Alternative engine configuration

[RicME85]

It's a shame this independent engine isnt just a cheaper PU built from the existing rules.
I get it wouldnt happen because its the R&D costs that inflate the price of the current PUs but it would be nice.
If any team uses this alternative engine its just going to end up more complicated for casual viewers, Bernie already complains F1 is too complicated for the couch potatoes, its ridiculous he wants to throw more confusion into the mix.

[wuzak]

Turbocharges must be able to cope with the maximum boost pressure imposed by the FIA.

The term "maximum boost" leads me to speculate that teams might be allowed to run less than the maximum boost to save fuel weight at the beginning of a race. Otherwise it could have been written as, "...cope with the boost pressure imposed by the FIA."

It has to be a maximum boost as boost will vary with engine load/operating condition.

[MrNoo]

I think it is a good idea, we need to see more "racing" and if this helps this out then it has to be a good thing. I also suspect it's a way of attracting other manufacturers, who after seeing how Honda have got on this season would not be willing to invest the sums required to produce a hybrid engine. I know that these proposed new engines are not to be OE but instead produced by a 3rd party but I am sure a certain amount of investment funds could find there way from OE company to a 3rd party engine developer.
Its a shame they couldn't just open the formula up, give a max displacement, max fuel (differing for normal atmo to turbo) and let them get on with it. That way we'd see and hear a plethora of different engines, make it much more interesting and with luck see some close racing, which at the moment we dont have currently. Hoards (including myself) see more overtaking in 1 lap of Moto GP than a whole race of F1. That interests me so I watch Moto GP and the occasional F1 race (if I dont fall asleep!)

[dren]

I really like this idea for the alternative engine option, and if they can make it work then it would be a lot of fun on the track. Something tells me that FIA would have not opened a tender for this new engine formula if they haven't had someone who whispered in their ears that is willing to give it a go, so lets wait and see.

On the other hand, the down side of this is that it will centrally create a chaos around the grid, and F1 will become ever more confusing for the casual fans around the world, which potentially could be the final nail in the coffin for F1.

It will be extremely hard to balance the two.

No it wont

It depends on who kisses BE ass more

Red Bull or Ferrari

Fundamentally the world championship is flawed at the moment as it requires you to be manufacturer/works team to win the championship. This is not in the spirit of competition and needs to be rectified.

It does not require you to be a manufacturer, it requires money. Changing the formula for non-manufacturer teams so they can have a better advantage with less money is absolutely against the spirit of competition.

The only fix is a cost cap, but that will never happen the way the decisions are made in F1.

[dren]

There is no change in formula, this is just alternative engine for whom a hybrid engine from car maker is either not available or too expensive.

It absolutely is a change in formula for non-manufacturers.

[Phil]

It does not require you to be a manufacturer, it requires money.

Apparently not only, as the wide variation in performance of the current engines show. So money clearly isn't the only issue. Resources, know-how, experience, facilities, time and yes money is all part of what is required. One manufacturer seems to have all of it (and done the best job at it), while the rest seems to fall short in certain areas while 7 remaining teams lack what is required to become manufacturers, most of all, an outside market and economy to even want to or for it to make sense for them.

Why do you think there is even talk about an alternative engine? Because it's leverage against the manufacturers and because the customer teams are at the mercy of their supplier - either in regards to what these engines cost and what performance they are getting for that money (with little power to change it, as they are bound by contract and the necessity of having an engine). The alternative engine is a means to stop the sport from monopolizing, either by a means of pressure to force the manufacturers to comply or a means to offer something that is competitive at a fraction of the cost from an unbiased supplier who isn't competing for the same points.

As a matter of fact, in regards to "money" being the issue; You don't see a problem when the sport effectively moves from being a 300-600 million per season to be a WDC contender to one suddenly requiring to being in the billion range (including facilities, know-how and expertise that have been built up over decades and outside market considerations of a car manufacturer who can use the outside markets as a means to invest and succeed inside F1)? Because that's exactly what has happened and thus narrowed the gap between who can be competitive and who can't.

[dren]

Money is the issue and the fix is a cost cap; I stated that in my post.

As has been stated here already, teams are beginning to verge towards similar performing PUs. Ferrari states they are now on par with Mercedes. Honda should make a rather large leap over the winter. I'm expecting Renault to make gains, too. I don't think there will be much between the PUs come 2017.

The manufacturers are the ones spending the big money. They are reaping the benefits. This Formula was made for them.

[langwadt]

Money is the issue and the fix is a cost cap; I stated that in my post.

As has been stated here already, teams are beginning to verge towards similar performing PUs. Ferrari states they are now on par with Mercedes. Honda should make a rather large leap over the winter. I'm expecting Renault to make gains, too. I don't think there will be much between the PUs come 2017.

The manufacturers are the ones spending the big money. They are reaping the benefits. This Formula was made for them.

sure a cost cap would fix a lot of things, but it is impossible to implement. It would be like trying to get multi national companies to pay tax.

[dren]

I've gone back and forth on if they could manage a cost cap.

The only team, Sauber, that I thought might be interested in the alternate PU is against the idea. It seems like it isn't because of their relationship with Ferrari, either.

[wuzak]

I think it is a good idea, we need to see more "racing" and if this helps this out then it has to be a good thing. I also suspect it's a way of attracting other manufacturers, who after seeing how Honda have got on this season would not be willing to invest the sums required to produce a hybrid engine. I know that these proposed new engines are not to be OE but instead produced by a 3rd party but I am sure a certain amount of investment funds could find there way from OE company to a 3rd party engine developer.
Its a shame they couldn't just open the formula up, give a max displacement, max fuel (differing for normal atmo to turbo) and let them get on with it. That way we'd see and hear a plethora of different engines, make it much more interesting and with luck see some close racing, which at the moment we dont have currently. Hoards (including myself) see more overtaking in 1 lap of Moto GP than a whole race of F1. That interests me so I watch Moto GP and the occasional F1 race (if I dont fall asleep!)

Doubtful it will have any affect on racing.
It may be Mercedes continuing to dominate or Red Bull, if they adopt the alternate engine and it proves a winner.

There is no way the alternate engine would attract more manufacturers. It is designed to stop manufacturers.

[wuzak]

It does not require you to be a manufacturer, it requires money.

Apparently not only, as the wide variation in performance of the current engines show. So money clearly isn't the only issue. Resources, know-how, experience, facilities, time and yes money is all part of what is required. One manufacturer seems to have all of it (and done the best job at it), while the rest seems to fall short in certain areas while 7 remaining teams lack what is required to become manufacturers, most of all, an outside market and economy to even want to or for it to make sense for them.

Why do you think there is even talk about an alternative engine? Because it's leverage against the manufacturers and because the customer teams are at the mercy of their supplier - either in regards to what these engines cost and what performance they are getting for that money (with little power to change it, as they are bound by contract and the necessity of having an engine). The alternative engine is a means to stop the sport from monopolizing, either by a means of pressure to force the manufacturers to comply or a means to offer something that is competitive at a fraction of the cost from an unbiased supplier who isn't competing for the same points.

As a matter of fact, in regards to "money" being the issue; You don't see a problem when the sport effectively moves from being a 300-600 million per season to be a WDC contender to one suddenly requiring to being in the billion range (including facilities, know-how and expertise that have been built up over decades and outside market considerations of a car manufacturer who can use the outside markets as a means to invest and succeed inside F1)? Because that's exactly what has happened and thus narrowed the gap between who can be competitive and who can't.

There is no monopoly in F1 at the moment.

If the alternate engine is more successful than the hybrid PUs then it may move to a monopoly.

If cost with the PU is the issue, then FOM can part with a little extra money to compensate the smaller teams. It would cost them $50-$60m per year to offset the PU cost to what the FIA is asking. I wouldn't compensate Red Bull....they have enough already, and are certainly not struggling.

On Red Bull, Horner said Honda were offering PUs for 30MEUR and suggested that was ridiculous. I wouldn't think so, when he is spending ~400MEUR on his chassis and aero.

[NL_Fer]

It's a shame this independent engine isnt just a cheaper PU built from the existing rules.
I get it wouldnt happen because its the R&D costs that inflate the price of the current PUs but it would be nice.
If any team uses this alternative engine its just going to end up more complicated for casual viewers, Bernie already complains F1 is too complicated for the couch potatoes, its ridiculous he wants to throw more confusion into the mix.

A cheaper edition of the hybrid v6, would perform much less. For example replacing the expensive hybrid turbocharger, with a conventional twin turbo setup, will introduce massive turbolag.

Also a crippled kers would still weight the same, but be less effective.

So to minimize the offset of this new engine, it has to have more displacement, so less turbopressure and lag is introduced. It needs to be hybridless, so it will be much lighter. This to compensate for the increased consumption.

But if they would allow a 2.5 no fuel or rpm restricted engine, it would already be as powerfull as the former 2.4 V8 and we throw in some (lowboost) turbo's for even more power and allot more torque.

The turbo would make a lower rpm possible and make it more efficient than the old v8, which needed 140kg of fuel. What if this alternative can run a full race on 120kg of fuel, thats only a 20kg disadvantage over the hybrids. And what if the lower weight (no ERS) would gain a balance advantage.

Sounds interresting.

[Cold Fussion]

On Red Bull, Horner said Honda were offering PUs for 30MEUR and suggested that was ridiculous. I wouldn't think so, when he is spending ~400MEUR on his chassis and aero.

Horner is also being disingenuous when he talks about the engine costs because he presents it as they're paying 30 million for 5 PU's and that's it. He doesn't mention the mountain of support that comes along with the engines.

[wuzak]

It's a shame this independent engine isnt just a cheaper PU built from the existing rules.
I get it wouldnt happen because its the R&D costs that inflate the price of the current PUs but it would be nice.
If any team uses this alternative engine its just going to end up more complicated for casual viewers, Bernie already complains F1 is too complicated for the couch potatoes, its ridiculous he wants to throw more confusion into the mix.

A cheaper edition of the hybrid v6, would perform much less. For example replacing the expensive hybrid turbocharger, with a conventional twin turbo setup, will introduce massive turbolag.

Also a crippled kers would still weight the same, but be less effective.

So to minimize the offset of this new engine, it has to have more displacement, so less turbopressure and lag is introduced. It needs to be hybridless, so it will be much lighter. This to compensate for the increased consumption.

But if they would allow a 2.5 no fuel or rpm restricted engine, it would already be as powerfull as the former 2.4 V8 and we throw in some (lowboost) turbo's for even more power and allot more torque.

The turbo would make a lower rpm possible and make it more efficient than the old v8, which needed 140kg of fuel. What if this alternative can run a full race on 120kg of fuel, thats only a 20kg disadvantage over the hybrids. And what if the lower weight (no ERS) would gain a balance advantage.

Sounds interresting.

I doubt that the alternate engine would be able to do a race on 120kg of fuel. Well, the ones with the highest consumption, such as Melbourne.

They are talking of no restrictions for them. I think that should also apply to the Hybrids.

[Phil]

There is no monopoly in F1 at the moment.

If the alternate engine is more successful than the hybrid PUs then it may move to a monopoly.

No it isn't. Anyone is free to buy the alternative engine, even the factory-teams too if they deem it performs better and is cheaper - thus it is the exact opposite. The difference is, the alternative engine would be supplied by an independent entity who is not competing as a team by itself, so there's no reason to decline a customer or control what or if they supply them.

According to rumours, Torro-Rosso (if it proves correct) will be racing with the 2015 Ferrari PU. That in itself shows the predicament of what is currently happening and why the alternative engine is even being discussed for either leverage or as a viable alternative.