Cosworth Engine an UNFAIR advantage?

[Giblet]

BEEP BEEP BEEP

WARNING

TRANSMISSION TALK IMPENDING

WARNING

BEEP BEEP BEEP

[Conceptual]

What about an ANYTHING GOES engine format, but single engine for entire season, with 3 rebuilds allowed.

THAT would give some killer engines, methinks!

[bar555]

Cosworth has already carried out tests which prove its 2010-spec V8 units will be a match for the engines currently in use by the sport’s top teams . According to Cosworth , the 2010 unit will be a lot more fuel efficient and it will obviously be retuned to the 18,000 rpm limit as opposed to the 20,000rpm limit
It is rumored that the 2010 unit is as strong as the Mercedes one ( around 745 up to 750 hp) and at least 20 hp over the Renault unit . That was probably the fact that made Williams choose Cosworth instead of Renault .

[Fil]

It is rumored that the 2010 unit is as strong as the Mercedes one ( around 745 up to 750 hp) and at least 20 hp over the Renault unit . That was probably the fact that made Williams choose Cosworth instead of Renault .

And probably why Red Bull haven't announced their engine for 2010 either

[WhiteBlue]

It is rumored that the 2010 unit is as strong as the Mercedes one ( around 745 up to 750 hp) and at least 20 hp over the Renault unit . That was probably the fact that made Williams choose Cosworth instead of Renault .

And probably why Red Bull haven't announced their engine for 2010 either

Internally Red Bull had already decided for Renault and are probably running all projects with the Renault option. But Renault have announced an imminent decision regarding their future participation in F1. So a decision from Red Bull is useless unless they have confirmation thatRenault will fullfill their contract. Toyota for instance did not, and it is conceivable that Renault won't either.

[tarzoon]

Hummm... Vettel in exchange for engines between RBR and MercGP?!

I still believe Vettel can go to Merc because it makes a lot of sense!

[tok-tokkie]

To me the concept of a spec engine defeats the purpose of an engineering challenge. Having really tight technical specs for the engine is just about the same. I appreciate the need to contain costs. A limited quantity of fuel for the weekend & a maximum for the actual race seemed to me to be the best solution. I have now read this by Peter Clifford (who made a MotoGP bike which was banned by the FIM).

(MM=Moto Matters; PC=Peter Clifford MSMA=Motorcycle Sport Manufacturers Association)

MM: I've suggested this to a few people, but my idea to make it cheaper is just to remove the engine limitations, because that way you can always get cheap horsepower.

PC: Well my suggestion was if you want to increase performance, reduce the number of gears in the gear box. Go from six, and you can do it successively, you can say 6 speed this year, next year it will be 5 and the year after that it will be 4. And what have you got to do then? You've got to produce broader horse power and all that sort of thing. It'll cost you no money to reduce the number of gears in the gear box, you can keep the same engine design. And you could have done that for the 990's and it would have cost next to nothing. I said so at the time and certain people agreed, but it was never taken on as a serious suggestion because that decision was driven by Honda you know, who still drive the MSMA.

That is an interesting idea (coupled with limited fuel & little other constraints).

*Source*

[xpensive]

With all due respect for mr Clifford, little matter if you have a torque-curve with the shape of Ayers Rock,
power-band will still be proportional to Rpm, why I fail to see how fewer gears would increase performance?

[autogyro]

The FIA regulations will prevent Cosworth from achieving any unfair advantage.

[SZ]

With all due respect for mr Clifford, little matter if you have a torque-curve with the shape of Ayers Rock,
power-band will still be proportional to Rpm, why I fail to see how fewer gears would increase performance?

It doesn't - not intended to - but it does increase competitiveness.

But I'm not so sure it's an idea suited to cars, or at all marketable for manufacturer/constructers... which dominate MotoGP. Clifford was a little miffed in this instance - and FIM wasn't quite wrong - his 'own bike' bore an astonishing coincidence to Yamaha's own R1 in a number of areas, not least engine parts. This doth not a prototype make, and FIM quite rightly told him to park them until they did with new parts. They then contracted a horrible case of Horsepower Deficit.

What Peter was saying in effect was 'if you de-emphasise peak power, you end up with engines that are way back along the development curve and far closer to what I'm running, and then my --- is competitive'. What FIM was saying was 'this is a prototype racing series representing the pinnacle of competition... there's no gun to your head requiring you to build your own bike or your own engine to take part... and if you don't like it, you're welcome to go forth and multiply'.

That part of Clifford's argument is valid in F1 if you want to make it cheaper. De-emphasise the need for expensive development. We're halfway there with the engines... not nearly there with the expensive bits in F1.

It is rumored that the 2010 unit is as strong as the Mercedes one ( around 745 up to 750 hp) and at least 20 hp over the Renault unit .

It is also rumored that that's total horseshit. Oh wait, it was proven in trap speeds.

An engine that's as strong as the Mercedes and cheaper - there'd be a few more teams other than Williams signing up.

It is rumored that the 2010 unit is as strong as the Mercedes one ( around 745 up to 750 hp) and at least 20 hp over the Renault unit .

Or the significant difference in cost between the two, or the stronger likelihood of an ongoing supply year-to-year.

[ISLAMATRON]

It costs the same to lease a Merc lump as it does to lease a Cosworth... as per FOTA regs

[SZ]

It costs the same to lease a Merc lump as it does to lease a Cosworth... as per FOTA regs

If you believe FOTA regs (or a gentleman's handshake among thieves... which is more or less the same thing)... I've nothing more to say.

[autogyro]

Fota do not make the regulations, they only have agreements.
The FIA still run F1 not the oil companies.

[SZ]

Fota do not make the regulations, they only have agreements.
The FIA still run F1 not the oil companies.

Huh?

[WhiteBlue]

Fota do not make the regulations, they only have agreements.
The FIA still run F1 not the oil companies.

Huh?

FOTA is dominated by the "Top teams" which in turn are all controlled by sovereign wealth funds. That really is a euphemism for Arab oil money. Whether you look at Aabar or Mubadalla or Mumtalakat there is no way to deny that F1 investment is completely in the hand of the big oil producers. Aabar will even have two teams in FOTA with Manor as of 2010.