Purnell: Engine freeze good for F1

[ShiftingGears]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/64117




Who, in this forum, thinks that an engine freeze will help the sport in any way whatsoever? As Ross Brawn said - it's a competitive business, and teams will spend all the money they have to get even the slightest advantage. I find this kind of needless restriction in the name of cost cutting just infuriating.

[Hawkmoon]

Purnell obviously hasn't been paying any attention to what the fans want. Not surprising really. Nobody in any position of authority in the F1 community listens to the fans. Why should Purnell be any different?

Too bad if your engine sucks at the beginning of the freeze. You can look forward to a decade of mediocrity. You might as well quit because I doubt a wonderfull little tree-hugging-hippy KERS device is going to turn your engine into a winner.

[Roamy]

well if they listened to the fans we would have v-10's and slicks.
Freeze that and we are good to go

[gloomyDAY]

I don't understand how restricting F1 somehow makes it better. Engineers/designers should have the ability to assess which engine is essential. V8? Sure. V10? Great! V6 turbo? Even better.

There are going to be a few teams in 2008 who have trouble with their engines and can do NOTHING about the problem. Doesn't that seem unreasonable? If you don't get it right the first time, you're going to have to wait an entire decade.

Ridiculous!

[aryan]

well if they listened to the fans we would have v-10's and slicks.
Freeze that and we are good to go

Give us a 5 litre V12 with 1,000 bhp and I'll agree to the freeze!

[SGWilko]

There are going to be a few teams in 2008 who have trouble with their engines and can do NOTHING about the problem. Doesn't that seem unreasonable? If you don't get it right the first time, you're going to have to wait an entire decade.

Ridiculous!

I disagree with the 10 year freeze wholeheartedly, but I am not sure what you say here is true. Are the engines in '08 going to be radically different from the ultra reliable iterations that were running in '07? Especially as development is currently restricted as it is.

So I cannot really forsee any big issue with motors next season.

But, yes, if you do cock it up at the start of the freeze, then you will have to live it, or will reliability development be permitted???

[passmeatissue]

There is a conspiracy theory ;) , saying there is something else that Max wants...

then the teams can have their engines back.

[ioan]

They are trying to level the field on the engine side, believing that this will help competition.
The 19000 rpm limitation did already show a positive effect by getting the Mc... to fight with Ferrari this season.
Otherwise it would have been a boring season won by Ferrari while FA and LH would have taken the 10 spot grid penalty in turns.
This also saved a lot of money for Mercedes! :p :

They do care less about the sporting side of it, what's important is the show and leveling the field as much as possible is improving the show. That's all.

[Malbec]

They are trying to level the field on the engine side, believing that this will help competition.
The 19000 rpm limitation did already show a positive effect by getting the Mc... to fight with Ferrari this season.
Otherwise it would have been a boring season won by Ferrari while FA and LH would have taken the 10 spot grid penalty in turns.
This also saved a lot of money for Mercedes! :p :

They do care less about the sporting side of it, what's important is the show and leveling the field as much as possible is improving the show. That's all.

Its not about the sporting side at all, its about controlling the power of the manufacturers within the sport by theoretically making it cheaper for independent engine makers to enter the sport by making the regs more stable and development less costly. The only problem is that it isn't working.

I'm also sure that Purnell's opinions are not influenced in any way whatsoever by the fact that he is now employed by the FIA......

[Sleeper]

Purnell has never realised that we like to see the veriety in the cars and engines as well in the driver talent. Apparently, earlier in the year he was talking to some of the journolists from autosport and was shocked to find that they were very much against the idea of all the teams running standard chassis. Says a lot about him I think.

[wmcot]

I'm also sure that Purnell's opinions are not influenced in any way whatsoever by the fact that he is now employed by the FIA......

Maybe we shouldn't be so hard on Purnell - after all, didn't he do wonders for Jaguar??? ;)

[millencolin]

I'm also sure that Purnell's opinions are not influenced in any way whatsoever by the fact that he is now employed by the FIA......

as much as i respect Purnell, you stole the words right out of my mouth. He is an FIA employee now, i have to take everything he says regarding regulations with a grain of salt.

but he did do wonders for that shamble of a team we did call Jaguar.

[passmeatissue]

There was a time, not so long ago, that rule changes could only be made with the agreement of the teams, except on urgent safety grounds. Somehow I missed the transition to martial law. I have a vague memory of a piece about this in (probably) grandprix.com but I can't find it now.

Can anyone shed any light? I thought the Concorde Agreement had been rolled over pretty much unchanged.

[SGWilko]

There was a time, not so long ago, that rule changes could only be made with the agreement of the teams, except on urgent safety grounds. Somehow I missed the transition to martial law. I have a vague memory of a piece about this in (probably) grandprix.com but I can't find it now.

Can anyone shed any light? I thought the Concorde Agreement had been rolled over pretty much unchanged.

This started (probably) when the GPWC/GPMA was being formed, and the FIA decided that they could change rules and regs under the very thinly guised veil of 'sporting regs'.

Now that the breakaway is no more, the FIA have conveniently forgotten to go back to playing by the rules. I bet Max votes Labour, probably donates via Bernie!!!!!!!

Sorry, politics is bad........

[wmcot]

There was a time, not so long ago, that rule changes could only be made with the agreement of the teams, except on urgent safety grounds. Somehow I missed the transition to martial law. I have a vague memory of a piece about this in (probably) grandprix.com but I can't find it now.

Can anyone shed any light? I thought the Concorde Agreement had been rolled over pretty much unchanged.

That was before the ultimate rise to power by "Benito Ecclestone" which changed the government of the sport to a dictatorship.

[passmeatissue]

That was before the ultimate rise to power by "Benito Ecclestone" which changed the government of the sport to a dictatorship.

Yes, originally Bernie represented the teams, didn't he, against the baddie Ballestre. Formule One Constructors Association.

How times change!

Now it's Formula One Management and he's in charge of exploiting them, while his buddy Max controls them.

A bit surprised the teams are so meekly bending over for Max, though.

[SGWilko]

A bit surprised the teams are so meekly bending over for Max, though.

Do they realistically have a choice?

[Malbec]

There was a time, not so long ago, that rule changes could only be made with the agreement of the teams, except on urgent safety grounds. Somehow I missed the transition to martial law. I have a vague memory of a piece about this in (probably) grandprix.com but I can't find it now.

Can anyone shed any light? I thought the Concorde Agreement had been rolled over pretty much unchanged.

I think what you're talking about is all in the Concorde Agreement and the FIA is taking advantage of the fact that it is lapsing to introduce all kinds of changes without the teams being able to oppose them.

I remember Spyker being able to change their name to Force India without all the teams having to agree which is odd given how STR and SAF1 would only accept that in exchange for a change in stance over customer chassis.

[passmeatissue]

I think what you're talking about is all in the Concorde Agreement and the FIA is taking advantage of the fact that it is lapsing to introduce all kinds of changes without the teams being able to oppose them.

I remember Spyker being able to change their name to Force India without all the teams having to agree which is odd given how STR and SAF1 would only accept that in exchange for a change in stance over customer chassis.

That's right, the FI name was just "approved" by the FIA wasn't it.

Maybe there's saga coming about this, only 4 weeks till the Concorde Agreement expires, what is going on behind the scenes?

[passmeatissue]

Do they realistically have a choice?

Well, Toyota, Mercedes etc., some of the most powerful organisations on the planet, compared with them Max' little empire is a straw hut on an atoll.

And from some points of view, FoM and the FIA are completely dependent on the teams signing something, otherwise the billion-dollar loans are not going to get repaid. They are seriously exposed.

And at the moment there is an active Concorde Agreement, as Dylan H says not being referred to at all, it seems.

I don't think that it will make much difference in the racing action as all it will do is help teams cut costs.

[SparkyKate]

The thing i don't get about the engine freeze is that yes it makes it more interesting at the top end where their engines are pretty much equal anyway, but what about those at the back of the field? How are they ever supposed to get to the same standard as the likes of Ferrari and McMerc if they have to use the same engine that wasnt good enough a couple of years before? It doesnt save money because teams start looking at other ways to increase performance and the cars at the back stay at the back, oh but its ok because McMerc and Ferrari can continue to fight at the front closer then ever?

Do any of the rules in F1 actually work in the real world and where can i get a job that pays me so well and i get to sit on my ass n make absolutely no sense all day??

[samehere]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/64117




Who, in this forum, thinks that an engine freeze will help the sport in any way whatsoever? As Ross Brawn said - it's a competitive business, and teams will spend all the money they have to get even the slightest advantage. I find this kind of needless restriction in the name of cost cutting just infuriating.

they want to cut costs...but they have done so many restrictions so far and none of them really helped...I think the best think would be to freeze the whole F1 circus for 2-3 years :-) max would safe billions of dollars (that what he wants) ...or they could start the next season to play F1 2008 on a PS3 ...the costs for mechanics would be null...for fuel null..for engine development...nearly null (they would have to pay a developper to develop a better software for their car in the game :-) ) and the emmisions would be null again..it would be perfect...everybody would be satisfyied:Greenpeace - no emmisionsFIA and MAx - cost cuts :-)Spectators could watch the season on their PC instead of watching TV :-) and safe replays and print screens :-)

[SGWilko]

they want to cut costs...

The only way to achieve that, is to put a budget cap on what can be spent in each year. To police this, the teams should deposit this budget (earning interest at std rate) with the FIA, and this can be withdrawn as the team sees fit throughout the year.

When the money runs out, then development of the car ends.

Simple, isn't it?

[wmcot]

The only way to achieve that, is to put a budget cap on what can be spent in each year. To police this, the teams should deposit this budget (earning interest at std rate) with the FIA, and this can be withdrawn as the team sees fit throughout the year.

When the money runs out, then development of the car ends.

Simple, isn't it?

No, the Ferrari bashers would claim that Ferrari was being paid a higher interest rate than everyone else! :)

[SGWilko]

No, the Ferrari bashers would claim that Ferrari was being paid a higher interest rate than everyone else! :)

No, fear not. In their attepmts to distance themselves from the monicker of Ferrari ally, the FIA will actually be CHARGING Ferrari to look after their money....... ;)