F1technical.net

wuzak wrote:

SteveRacer wrote:How fast are they going to allow this new engine to go? If it wins a race will they throttle it back somehow? Hell, if I had a deal with an engine supplier and this new engine shows enough pace to win a race why would anyone still work with a manufacturer? Why would a manufacturer try and compete with it if it is regulated to be faster or as fast?

This is the problem.

The only one who will win with this engine is Red Bull. None of the other potential users would have a hope of beating them.

And if it goes ahead, I see that the 4 manufacturers would withdraw.

Withdraw? I'm not sure they would. After all, they can still profit using their own engines as it's still R&D that can be used for the road cars they sell in their outer markets. So it's not a straight loss for them, even if they are not winning every single race.

But yes, the biggest flaw in this whole alternative engine deal goes back to the same fundamental problem even A and B spec engine pose. It creates a 2 tier championship. Either this alternative engine will have an advantage over the hybrids at which both will be in different classes, not being competitive with one another, or they will be too weak and it's the other way around. Best case is, they are similar, but either way - I already foresee lots of bickering when one wins over the other. And an even bigger mess in trying to create equality.

Then again, this engine was always about creating pressure. It's fun to discuss the technical challenge it in itself poses, but it's probably overkill to discuss it in a realistic manner of how the racing will end up like if these engines ever come to life. I seriously doubt it's going to go that far...

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.

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.

All this goes down to that Mr Eccelstone don't like that Mercedes is winning. But when Schumacher won with ferrari everything was ok.. . If Ferrari were in Mercedes position we would never been into this mess

toraabe wrote:All this goes down to that Mr Eccelstone don't like that Mercedes is winning. But when Schumacher won with ferrari everything was ok.. . If Ferrari were in Mercedes position we would never been into this mess

I think Bernie was never a fan of the hybrids, and wanted them gone. It's not about Mercedes.

WilliamsF1 wrote: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.

The too expensive part is the biggest BS IMO.

They won't save the extra $10-$15m by using the alternative engine. They will spend it on aero.

bauc wrote: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.

wuzak wrote:

bauc wrote: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.

What if the alternative engine users have to take a 10kg ballast during qually?

wuzak wrote:

SteveRacer wrote:How fast are they going to allow this new engine to go? If it wins a race will they throttle it back somehow? Hell, if I had a deal with an engine supplier and this new engine shows enough pace to win a race why would anyone still work with a manufacturer? Why would a manufacturer try and compete with it if it is regulated to be faster or as fast?

This is the problem.

The only one who will win with this engine is Red Bull. None of the other potential users would have a hope of beating them.

And if it goes ahead, I see that the 4 manufacturers would withdraw.

Control will be via the boost level.

Road car manufacturers may leave, but then they come and go from all top level series as it suits their boards of directors.

Ferrari won't leave, as it's primary reason for existence is racing. They manufacture road cars on the side to support its racing. But Ferrari won't let these alternative motors be more powerful than their motor.

Which means that the road car manufacturers that stay won't be able to sell their motors to other teams unless it's similar in price to this alternative motor. And ensuring motors are available to F1 teams at a lower price is the goal.

A smart racing series must plan on surviving when road car manufacturers leave its series, because that is what they always do.

Alternative engine ok
30 liter fuel tank max

NL_Fer wrote:What if the alternative engine users have to take a 10kg ballast during qually?

NL_Fer wrote:What if the alternative engine users have to take a 10kg ballast during qually?

it'll be a mess of ballast, fuel limits, boost limits etc. to makes them fast enough to not be ridicules but slow enough enough that they can't keep up with the expensive manufacturer engines

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."

If all cars were to have the same minimum weight as required for 2016 (702kg), then the hybrid powered cars will have a distinct weight advantage at the beginning of every race.

If FIA control the balance between the two specs of engines solely by the maximum boost pressure, it would take a fairly clever bit of computer modeling to keep it close. And the performance balance would change to some degree from track to track.

Even with the same minimum weight, a lighter engine will allow more shifting in balance, thus gaining an advantage at the end of the race and during qualify.

Just like BrawnGP , same weight, no kers, more free weight to shift around the chassis.

The 2016 tech regs require the weight, "on the front and rear wheels must not be less than 319kg and 376kg respectively at all times during the qualifying practice session." I'd be surprised if that were to change.

If both 2017 engines were required to have the same minimum car weight, and have the same weight balance requirements across the axles as per the 2016 regs, then the ballasting advantage of the lighter alternative engine would primarily be that it should be possible to slightly lower the CoG.