Engine equalization... the return

[veeten]

Looks like the teams & manufacturers want to re-evaluate a possible return of equalisation of the engines.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78678

Personally, I would like to see this based on output (Hp) rather than cylinder count, leaving the manufacturers and independent concerns free to design and build engines in varying degrees such as 4-& 6-cylinder turbo, V-8's, 10's or even 12's. It was done in the past, with little problem, and in today's present financial climate, it's a lot better take this route than to expect them to provide the whole car.

But that's just me... :)

[Robinho]

should give Cossie the chance to get somewhere near competitive, which from what we've heard so far wil be a relif to the new boys.

might be enough to keep Renault in the game too

[Knock-on]

What is the point of this?

Mercedes and Ferrari have the best engines so the FIA gives everyone a chance to play catchup but what if Ferrari and Mercedes increase their advantage.

Look for further equalizations until we get a spec engine :(

[Garry Walker]

Why should things be equal? This is hard competition, not the get-together of 1265 typical unemployed liberals with a degree in arts.

[ioan]

F1 is about to learn what Communism is about. :D

[wedge]

They should take off the 19K RPM rev limit

[DexDexter]

There are obviously bad sides to this engine freeze but on the bright side, the grid would never ever be as competitive as it is now if there was no engine freeze.

[ioan]

There are obviously bad sides to this engine freeze but on the bright side, the grid would never ever be as competitive as it is now if there was no engine freeze.

It's an artificial state that can't last naturally.

[Sonic]

Groan! *bangs head repeatedly on wall*

Boo hoo. My engine isn't as good as everyone else's! So instead of praising the Merc/Ferrari guys for a job well done we'll just unfreeze and let them catch up.

Personally I'm all for the unfreeze. But forever thank you very much!

[DexDexter]

Groan! *bangs head repeatedly on wall*

Boo hoo. My engine isn't as good as everyone else's! So instead of praising the Merc/Ferrari guys for a job well done we'll just unfreeze and let them catch up.

Personally I'm all for the unfreeze. But forever thank you very much!

What if Renault & Toyota pull out and we get rid of the freeze? There are not going to be nearly enough competitive engines for the teams. Cosworth will be left behind in an instant. I don't know, I kind of like this current situation compared to those -100 bhp Minardis back in the old days. From a technological perspective it's obviously a different matter. Do those average Joes care about that? Don't think so. They want close racing.

[Sleeper]

There are obviously bad sides to this engine freeze but on the bright side, the grid would never ever be as competitive as it is now if there was no engine freeze.
At most tracks the current closeness of the grid has little to do with the power of the engines. Just look at Red Bull, no streight line speed at Monza, and so nowhere, but will probably be the cars to beat at Suzuka.

[OutRun]

The engine freeze probably made it easier for Honda to abandon F1. There is no point in racing if your stuck with a dud engine for 'years'. Anything to make the sport more competitive is needed.

[Lennat]

How about an unfreeze but with a budget cap for engine development?

[Valve Bounce]

[quote="Lennat"]How about an unfreeze but with a budget cap for engine development?[/QUOTE

Sounds great, but impossible to control. Engines are developed behind closed doors, and just for the sake of argument there is a consultant who develops an engine somewhere located in Zuhai, and the information is then passed back to a certain manufacturer who then spends very little to alter his engine using the information provided by this consultant in Zuhai.

Now the Consultant in Zuhai is not paid anything for developing the engine, nada, zero.

BUT this Zuhai Consultant, whose patron is a local mayor has a football team which is suddenly blessed with a couple of Brazilian players who help them win many games and ....................................


I think you get the picture.

[schmenke]

F1 is currently struggling to accommodate competitiveness in a constructor's series.

Formula 1, being a constructor'sseries, is not about being competitive. It's about being innovative and constructing the best car to dominate the rest of the field.

Only a spec series will provide true competitiveness which is not, IMO, the direction that F1 should take.

Catch 22.

[DexDexter]

At most tracks the current closeness of the grid has little to do with the power of the engines. Just look at Red Bull, no streight line speed at Monza, and so nowhere, but will probably be the cars to beat at Suzuka.

It is part of it I'm sure. If there is little or now difference in horsepower it takes away one performance area where you can make a difference, one area where money and resources don't make a difference. That will definitely equal the teams. Now teams at the back of the grid have a winning engine, if we get rid of the freeze, they are going to have underpowered over-thirsty engines pretty soon.

[Saint Devote]

I think engine freezes are retarded and is the one item that ought to be freely developed along with the tyres - and completely reduce the aero part that mechanical grip becomes the order of the day.

I do HATE aerodynamics they have messed up f1 and made the driver less important.

Oh well what am I saying we may attract RACERS to f1 and they will ATTACK each other on the track and they COLLIDE with each other accidentally sometimes and then the FIA will interfere and the racing will be restricted........

[[sigh]]

[call_me_andrew]

Why should things be equal? This is hard competition, not the get-together of 1265 typical unemployed liberals with a degree in arts.

Competition becomes more challenging when everyone else is as good as you.

[DexDexter]

Why should things be equal? This is hard competition, not the get-together of 1265 typical unemployed liberals with a degree in arts.

Compare 1988 and 2009. When things are more equal, you get better racing. Technology is nice and exciting but boy it's boring to see (in the case of 1988) the same car win 15 out of 16 races.

[ioan]

I think engine freezes are retarded and is the one item that ought to be freely developed along with the tyres

And all this withing 40 millions?!


and completely reduce the aero part that mechanical grip becomes the order of the day.

Why not simply buy some karts?



I do HATE aerodynamics they have messed up f1 and made the driver less important.

They did so since the 70's.
More than half of the F1 championship's life has been contested with aerodynamics as a big part of the sport.

[ioan]

Competition becomes more challenging when everyone else is as good as you.

The problem is that obviously everyone else isn't as good so may they should simply take their toys home.

[ShiftingGears]

The best should win. This crap about engines is awful.

[call_me_andrew]

The problem is that obviously everyone else isn't as good so may they should simply take their toys home.

Large fields > Small fields

[Saint Devote]

And all this withing 40 millions?!

Why not simply buy some karts?

They did so since the 70's.
More than half of the F1 championship's life has been contested with aerodynamics as a big part of the sport.

I am part of the Gilles Villeneuve-Jacques Villeneuve school - I would like to see things change significantly but what is, is and there is no point getting bent out of shape over it.

[Saint Devote]

The best should win. This crap about engines is awful.

Of course it is - it is the same old story of sacrificing the strong for the sake of weak.

Trying to bring the best down to the level of the others is always a losing proposition and that is why people like Adrian Newey and Mario Illien have left and want to leave the sport based on the direction of the current regulations.

[DexDexter]

Of course it is - it is the same old story of sacrificing the strong for the sake of weak.

Trying to bring the best down to the level of the others is always a losing proposition and that is why people like Adrian Newey and Mario Illien have left and want to leave the sport based on the direction of the current regulations.

True, but again, F1 has to be entertaining. In the 21st century people have so many activities to choose from that F1 cannot afford to be predictable. Letting people develop their cars/engines without any limits will most likely lead to boredom, huge differences between cars and 1-2 cars that can win. Having said that, I think the people who write the regulations have a huge task, how to keep the engineers and public happy at the same time?

[ioan]

True, but again, F1 has to be entertaining. In the 21st century people have so many activities to choose from that F1 cannot afford to be predictable. Letting people develop their cars/engines without any limits will most likely lead to boredom, huge differences between cars and 1-2 cars that can win. Having said that, I think the people who write the regulations have a huge task, how to keep the engineers and public happy at the same time?

That's the problem F1 isn't a real competition anymore now it's entertainment, show. :\

[Malbec]

The problem is that obviously everyone else isn't as good so may they should simply take their toys home.

Its not about being good, its about the spirit of the regulations and how they're interpreted.

Either the regulations are about freezing development with the exception of improving reliability, or they're about highly restricted development in the pursuit of performance.

Both Renault and Mercedes are absolutely correct. Mercedes is free to squeeze every last drop out of the engine, Renault is right in arguing that the regulations are there to stop development unless you have an absolute dud on your hands. In this case it isn't correct to lambast Renault's point of view.

The only way to stop this is for a total freeze on development after some degree of equalisation, otherwise companies like Mercedes will exploit the regs to hunt for more power. Whether we like it or not the days of having free spending and development on engines are over.

[ioan]

The only way to stop this is for a total freeze on development after some degree of equalisation, otherwise companies like Mercedes will exploit the regs to hunt for more power. Whether we like it or not the days of having free spending and development on engines are over.

Who's to decide the degree of equalization and based on what?
And why is that some should benefit of equalization, which in fact means getting an artificial advantage over those who were smarter?

Why is that Mercedes and Ferrari were able to exploit the rules while other weren't? Maybe the others are lacking some intelligence? And why should the less intelligent and probably also lazier ones get the benefit of an equalization?

[Malbec]

Who's to decide the degree of equalization and based on what?
And why is that some should benefit of equalization, which in fact means getting an artificial advantage over those who were smarter?

Why is that Mercedes and Ferrari were able to exploit the rules while other weren't? Maybe the others are lacking some intelligence? And why should the less intelligent and probably also lazier ones get the benefit of an equalization?

You're missing the point here.

The regulations were imposed to cut engine development and cut costs. Several teams interpreted the rules and cut down their engine departments, only redesigning bits for reliability reasons as the regulations were clearly intended to do.

Merc and Ferrari carried on developing the bits they could do, against the spirit of the regulations but within the letter of the law.

Neither are right or wrong, neither are stupid or clever. None are lazy, these are teams and organisations, not people and your use of the word is inaccurate in that context.

Don't get me wrong, I think equalisation is a case of bolting the door once the horse has bolted. The regulations should be clarified and development freezes made much more stringent. Having not done that, the only option left for the FIA is to allow equalisation.

[SGWilko]

Following suggestions that there is a differential between the performance of engines used in Formula 1, the World Motor Sport Council has decided that should this be the case, and should the teams wish to eliminate this performance differential, they may be allowed to do so by reducing the performance of the more powerful engines. However, no engine upgrades will be allowed

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78776

My jaw has hit the floor.

So, what next. If a chassis has an advantage, are they going to hinder that as well.

F1 is getting sillier by the moment. :down:

[ArrowsFA1]

"It is always the danger of a freeze that you can freeze in a competitive advantage."
No **** Sherlock :laugh:

Engine freeze? Daft idea. Always was. Still is. Just part of Max's move towards F1 being a spec series. He'll have one team running all the cars next a la F2.

[gloomyDAY]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78776

My jaw has hit the floor.

So, what next. If a chassis has an advantage, are they going to hinder that as well.

F1 is getting sillier by the moment. :down: Wow!

What is this NASCAR? I remember Toyota had to de-tune their engines last year when Ford and Chevy couldn't match their power. Now they're going to do the same in Formula 1! I don't even understand the point of having different engines if they are all going to be the same spec.

[ioan]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78776

My jaw has hit the floor.

So, what next. If a chassis has an advantage, are they going to hinder that as well.

F1 is getting sillier by the moment. :down:

I told you that communism is coming to F1.

[ioan]

"It is always the danger of a freeze that you can freeze in a competitive advantage."
No **** Sherlock :laugh:

That was a good one! :rotflmao: :up:

[V12]

This is getting worse and worse. It's bad enough trying to achieve "equalisation" by allowing selective manufacturers to develop their engines to catch up or whatever, but pegging back the best engines because their rivals can't catch up, bless them, well words fail me.

Whatever happened to top level motorsport being a technical competition? Like, you know, for the last 100+ years.

What next? Should Liverpool, Man Utd, Arsenal and Chelsea start the Premier League on minus points for being too good, or made to play with 10 players? Or should Usain Bolt be made to run with lead in his shoes to make the 100 metres more "equal"?

Maybe "Joe Public" doesn't care about the technical ins and outs, but people who actually watch F1, do.

[ioan]

Maybe "Joe Public" doesn't care about the technical ins and outs, but people who actually watch F1, do.

We are way to insignificant.
Take a look to the F1 related message boards, like this one here for example, and you'll see that 90% of the people doesn't give a rat's a$s about technology, they are all about drivers, personalities, helmet designs and car liveries.

I don't know if there are 10 people in the F1 forum who are interested about the technical details of the F1 cars. And sadly we are talking about people who follow F1 closely. What should one expect from those who only turn their TV on every 2 weeks or even rarer to watch colored cars zipping by. :\

F1 is marketed as a show now and the technical aspects are kept under lid for exactly that reason, not to scare away the occasional viewer. Some people still believe that F1 stands for the pinnacle of automotive technology but truth is that Le Mans prototypes are way above, almost any modern supercar it's way ahead in technology used and there were and maybe still are times when DTM and ETCC cars were making use of better technology than f1 does now.

[V12]

Don't get me wrong drivers and personalities are important, I would say they are as important as the technical side. Possibly a little more so, but even if you say hypothetically that the "human" side makes up 60% of the equation, that's still a 40% shortfall in interestingness (for want of a better made-up word) when the technical side is completely emasculated. IMHO of course :)

And yes you need to find a balance which is hard, nobody wants to see the advent of robot cars where the driver is literally a passenger, and since like the A-bomb you can't uninvent aerodynamics, driver aids and so on.

But still, I think what all reasonable technically-minded F1 fans want is for the governing body to draw up technical rules saying what the teams can and can't do, however restrictive or unrestrictive that might be, and then let the designers and engineers go mad within that framework. But things like development freezes and common parts are a whole different kettle of fish to saying "the bottom of the car must be flat within a certain area", "the rear wing cannot be x number of millimetres wide" or "systems that take the control of the throttle away from the driver are not permitted".

It is at this point that supporters of such measures, will trot out the "cost cutting" excuse (which, despite the financial crisis only being approx two years old, is becoming more and more worn-thin and tiresome than Bono and Bob Geldof's rants).

But motor racing has survived worse times before. In fact history shows that in the past, in times of a bleak economy, or even worse (like say, the aftermath of a World War or two), motor racing got back on its feet by adopting an open, Formula Libre style approach, competitors bringing anything they could get their hands on and having some fun (which any sport is supposed to be, professional or not!), the exact opposite of the ever increasing standardisation and equalisation we have today.

[ioan]

Don't get me wrong drivers and personalities are important, I would say they are as important as the technical side. Possibly a little more so, but even if you say hypothetically that the "human" side makes up 60% of the equation, that's still a 40% shortfall in interestingness (for want of a better made-up word) when the technical side is completely emasculated. IMHO of course :)

As far as I'm concerned I watched F1 mainly (like 85-90%) for the technology involved.
Nowadays we get to see plenty of pictures of the internals of the cars, things that we couldn't even dream about 20 years ago and were still scarce 10 years ago. However in the same time the technical side started being restricted and standardized to the point where IMO it lost 50% of it's appeal.
I'm still as interested as I ever was but I get a better kick from looking to the internals of a LeMans prototype nowadays than with a F1 car.

I really couldn't care less about who wins the championship or if there are more than 3 overtaking moves per race as long as I know that the cars that compete are against state of art automotive technology representatives not some dumbed down restricted, standardized and frozen mixes of aluminum and carbon fiber.

[DexDexter]

As far as I'm concerned I watched F1 mainly (like 85-90%) for the technology involved.
Nowadays we get to see plenty of pictures of the internals of the cars, things that we couldn't even dream about 20 years ago and were still scarce 10 years ago. However in the same time the technical side started being restricted and standardized to the point where IMO it lost 50% of it's appeal.
I'm still as interested as I ever was but I get a better kick from looking to the internals of a LeMans prototype nowadays than with a F1 car.

I really couldn't care less about who wins the championship or if there are more than 3 overtaking moves per race as long as I know that the cars that compete are against state of art automotive technology representatives not some dumbed down restricted, standardized and frozen mixes of aluminum and carbon fiber.

I used to think that way also but this standard F1 has somehow won me over, I just love what Force India did in the last two races, that would not have happened with free regulations. I've said here that I support the engine freeze but maybe that should be lifted if the regulations guaranteed somewhat competitive engines for the whole field. Those minus 100bhp Ford ED V8 days should never return.

[ioan]

I've said here that I support the engine freeze but maybe that should be lifted if the regulations guaranteed somewhat competitive engines for the whole field.

It would be enough for the FIA to have regulations that allow every manufacturer to only use and sell the same engine evolution for the factory team and for their customers.
The FIA could check engines at it's discretion after every race to make sure that the manufacturers respect the regulation.

Anyway the cost reduction plans and semi-standardization regulations have won over the teams too.
The big manufacturers are happy that they can use their marketing tool for a lot less money while they have about the same chance to win as everyone else.
The smaller teams can finally have a profit from what was until recently a money sucker black hole.
The fans who want close racing get their wishes granted.
Those who want to watch technologically advanced cars better watch LMP cars.

The technology competition turned into a show in the end.

[veeten]

We are way to insignificant.
Take a look to the F1 related message boards, like this one here for example, and you'll see that 90% of the people doesn't give a rat's a$s about technology, they are all about drivers, personalities, helmet designs and car liveries.

I don't know if there are 10 people in the F1 forum who are interested about the technical details of the F1 cars. And sadly we are talking about people who follow F1 closely. What should one expect from those who only turn their TV on every 2 weeks or even rarer to watch colored cars zipping by. :\

F1 is marketed as a show now and the technical aspects are kept under lid for exactly that reason, not to scare away the occasional viewer. Some people still believe that F1 stands for the pinnacle of automotive technology but truth is that Le Mans prototypes are way above, almost any modern supercar it's way ahead in technology used and there were and maybe still are times when DTM and ETCC cars were making use of better technology than f1 does now.

"The sleeper has awakened..." to borrow a phrase from a famous Sci-Fi novel.

The substitution of gimmicks over 'real' technology, and the standardization of chassis, components, and engines has led to where cars have become either 'cookie-cutter' or 'look-alike', in both purpose and performance.

The reason as to why the 'pinnacle of racing' ideology has persisted in its present guise is more due to marketing and PR, rather than actual individual performance of either men or machines. All due to Bernie & Max's efforts to make the sport more like what, unfortunately, goes on in NASCAR, where it's the personality-driven aspects that sell more tickets, souveniers, and broadcast time.

While 'purists' may feel like the sport has lost its "soul", the 'powers-that-be' do not care about such things, as long as the money keeps pouring in.

[DexDexter]

"The sleeper has awakened..."
The substitution of gimmicks over 'real' technology, and the standardization of chassis, components, and engines has led to where cars have become either 'cookie-cutter' or 'look-alike', in both purpose and performance.


It's going in that direction but it's not there yet, thank God. The teams do design their cars and clever engineering can still make a difference of which Brawn is a good example. (Please let's not talk about the double-diffuser stuff).

[jens]

Funny how FIA claims each year, how due to freeze engines should be equal, yet every year someone is above others. Last year Renault was complaining, hence they were given an opportunity to make an upgrade. Now Mercedes-Benz is beating others. Who will be the best in 2010? The dominance of Cosworth after MB/Ferrari have been severely restricted to "level the field"? :D

[V12]

I used to think that way also but this standard F1 has somehow won me over, I just love what Force India did in the last two races, that would not have happened with free regulations. I've said here that I support the engine freeze but maybe that should be lifted if the regulations guaranteed somewhat competitive engines for the whole field. Those minus 100bhp Ford ED V8 days should never return.

I see your point but it felt so much better seeing the likes of Jordan do it both in their first season and again in the late 90s, despite the field being more technically and financially unrestricted. What's happened lately in comparison is like going with a hooker - the end result is the same, but it just doesn't feel as real (not that I'd know btw! ;) )

And those -100 Ford EDs, if that was the best teams could get hold of for the money they had available, then so be it - better than them not being there at all!

There's already a series that specialises in juggling performance and pegging everything back to try and make things as equal as possible - it's called NASCAR and they do it very well, it's not my cup of tea by a long stretch but it's there and it exists for people who are into that sort of thing, so why does F1 have to follow suit, even though we are continually told that F1 is a business first and a sport third or fourth or fifth or something, whatever happened to finding a gap in the marketplace, i.e. doing something different?