3 Engine Rule - Why not take new Engine Every Race?

All that has to do with the power train, gearbox, clutch, fuels and lubricants, etc. Generally the mechanical side of Formula One.
ESPImperium
117
User avatar
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 11:08 pm
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

Re: 3 Engine Rule - Why not take new Engine Every Race?

Post by ESPImperium » Sun Dec 10, 2017 11:58 pm

I have always been a fan of a graduated engine rule, basically on your title and win status within the last 3 seasons, so that each engine manufacturer would have different allocations at different teams, might be difficult to explain to consumers (corporate word for fans) but i think it could work. Basically if you win more than 5 races and or a title in the last 3 years you have 3 of each component. If you have a less than 5 wins but have finished within the top 4 of WDC in last 5 seasons, but no title in the last 5 years you have 4 of each component. Other rules would be if a Engine Manufacturer is new to the sport they get 2 extra per season until they score a podium same with new teams, and all win-less teams get an extra engine.

So:
3 = Ferrari, Mercedes, Red Bull
4 = Williams, Force India
5 = Renault, McLaren, Sauber
6 = Haas
7 = Toro Rosso

Or alternatively, just go back to the circa 2008 regulations, with a modern twist, and have each engine component and gearbox do 4 consecutive races like the 2008-two consecutive race rules. It would mean that manufacturers could plan in better upgrades, and even have upgrades for some components take place out of sync with each other? However id make it that Friday power units and engines would be limited to 2 per season. Make the rules simpler.

Jolle
154
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:58 pm
Location: Dordrecht

Re: 3 Engine Rule - Why not take new Engine Every Race?

Post by Jolle » Mon Dec 11, 2017 1:32 am

ESPImperium wrote:
Sun Dec 10, 2017 11:58 pm
I have always been a fan of a graduated engine rule, basically on your title and win status within the last 3 seasons, so that each engine manufacturer would have different allocations at different teams, might be difficult to explain to consumers (corporate word for fans) but i think it could work. Basically if you win more than 5 races and or a title in the last 3 years you have 3 of each component. If you have a less than 5 wins but have finished within the top 4 of WDC in last 5 seasons, but no title in the last 5 years you have 4 of each component. Other rules would be if a Engine Manufacturer is new to the sport they get 2 extra per season until they score a podium same with new teams, and all win-less teams get an extra engine.

So:
3 = Ferrari, Mercedes, Red Bull
4 = Williams, Force India
5 = Renault, McLaren, Sauber
6 = Haas
7 = Toro Rosso

Or alternatively, just go back to the circa 2008 regulations, with a modern twist, and have each engine component and gearbox do 4 consecutive races like the 2008-two consecutive race rules. It would mean that manufacturers could plan in better upgrades, and even have upgrades for some components take place out of sync with each other? However id make it that Friday power units and engines would be limited to 2 per season. Make the rules simpler.
One of the beauties and princables of Formula one has always been that everybody is competing in the same set of rules and within the same formula (with a few exceptions that didn’t make racing any better). Different formulas for different teams are for club and gentleman racing, not for the F1.

stevesingo
45
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2014 11:28 pm

Re: 3 Engine Rule - Why not take new Engine Every Race?

Post by stevesingo » Mon Dec 11, 2017 12:46 pm

The cost saving argument of having 3 PUs for the season vs 4 or 5 is pretty lame TBH. In 2017 Merc were supplying 3 teams each using 5 PUs we are looking at 30 race PUs. Accounting for two spares of each spec per team you can double that to 60PUs. The switch to 3 PUs per season, drops that to 36PUs, a saving in manufacturing of 24PUs for race purposes.

Any time the PU is replaced, you are using a new spec, so the existing spec spare engines are redundant, so are probably used for FiA tyre tests or whatever. So, of any given spec, there are 4 PUs per team, 12PUs manufactured for 5 races with only 6 PUs running for about 4hrs per event. 6 PUs each running at 4hrs is 24hrs running and the engines are spent.

Even if Brackly had only one dyno cell, they could run a test PU through a durability cycle of 24hrs in, err 24hrs! How many PUs can you put through one dyno cell in the 8-12 weeks that will pass during the life of one race PU? How many PUs are being produced to feed the durability testing never mind the development program?

I wouldn't mind betting Merc manufacturing numbers per season are well in to 3figs and any spare capacity freed up by not producing race PUs would be used to produce dyno PUs. Hell, they may even buy a new dyno to exploit the excess manufacturing capacity.

Stick to 5 PUs, but only allow 3 spec changes or changes approved by the FiA to counter reliability issues.

Fix the cost for customers. If factory teams want to spend to gain competitive advantage, let them. Don't expect the minnows to pay for the manufacturers excess.

Manufacturers must guarantee same specs and software access to all modes.

AJI
34
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 8:08 am

Re: 3 Engine Rule - Why not take new Engine Every Race?

Post by AJI » Thu Dec 21, 2017 10:16 pm

morrisond wrote:
Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:09 pm
I know only 3 engines allowed next year... ...it's getting to the point where different strategies might work. It's almost like pitstops - No Stop, 1 stop or 2 stop strategy.
Surely the strategists must be planning for a 'lite' version of this? It's inevitable that several teams (possibly all) will have to take penalties next year, so I'd assume that they are all running the numbers. Red Bull probably have a room with 10 savants locked in it working on permutations right now!

Zynerji
60
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:14 pm

Re: 3 Engine Rule - Why not take new Engine Every Race?

Post by Zynerji » Thu Dec 21, 2017 10:48 pm

Well, I would say that any team that blows an engine within the first seven races is guaranteed to take penalties later in the year.

I wish they would just drop to 3 races per kit, and cut it loose. We would see more full-power modes, and it wouldnt be difficult to stretch to 5 races if you blew one or two.

Cut the cost in the reliability engineering departments, and just build more engines.

Jolle
154
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:58 pm
Location: Dordrecht

Re: 3 Engine Rule - Why not take new Engine Every Race?

Post by Jolle » Thu Dec 21, 2017 11:32 pm

Zynerji wrote:
Thu Dec 21, 2017 10:48 pm
Well, I would say that any team that blows an engine within the first seven races is guaranteed to take penalties later in the year.

I wish they would just drop to 3 races per kit, and cut it loose. We would see more full-power modes, and it wouldnt be difficult to stretch to 5 races if you blew one or two.

Cut the cost in the reliability engineering departments, and just build more engines.
If the rule would be 3 races per PU, they would blow in the 4th.

Zynerji
60
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:14 pm

Re: 3 Engine Rule - Why not take new Engine Every Race?

Post by Zynerji » Thu Dec 21, 2017 11:47 pm

Jolle wrote:
Thu Dec 21, 2017 11:32 pm
Zynerji wrote:
Thu Dec 21, 2017 10:48 pm
Well, I would say that any team that blows an engine within the first seven races is guaranteed to take penalties later in the year.

I wish they would just drop to 3 races per kit, and cut it loose. We would see more full-power modes, and it wouldnt be difficult to stretch to 5 races if you blew one or two.

Cut the cost in the reliability engineering departments, and just build more engines.
If the rule would be 3 races per PU, they would blow in the 4th.
Who cares if they only need to last 3? Unless you blow one before its third, then you have to turn down one engine to last 4.

They are not going to forget how to make engines that last 7 races, they are simply going to abuse them more.

Jolle
154
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:58 pm
Location: Dordrecht

Re: 3 Engine Rule - Why not take new Engine Every Race?

Post by Jolle » Thu Dec 21, 2017 11:53 pm

Zynerji wrote:
Thu Dec 21, 2017 11:47 pm
Jolle wrote:
Thu Dec 21, 2017 11:32 pm
Zynerji wrote:
Thu Dec 21, 2017 10:48 pm
Well, I would say that any team that blows an engine within the first seven races is guaranteed to take penalties later in the year.

I wish they would just drop to 3 races per kit, and cut it loose. We would see more full-power modes, and it wouldnt be difficult to stretch to 5 races if you blew one or two.

Cut the cost in the reliability engineering departments, and just build more engines.
If the rule would be 3 races per PU, they would blow in the 4th.
Who cares if they only need to last 3? Unless you blow one before its third, then you have to turn down one engine to last 4.

They are not going to forget how to make engines that last 7 races, they are simply going to abuse them more.
So what would be the magic number of races that a PU has to last? whatever number your pick, they will make it so that it will last that plus a few laps more. The probability of failure and therefore penalties will go up. With only 3PU's a year, you only have 3 races where you are on the edge of use. If you have 1 PU a race, you will be 20 times at the end of use per season.

Zynerji
60
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:14 pm

Re: 3 Engine Rule - Why not take new Engine Every Race?

Post by Zynerji » Fri Dec 22, 2017 5:59 pm

Jolle wrote:
Thu Dec 21, 2017 11:53 pm
Zynerji wrote:
Thu Dec 21, 2017 11:47 pm
Jolle wrote:
Thu Dec 21, 2017 11:32 pm


If the rule would be 3 races per PU, they would blow in the 4th.
Who cares if they only need to last 3? Unless you blow one before its third, then you have to turn down one engine to last 4.

They are not going to forget how to make engines that last 7 races, they are simply going to abuse them more.
So what would be the magic number of races that a PU has to last? whatever number your pick, they will make it so that it will last that plus a few laps more. The probability of failure and therefore penalties will go up. With only 3PU's a year, you only have 3 races where you are on the edge of use. If you have 1 PU a race, you will be 20 times at the end of use per season.
That is exactly my point.

Id rather watch them have a new engine each weekend, than watch penalties be applied.

If a team can only run 6PU for the season, but blows up 34 on the dyno testing the reliability to adhere to the rules, doesn't it make more sense to just let them run 40PU for the season? The cost of building them is the same, so let the teams turn these 7 race engines up to 11 for a single weekend, knowing they wont blow up, and they get a fresh one next race. Also, the costs of building the engines could come way down in this case due to less expensive raw materials, and coatings needed to have the current longevity.

morrisond
2
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2017 1:01 pm

Re: 3 Engine Rule - Why not take new Engine Every Race?

Post by morrisond » Tue Feb 27, 2018 7:51 pm

morrisond wrote:
Fri Dec 08, 2017 3:52 am
Well you could get away with One Engine per weekend - use the one from the previous Weekend and crank it to the max for qualifying knowing full well you will replace it for the race. If it blows you start from the back. That would mean 42 engines per year per team - as Mario Illien has stated Development Costs on the dyno to get an engine to last for 7 races far exceed the cost of producing an extra engine, and then only 1 ten place penalty per weeken (unless regs are different for 2018).

Theoretically say you are Red Bull or Mclaren with a pretty good chassis but no hope of matching Mercedes on HP on a 3 per year Engine Strategy. But you could get 75-100HP more with a 1 race engine and start from something like 10-13th place (assuming you qualify in the top 3 and take a 10 place grid penalty as you are willing to kill your engine).

You may not finish 1st every time but you would probably get a lot of podiums and points.
It sound like Renault is considering a variation of this plan.

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/rena ... 09578/?s=1

marmer
30
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 5:48 am

Re: 3 Engine Rule - Why not take new Engine Every Race?

Post by marmer » Tue Feb 27, 2018 9:42 pm

Perhaps the thing to do would be go long on the first 2 motors then once you have a final spec for the rest of the season just add enough engines to make it so each only has to do two races

Brenton
11
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2017 6:28 am

Re: 3 Engine Rule - Why not take new Engine Every Race?

Post by Brenton » Sat Mar 03, 2018 4:00 am

A non technical factor to consider is that the rules could be changed due to gaming the rules like this. The FIA could respond to such behavior by increasing the penalty for changing engines, making it less worthwhile.

SteveRacer
6
User avatar
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2014 12:13 am

Re: 3 Engine Rule - Why not take new Engine Every Race?

Post by SteveRacer » Sat Mar 03, 2018 5:16 am

This may not be beneficial for a team fighting for wins. If your a mid pack team with a goal to score points it may have some merit.

motobaleno
21
User avatar
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 12:58 pm

Re: 3 Engine Rule - Why not take new Engine Every Race?

Post by motobaleno » Sat Mar 03, 2018 10:14 am

Let's put the things in another way: the question is not to decide between 3 or 21 engines but to solve an optimization problem whose parameters are engine power and penalty positions and the function to maximize is the final championship score.
I'm pretty sure that the best solution is not 21 engines but at the same time I'm not sure at all that it is 3 engines.
What lacks to us is the function that relates duration vs output power but if I was a team engineer I would explorate the problem around 3 gps of duration....if this would grant around 50 cv the thing is serious...with a good car (e.g. ferrari or red bull) and 50 cv more I would have big chance of winning the first 9 gps (let's think of last year ferrari with 50 cv more...) and then I will have 3 very good gp out of 4...