3 race engines?

[ISLAMATRON]

Effectively approved for the 2009 season...

http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/ ... /8651.html

How will they effect the racing next year? Is there a consensus as how the 2 race motor changed F1 racing? What is the upper limits as to # of races for a motor as the FIA looks to cut costs?

[CMSMJ1]

It made very little overall difference IMO.

I would prefer the regs to be more open and if you wanted to use a motor a day then go fo rit. However, with the modern save the planet attitude it is PC to have these days, we have to suck it and see.

3 day motors will make no idds. - I guess team will get a joker and by the end of next season will be back at the same power they are now.

They should drop the rev limit as I think it will be self policing - we won't see any cars with 21k rev ceilings making 600 racing miles + practice and qualli.

[Scotracer]

There's two ways of looking at this:

-Engine failures are now a very, very rare event in F1; the longevity rules have sorted the problems
-Engineering advancement would have sorted out the problems anyway

To say that the engine rule change alone made the cars so reliable is a tad ignorant but it's definitely the biggest factor.

They should drop the rev limit as I think it will be self policing - we won't see any cars with 21k rev ceilings making 600 racing miles + practice and qualli.

Indeed. However I think they should still use separate engines on Friday to get more track time for fans.

I remember hearing during the Brazilian GP ITV coverage that some team benched a V8 unit to destruction and it was surprisingly willing to stay in "one" piece. They may be able to get 3 weekends out of the current engines (DC managed it this year).

[ISLAMATRON]

Indeed. However I think they should still use separate engines on Friday to get more track time for fans.

You mean keep it as is?

[Metar]

As it is, the engines are very reliable - and I don't think many changes will be needed to adapt them to three weekends... As a factor in racing, however, it will be interesting to see actual differences between new and old engines, though.

They may be able to get 3 weekends out of the current engines (DC managed it this year).

Yeah, but he drove as many laps in all combined as others do in just one weekend.

[axle]

They may be able to get 3 weekends out of the current engines (DC managed it this year).

Yeah, but he drove as many laps in all combined as others do in just one weekend.

That was indeed the reason. It's a mileage thing not a race weekend one...no point changing an expensive engine that's gone no where.

4 engines for the season should be enough in this day and age.

[ESPImperium]

Indeed. However I think they should still use separate engines on Friday to get more track time for fans.

I remember hearing during the Brazilian GP ITV coverage that some team benched a V8 unit to destruction and it was surprisingly willing to stay in "one" piece. They may be able to get 3 weekends out of the current engines (DC managed it this year).

Youre right there was a mention of a Engine Manufacturer that tested and engine to destruction andf that was Merceedies, they tested a engine made from the exact same parts from the exact same batch that all the diffrent parts came from, and they effectivly ran it 24/7 for 6.5 days i think they said before it blew up, and it was 3 or 4 days in that it started to show signs of horsepower slowing that could be serious enough to hamper Lewis or Hekki in a race.

DC did GB, Germany and Hungary on the same engine, meaning that he could have 2 diffrent engines for Monza and Spa. All down to the first lap spin he has in GB with Vettel on the first lap at Brooklands.

I think the current engines can cope with the stresses and strains, but if they were to ditch the single engine for twenty-10 i think that 4 or 5 races per engine could be on the cards. Most probably 4 races with gearboses going to the 6 race mark.

[ISLAMATRON]

They may be able to get 3 weekends out of the current engines (DC managed it this year).

Yeah, but he drove as many laps in all combined as others do in just one weekend.

That was indeed the reason. It's a mileage thing not a race weekend one...no point changing an expensive engine that's gone no where.

4 engines for the season should be enough in this day and age.

Thermal cycles must be taken into account as well... and when referring to a DC racing engine dont forget possible damage from the probable accidents instigated.

4 engines per season at around 20 races equates to about 5 races per engine... Yes the next formula engine should be able to handle that, but I doubt this iteration will.

[DaveKillens]

Current 2 race engines are designed, engineered, and constructed to last two races, no more. To reach for three weekends, the entire engine and drivetrain has to be re-examined in minute detail. Then, most likely, many parts will have to be altered or changed entirely. This will keeep the engine departments very busy for the next few months. Quality control will have to be more stringent.
The actual handling, strategy, and use of the engines will be similar to the two race engine era.
There is a slight power loss from event to event, and by the third race weekend, the used engine will be down a very few ponies in grunt. KERS will mask this.
The engines will appear similar to 2 race engines, but they will be massaged and tuned for the added stress.
So although the goal of cheaper engines is a fine one by Max, this method of slow change forces the teams to go back to the drawing board for each revision. More short-term cost to the teams.
Where will this lead? How about the ultimate in reliability, for one engine to last the entire season. Please don't laugh, Max is that Mad.

[pipex]

I remember reading some text (don't remember where) that said that the current engines can only be used for three races, and beyond that significant reengineering of the engine will be needed, which is like what Dave in the post above said. This means that it's not allowed by the engine freeze and is not in the spirit of the cost cutting measures.

Regards

[donskar]

Current 2 race engines are designed, engineered, and constructed to last two races, no more. To reach for three weekends, the entire engine and drivetrain has to be re-examined in minute detail. Then, most likely, many parts will have to be altered or changed entirely. This will keeep the engine departments very busy for the next few months. Quality control will have to be more stringent.
The actual handling, strategy, and use of the engines will be similar to the two race engine era.
There is a slight power loss from event to event, and by the third race weekend, the used engine will be down a very few ponies in grunt. KERS will mask this.
The engines will appear similar to 2 race engines, but they will be massaged and tuned for the added stress.
So although the goal of cheaper engines is a fine one by Max, this method of slow change forces the teams to go back to the drawing board for each revision. More short-term cost to the teams.
Where will this lead? How about the ultimate in reliability, for one engine to last the entire season. Please don't laugh, Max is that Mad.

I agree, Dave. Simply put, another "money saving" move will cost the teams more money.

[WhiteBlue]

I don't agree. It will cost a lot less money and that has been confirmed by the agreement to drop the price which was typically 17 mil € to 10 mil €. Of course those teams profiting from high cost (because they can afford them) will object. But in the name of sportsmanship and good entertainment it has to be seen as a positive move. I am dead against the use of money as a competitive advantage. If there is a way to curb the excesses of the super rich teams and give some chances to the smaller teams I suppport that move. Most spectators like different winners and cheer the underdogs when they win. The best of them should get more of a chance to get a podium occasionally. It also serves to emphasise the driver talent. Some years ago Vettel could not have taken a GP win. Now he can and this is good.

[ISLAMATRON]

The money spent to make them into 3 race engines will be pennies on the dollar compared to if the engines were not frozen. The teams may also be spending less to convert them to 3 race engines than they would be if they remained 2 race engines.

Remember the engines were designed with a 2 race engine rule in mind, but no rev limit. These engines may be streched to 3 races but it may not be possible to squeeze 4 races out of them without an extensive(& expensive) redesign.

The teams cannot blame the FIA for the costs of making these engines 3 race engines, this is something the teams offered themselves.

[WhiteBlue]

The money spent to make them into 3 race engines will be pennies on the dollar compared to if the engines were not frozen. The teams may also be spending less to convert them to 3 race engines than they would be if they remained 2 race engines.

Remember the engines were designed with a 2 race engine rule in mind, but no rev limit. These engines may be streched to 3 races but it may not be possible to squeeze 4 races out of them without an extensive(& expensive) redesign.

The teams cannot blame the FIA for the costs of making these engines 3 race engines, this is something the teams offered themselves.

facts will never stop certain teams to spread their propaganda. as we have seen with Mr. Bishop's comments last year.

[jamsbong]

I do enjoy having engines not blowing up for a change. I don't really find joy in watching the frustration of a driver (especially my hero) coming of out the cockpit after a blown engine. Well, there is exception, Mark Webber and Montoya are the 2 who I enjoy seeing them blow up engines.

Oh boy, there will be many who hates me now...

I am not sure what implications 3 race engine will mean? less cost? Don't you have to spend money to check if the engine is reliable for 3 race? Will we continue to enjoy 100% reliability race? will cars be slower?

I will wait and see.