As I am sitting here thinking about the possible engine changes this weekend.
JPM, DC, Massa, Rubens, What if all the teams decided to change engines and thus everybody getting a 10 grid penalty, would it not wash it out? If all the teams agreed to change them, they could really get to tweaking those V8's with no penalty.
Just a thought. [/b]
Last year, the title was won by a car that followed the two race rule and did not do any unexpected engine changes, thus not suffering the ten position penalty. The car that came second, and may have won the title did have to do a few unexpected engine changes. I know many parts of this can be argued, but the bottom line is the winner didn't have engine changes penalize him.
Why would teams with perfect good engine switch their engine this weekend?
If the engine lasts 2 races, it shows that the engine is competitive and reliable! And I think that is a good thing (advertisement) for the ones who make the engines: Renault, Mercedes, BMW, Toyota, Honda, Ferrari.
Last edited by Principessa on 15 Mar 2006, 19:17, edited 2 times in total.
Principessa wrote:Why would teams with perfect good engine switch their engine this weekend?
If the engine lasts 2 races, it shows that the engine is competitive and reliable! And I think that is a good thing (advertisement) for the ones who make the engines: Renault, Cosworth, Mercedes....
No, I see your point and Daves point. Why would you want a 10 grid penalty if your engine is reliable? I agree with that thought 100%. Thats why it was just a thought that was not thought through.
If all the teams changed, Bernie would be on there case, also wouldn't the cost be higher to change a engine?
Simon: Nils? You can close in now. Nils?
John McClane: [on the guard's phone] Attention! Attention! Nils is dead! I repeat, Nils is dead, ----head. So's his pal, and those four guys from the East German All-Stars, your boys at the bank? They're gonna be a little late.
Simon: [on the phone] John... in the back of the truck you're driving, there's $13 billon dollars worth in gold bullion. I wonder would a deal be out of the question?
John McClane: [on the phone] Yeah, I got a deal for you. Come out from that rock you're hiding under, and I'll drive this truck up your ass.
I doubt the big teams will be worried from a cost point of view.
If I was the owner of a big team I would design my engine to be very powerfull but with no intention of it lasting 2 races. If you got pole, you would only have to start from 10th - and look what KR did from 22nd!!!!
djones wrote:If you got pole, you would only have to start from 10th - and look what KR did from 22nd!!!!
And I'd be thinking that if I do that I will have 9 nutters in front of me who can ruin my race and who I have to pass.............seems like a risky strategy
And if I was a major auto manufacturer, and I adopted the one engine per race strategy, I would be admitting to the world that I can't build engines as good as my competitors. It just takes one non win with this strategy to wind up with your competitors telling the world that they build better engines, and that the facts are there for all to see.
You may even win most of the races, even the titles. But you would give your competitors a lot of food for attacking your credibility and quality of machinery. And don't forget, those big manufacturers are in this game for prestige.
[/b]
