Moving toward an engine formula, in hindsight, probably always carried the risk of advantaging the factory teams. Would a return to an aero or chassis biased formula provide parity for teams who don't make engines?
If money is the key factor for success in F1, then it shouldn't matter what parts of the car the formula biases development funding towards. Teams with big capital backing such as Merc & Ferrari would be able to outspend the other teams on aero & chassis tech.
2009-2013 might be explained by looking at team revenues/expenditures, team organization, and manufacture interest in the sport.
Regardless, it would be cool to see a non-engine-building organization use their methodology to develop a power unit. RB masterfully developed a complex mechanical system which was dominant for four and a half years, from scratch. If funding arrived, could their approach supply a similarly competitive engine? Trouble is, by now, four years on, the Ferrari and Merc teams have massively improved their organization and approach. They now have chassis and aero development on par with the team that brought it to a new level: Red Bull.
NL_Fer wrote: ↑
Sun Nov 26, 2017 12:11 am
...wait till 2021 for a proper engine.
A subjective term. F1 has never purposely tried to build a "proper" engine.
Mudflap wrote: ↑
Sun Nov 26, 2017 8:44 pm
Ilmor have less than 100 employees and most of them work on the Indy engine.
OT, but why does it take 100 people to develop/build the Indy engine? They brag about how simple and cost-effective it is.