Cosworth Engine an UNFAIR advantage?

[WhiteBlue]

I cannot give you much detail but I can translate and give you the source:

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 49523.html

Doch die Motorenhersteller der Formel 1 haben sich geeinigt, dass die Motoren, die weiter als zwei Prozent vom jeweiligen Bestwert entfernt sind, noch einmal angeglichen werden dürfen. Das gilt nicht nur für die Leistung. Wer einen zu durstigen Motor hat, soll in dieser Disziplin nachrüsten dürfen.

The engine manufacturers of Formula1 agreed that engines which deviate by more than two percent from the respective best in class will be allowed to be equalized. This is not only applicable to the power output. Those who have too thirsty an engine, will be allowed to do upgrades.

This was published 2. November 2009 which was directly after the race. To me that sounds like Fota made an internal deal which they will be able to push through at the FIA.

I'm not at all delighted that FOTA can do this and I would have liked to see more competition for fuel efficiency and not simply lets all do what the best man did. I also doubt that it will be easy to action this decision and verify the results. On the other hand if such political horse dealing is being done one should at least be aware of ot.

[Fil]

sounds like they're implementing stop-gap measures, waiting for new engine regs before development starts up again.

F1 has more than likely decided to cut its losses with the current ancient, bandaid, engine formula..

[xpensive]

Wouldn't it be easier for all to implement both Rpm as well as Torque limit, together with a max fuel load and that's it?

[WhiteBlue]

Some calculations in the same article showed that the Renault engine (which is the least thirsty) would be on par with the Merc in 2010. Simply by carrying less fuel and therefore weight. So my impression is that Ferrari had all their FOTA acolyts brown nose them once again. Their engine is neither supposed to be fuel efficient nor extremely power full. I could be wrong but it would fit the picture.

Re: regulated power curve, I have been an advocate of that strategy for long. But you must not equalize fuel efficiency. That is supposed to become the performance discriminator if we want to make progress.

[xpensive]

That is of course my position as well WB, fuel-efficiency should give the competitive edge.

[Astro1]

Some calculations in the same article showed that the Renault engine (which is the least thirsty) would be on par with the Merc in 2010. Simply by carrying less fuel and therefore weight. So my impression is that Ferrari had all their FOTA acolyts brown nose them once again. Their engine is neither supposed to be fuel efficient nor extremely power full. I could be wrong but it would fit the picture.

Of course it could be the opposite and Ferrari expecting Cosworth to be a brick thought it would be good to have the ability to let the little guys catch up? Unlikely but possible?

In reality, I suspect that Ferrari knowing that their engine is not the most economical may have sold the idea, by suggesting that Cosworth teams should have the ability to catch up to the big boys while really thinking about themsleves.

But I doubt the the others bowed down to the mighty Ferrari in coming up with the 2% rule. More likely Ferrari was able to sell the idea because of the unknown performance level of the coming Cosworth.

[ISLAMATRON]

If Haug truely has agreed to this he has clearly taken over Howett's title as biggest F1 idiot.

And like Wb said earlier, it sounds Like FOTA made an internal deal to "equalize" engines but watch how the people on this board will allways praise FOTA and blame the FIA. FOTA has destroyed F1 more during its short existance than Mad Max has done during his entire presidency.

It is completrely assinine to equalize engines on the basis of both power & fuel economy after sabotaging KERS, now the only performance differentiator is aero(and tire usuage). If anyone is making F1 into a spec series it is FOTA. God Damn Luca, what type of MK ULTRA mind control does he hold over the other teams? We need Ron Dennis back to help stop all this madness.

[PlatinumZealot]

I read it as, engine manufacturers are only allowed to upgrade if their performance is less than 98%. However, I am sure that some of the engine makers are giving it their best and they still can not come close to 98% of the best in each class. It is like the design has reached it's limit. You can only reduce friction so much, you can only lighten parts so much, you can only make so much power etc.. What may be the major difference between the engines is the internal geometry (shapes) and whatever secret technologies there are. So some engines can only make so much power until the internal shapes of the parts and secret technologies are like the leading engine.. and maybe no amount of upgrading can get you there. (eg. within 98%)So we always have different performance between the engines even if an engine maker is allowed to upgrade. That is what I think.

[Scotracer]

After an engine freeze, anything is justified. Pity.

[ISLAMATRON]

The FIA said no upgrades allowed, only detuning, why Merc would agree to detuning is beyond me, unless they feel they can not get a hold of their fuel consumption and are making a trade off between power & fuel, and at the same time restricting Renault's fuel consumption advatage.

As it stands right now the Merc has the best driveablity & maybe the best cooling but maybe the worst fuel milage.

The Ferrari has the most peak power but poor cooling & fuel milage.

And the Renault has not as good driveability or peak power but the best fuel milage.

Reliabilty seems to be dependent on installation, but the MErc looked bullet proof in 2009, while RBR/Newey did something to the Renault lump that it didnot like.

The cossie is a total unknown, especially in the reliabilty department, going from a 1 race milage engine to a 3 to 4 race milage engine will be quite a stretch, especially in 1 leap.

[xpensive]

As it stands right now the Merc has the best driveablity & maybe the best cooling but maybe the worst fuel milage.

The Ferrari has the most peak power but poor cooling & fuel milage.

And the Renault has not as good driveability or peak power but the best fuel milage.

With all due respect, how can you possibly know all this with such certainty?

[ISLAMATRON]

I have no certainty, none at all... only, rumor, heresay and innuendo, from the designs of the cars, things that the drivers say, and fuel milage from very loose calculations made from the FIA pre race weights and pit stop laps.

If you have better more correct & concrete intel I welcome any corrections to my assumptions.

I'm sorry to have not stated this in my previous post.

[xpensive]

I most certainly don't, which is the reason why I'm so awestruck when other people convey the impression that they do.

[PlatinumZealot]

I guess the Renault is the most fuel efficient.. (which might make it the most powerful if they decide to add more fuel). It was also reliable in the hands of Renault team.

[Richard]

Astro, how could a new engine supplier enter F1 without designing a new engine??