Do you agree with the FIA mandate that each driver may use no more than five power units during a championship season.

[ChrisM40]

The true cost to the teams is the R&D, not the physical engine cost. Its like drugs, if a course is 1 pill or 1000 it doesn't matter, the cost you are charged is for the development costs.
Sure each engine still costs a lot, but there would be an economy of scale if they were allowed to make more. Really I think 8 or 10 is fine. I doubt it would increase the total cost much. I understand that they want to stop teams using an engine per session, like it used to be, but 5 total for the entire season seems really unnecessarily restrictive.

[Manjhi]

Yes. But with little modification in rules, FIA should freeze the engine development for 2 season and allow the teams to develop aero of the chassis, that way the manufacturer will provide 10 engine each to customer for 2 season and this will help in reducing the cost, plus the cars will be aero specific and not engine specific.

[graham.reeds]

Yes. But with little modification in rules, FIA should freeze the engine development for 2 season and allow the teams to develop aero of the chassis, that way the manufacturer will provide 10 engine each to customer for 2 season and this will help in reducing the cost, plus the cars will be aero specific and not engine specific.

And that would prevent any team from beating the Mercedes. Aero gains are measured in hundredths and thousandths. Rarely in tenths. And when the engine has a second over the opposition then you are handing a two year period of domination.

The cost of the engine is irrelevant. They could retail them for a bag of peanuts and Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault will still have sunk all that money into engine development because they want to win - to show they are the best.

The problem of the engine numbers is the mockery of the penalty. Hamilton comeback in Spa shows that the penalty is not enough.

The worst crime is the aero reset we are getting next year to make the cars faster. Thing is they were nearly there already and now all they have done is hand the lead to Mercedes, McLaren, Ferrari and Red Bull, the teams with the money and personnel to follow and test multiple leads whereas the other teams have to pick a path and follow it.

[Pierce89]

Yes. But with little modification in rules, FIA should freeze the engine development for 2 season and allow the teams to develop aero of the chassis, that way the manufacturer will provide 10 engine each to customer for 2 season and this will help in reducing the cost, plus the cars will be aero specific and not engine specific.

Any open formula should be a balance of engine and chassis. To freeze either, is just WRONG in f1. Besides, freezing the PUs with huge performance differences just means you'd never get the "straight aero" competition you seem to be asking for.

[cooken]

Is something like this possible in lieu of silly grid place drops? To be clear I don't think this is the answer, haven't thought it out very much and there are probably gaping holes begging for abuse. I just hate seeing FA/JB wallowing in last through no fault of their own.

"Each driver may be allocated no more than five of each power unit component by the team during a championship season. Additional allocations beyond the maximum of five will be penalized by subtracting X points on a per component basis from the constructor's championship point total."

Currently Merc could easily abuse this with no consequence due to their massive points buffer, but it would matter quite a bit to RB/Ferrari at the moment as well as FI/Williams.

[Cold Fussion]

I really don't understand this nonsense of penalising teams and not drivers. F1 is a team sport and you win an lose as a team.

[cooken]

So shouldn't they penalize both drivers and have max allocations per team instead of driver?

I disagree personally, but I suppose its a valid argument as any.