itself out and actually become a 'sport'.

But then again this entitlement leads us back to Red Bull and what defines as F1 being a sport, every team having equal opportunity?


Equal opportunity, no...

But I'd like things to be a little closer, without losing the essence of F1.

Go back to when we had dual tyre suppliers - in the right conditions (damp, drying track) the Bridgestone inters were often in a class of their own - and the smaller teams could often perform at a higher level than usual.

Things like this could often give us the excitement we wanted, without it being artificial.

A reasonable engine at an affordable cost could really help - but it's probably not doable...

Basically that's just introducing a lottery that allows some smaller teams to be quicker than some of the bigger teams once in awhile, it still doesn't give them the chance of winning unless they get extremely lucky with retirements etc.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: Currently 14th

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 23, 2017 1:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2003 1:36 pm
Posts: 2168
Image

If it produced the odd moment like this then I'd take a lottery now and again. If the only way the little guys can have a chance is a 'lottery', then so be it. Purity be damned, I'd take Damon overtaking a Ferrari in an Arrows over two Mercedes 'carefully' racing anyday thank you very much.

_________________
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: Tue May 23, 2017 5:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 22323
ALESI wrote:
Image

If it produced the odd moment like this then I'd take a lottery now and again. If the only way the little guys can have a chance is a 'lottery', then so be it. Purity be damned, I'd take Damon overtaking a Ferrari in an Arrows over two Mercedes 'carefully' racing anyday thank you very much.

That sort of lottery didn't last long, the Bridgestones that helped Arrows that day attracted the big teams like Benetton and McLaren for the following season, whilst the two other big teams Ferrari and Williams were on Goodyears.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: Currently 14th

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


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: Bing [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Jezza13, ynot22 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