F1technical.net

Just read on Autosport that Torro Rosso want to keep using the V10 until the start of the 2008 season. I don't see what they are achieving by this apart from bad publicity. Unless Mateschitz in under the impression that there is no such thing as bad publicity I don't know. Red Bull will have definetely recieved more column inches across the world by doing this but apart from that it seems a bit silly to me.
Imagine that Torro Rosso discovered an amazing aerodynamic advantage in the wind tunnel that gave them a second a lap around any circuit over their rivals. The other teams will simply protest no matter what the reasoning for any advantage is put forward. They will claim it is all down to the V10.

i like them using it they are beating the FIA at there own game

They have a competive engine for next to nothing cost wise id rather see al of the teams run restricted 10s then the splosion prone v8s

and for the love of god get rid the two engien per race rule

Mateschitz knows there is no such thing as bad publicity.

I don't see how this decision is negative or causing bad publicity. They're a team and it is within the rules for them to run the engine. Good on them. It shouldn't be bad publicity for them just because a couple of people have decided that they think STR shouldn't use the engine.

It may be slightly against the spirit, but all the FIA have to do is restrict the engine sufficiently that the V10 becomes impractical.

There must be something we don't know, like a written contract or a minimum restriction clause.

zac510 wrote: I don't see how this decision is negative or causing bad publicity. They're a team and it is within the rules for them to run the engine. Good on them. It shouldn't be bad publicity for them just because a couple of people have decided that they think STR shouldn't use the engine.

Quite a few people, some fans and teams alike aren't happy about it. Just surprised me to see, that's all.

Although their pace at the Aussie GP is worrying, and I can see plainly that the engine's to blame in that case (higher torque on a twisty track = definate advantage), the fact seems to be that there's very little anyone can do about it.
I can't imagine the FIA doing anything to upset one of his 'allies' without more than just a solitary flash of speed as evidence (though, it'd probably be restricted to roughly the same power as my mate's scooter if McLaren or BMW did it).

There is a sentence in the rules that says the FIA reserves the right to change the restriction on the V10 at any time, so there is something they can do about it, but as you said, there is no solid ground to increase the restriction yet. If Speed's point had stood then perhaps they would already be thinking about increasing the restriction.

There pace in Australian was the consequence of the cool tempuratures and other teams struggling to get grip on the track when Luzzi passed Schumacher as a example. I read somewhere else that STR will probably powered by Cosworth after 2007. Mateschitz says when he bought the team (2005) that minardi had a contract until 2007 for there V-10's. I think the only teams that are making a big stink are midland and Super Aguri which are always going to be struggling and hence the complaints.

the fact seems to be that there's very little anyone can do about it.

Yeh, I phrased that quite poorly, I meant that there's little the other teams can do atm by complaining.

I can't imagine the FIA doing anything to upset one of his 'allies'

I think you can guess who I replaced with 'FIA'

The V10 is at such a disadvantage now compared to the V8's and development has stopped on it too. If somehow they got an extra second from the windtunnel, no one in their right mind would believe it has ANYTHING to do with the engine.

There pace in Australian was the consequence of the cool tempuratures and other teams struggling to get grip on the track

...maybe

The V10 is at such a disadvantage now compared to the V8's

But even if the overtake was before the yellow flag was lifted, it's difficult to imagine what's basically an RB1 being faster than an RB2, especially if the engine's 'disadvantaged'.
I think it's a simple fact that a V10 has more torque up to it's rev limit than a V8, and this is a benefit on a track with lots of accelerating out of low speed corners involved.
However, I do see your point that most other Michelin teams with V8s were faster, so perhaps it was just Bridgestones on cool tyres.

While the V10 will be lacking in top end power, the bulletproof reliability should allow STR to steal a couple of points via attrition.

However, what puzzles me is the assumption by rival teams that a restricted V10 must be uncompetitive. The rule for V10 is on the books, with provisions for action to further restrict them, but why would the FIA proactivley endorse a further competitve imbalance? STR has a valid engine contract for another year, and despite Red Bull's wealth, why should they incur additonal expenses for an admitted "B" team?

Nothing more than sour grapes on the part of Midland, who are squandering a resource with the Toyota V8 and Super Aguri, who despite an admirable fighting spirit, are moving chicanes while running a 4 year old chassis.

The problem, I think Toro Rosso will always have, is that the V10r engine is simply not a V8. It doesn't have the same characteristics, the maximum power output may be similar, but it will never behave fully as a V8 does.

Whilst I could never see Super Aguri toppling Toro Rosso under under viable circumstances, and I suspect they're just complaining in the unlikely hope that it will benefit them if STR are made less competative, I can see Midland's point. How do you judge the competativeness of the STR? I would probably complain in their position as well - if just to try and get ahead of them.

People can argue about performance alll they want, but STR will always be lumbered - while the V10r is present - with the fact that anyone behind them will cry 'foul play', and they can never truly satisfy them with any restrictions on the engine.
To be honest, I would just sign up for a V8 at the next opportunity if I were in charge of STR, who cares if Cosworth give priority to Williams? I would happily get one of those engines under any circumstances.

If they have to change the engine the costs would be higher for the team hence why they are no rush to change there engines. I think they will wait until the RB3 is out of comission and use the RB3 as there template for there 2008 racer, as I forsee that RB3 will be influenced by Newey and hence somewhat competitive, but that is just my opinion.

If STR does use the V10 again next year 3 things will happen:
The FIA will re-evaluate their equivalency formula and up the power on the restricted V10
The bottom half of the field will complain (as the did this year)
The bottom half of the field will stop complaining 3 months in (as they ar doing now)
One thing i'd like to add is that these V8's may be heavier ( i heard merciless max was at it again on the engine weights) but the development on the V8 will continue meaning the teams will have benefits of making the engine more compact and thus beneficial in terms of their centre of mass design targets.

In short STR are going to have to design aroung this lump in the back of their car whilct the other teams can work with it.