F1 Engine Rules - RIDICULOUS!!

Aerkuld · Aerkuld's Garage

Has anyone else seen this...

http://www.speedtv.com/articles/auto/formulaone/41206/

QUOTE:
"The FIA’s World Motor Sport Council has announced a decision to freeze engine development in Formula 1 for another 10 years, beginning next season. Development had already been forbidden since late last year.

"There will be a total freeze on engine development for a period of 10 years, starting from 2008," the WMSC’s statement read. "A change can be made after five years but only with the unanimous agreement of all stakeholders and following a further two-year notice period. Total freeze means that there will be no exceptions for development of certain parts of the engine, as is the case under the current regulations."

The decision came as a surprise as the introduction of a new technical package more environmentally friendly was expected for 2010, after the manufacturers involved in F1 submitted a proposal last week.
"

That's insane. I see no reason to do this at all. What are all the engine manufacturers going to do? Sit on their arses for 10 years until the next development is allowed?
The whole governing body of F1 is totally whacked. The sooner F1 gets people in charge who know what they're talking about the better. But that's just my opinion!

Jeff Higgins · 10-25-2007, 04:58 AM

No more than open-wheeled NASCAR at this point. FIA mandated engine management systems, transaxles, brakes; spec tires... now a freeze on engine development. If we want a "spec" open wheel series, we already have CART and IRL. I can see the day coming where F1 collapses under the weight of its own rules.

onewhippedpuppy · 10-25-2007, 04:59 AM

??? Euro Nascar? The biggest reason I like F1 is their high level of technical development. F1 cars are the fastest and most developed race cars on earth, shame to see that go away.

sammyg2 · 10-25-2007, 06:31 AM

I heard that F1 was going to require all engines to be 360 cu. in. V8s with pushrods and a holly 4 bbl carb. Oh wait, that's nascar.
It's getting harder to tell them apart every year.

frogger · 10-25-2007, 06:33 AM

Jims5543 · 10-25-2007, 06:33 AM

That is very sad news, I can only advise we all e-mail the FIA and let them know we are not happy as fans.

I just searched their site and do not see any e-mail addy's.

legion · 10-25-2007, 06:39 AM

Frogger, do you have a page-sized version of that picture?

Porsche-O-Phile · Porsche-O-Phile's Garage

Why doesn't FIA just cut through the crap and say "for the next 10 years, we will only allow Ferrari to compete. All others must park. Oh, and ticket prices will still be $600 each. Pay up".

frogger · 10-25-2007, 06:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by legion

Frogger, do you have a page-sized version of that picture?

No, but I seem to remember seeing it available on t-shirts somewhere on the Internet.

legion · 10-25-2007, 06:50 AM

I'd like to see F1 go clear the other direction:

"You get X gallons of fuel for each race. Not a drop more. Race what you brought."

scottmandue · 10-25-2007, 07:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by onewhippedpuppy

The biggest reason I like F1 is their high level of technical development. F1 cars are the fastest and most developed race cars on earth, shame to see that go away.

Looks like I picked a bad time to become a F1 fan

I guess they are striving to become euro-CART... BORING!

Jims5543 · 10-25-2007, 07:03 AM

Looking back this past year and last year. Just looking at fastest trap speeds at the end of straights, indicating the cars power and straight line speed as an indicator of who has a powerful engine. Maybe not scientific. I realize downforce plays a lot in this as well but just for yucks......

This past year, both Ferrari and McLaren have very fast cars, they both were tops on the trap speeds many times showing they have very powerful engines.

I also remember Renault had a very fast engine 2 years ago.

Who else seems to have the speed, I remember a couple of other car topping these trap speeds?

I am against the engine freeze 100% but to say this is going to give 1 team (Ferrari) an advantage is not fair. McLaren seems to have the more powerful engine last year constantly topping the speed charts. Renault is not shabby either, neither is BMW.

Honda and Toyota probably have great engines they just have really bad chassis setups. Plus Ferrari is sending engines to 2 other teams next year.

I think removing the TC is a step in the right direction, but when you look at the bigger picture you realize it is dummying down the car more from a technical view.

How do you promote passing without removing the technology? Remove the aero? Again, taking away from developing the car technically.

I really do not know what to do but I believe this one ECU and frozen engines is not the correct steps.

motion · 10-25-2007, 07:05 AM

Guys, I don't think this means the teams can't keep developing their engines. I think it means that the general spec is frozen; no more changes to induction, fuel-type, displacement, configurations, etc. The teams will always be tweaking what they have for more reliability, horsepower and efficiency.

scottmandue · 10-25-2007, 07:10 AM

Motion,
I hope you are right, I would really like to see Honda/Toyota/BMW get a shot at winning a few races.

frogger · 10-25-2007, 07:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Cesiro

How do you promote passing without removing the technology? Remove the aero? Again, taking away from developing the car technically.

I really do not know what to do but I believe this one ECU and frozen engines is not the correct steps.

Maybe the tracks suck.

Dumbing down F1 is great for the small teams without money. I wish F1 could attract more major manufacturers. I suspect that Max's incessant tinkering and rigging the game keeps potential new entries away.

BGCarrera32 · 10-25-2007, 07:28 AM

That and the $50 million dollar buy in price just to get a spot on the list...

Porsche-O-Phile · Porsche-O-Phile's Garage

It seems to me racing bodies suffer from a few of the same problems as politicians: (1) unlimited power, (2) enormous ego, (3) the constant need to satisfy #2 by passing more and more and more and more rules and regulations in order to justify their own existence.

Want better racing? Get rid of as many rules as possible. My ideal racing rulebook would look something like this:

1. Vehicles must be powered solely by drive wheels which remain in constant contact with the ground at all times.

2. Vehicles must have the following safety equipment for drivers/occupants:
-
-
- (list of required stuff)
-
-

3. No deliberate running off or damaging other vehicles.

4. Race starts at 10:00. Have fun.

In other words, build what you want, crew it how you want, use whatever power plant(s) you want, etc. Whatever tires, whatever fuel, etc. Then you'd see real innovation.

Jims5543 · 10-25-2007, 07:33 AM

My first reaction was to agree with the loss of TC and then to remove self shifting trannies and let them stir a shifter so we see races like the "good ole days".

But then I look at the results from the "good ole days" and 1/2 the field retires from every race, then the other 1/2 on track 1-3 cars end up lapping the field 2-4 times in a race.

Today its a feat to lap up to P6 or so and 80-90% of the cars stay in the race.

There were some amazing races this year, most of them rain races and honestly Brazil was pretty exciting, yes P1-P3 remained the same for the entire race pretty much but the mid pack was dicing it up nicely.

If they remove aero, TC, paddle shifters, etc... then it seems they are just going backwards technology wise.

I agree with legion give them X amount of fuel and tell them to build a car to win. Leave it wide open.

Motion - I understand what your saying I understood they can still develop the engine to be more reliable, but I can see the frustration of the fans that want to see the teams come out with advancements in the engines. They can only tweek a little and it would be cool to see one come out with something that turns the sport on its ear again. Limiting revs to 19K is kind of a step backwards if would be neat to see what they could squeeze out of these 2.4 liter engines.

frogger · 10-25-2007, 07:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Cesiro

If they remove aero, TC, paddle shifters, etc... then it seems they are just going backwards technology wise.

And these technologies are applicable to road cars.

GDSOB · GDSOB's Garage

Quote:

Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile

It seems to me racing bodies suffer from a few of the same problems as politicians: (1) unlimited power, (2) enormous ego, (3) the constant need to satisfy #2 by passing more and more and more and more rules and regulations in order to justify their own existence.

Want better racing? Get rid of as many rules as possible. My ideal racing rulebook would look something like this:

1. Vehicles must be powered solely by drive wheels which remain in constant contact with the ground at all times.

2. Vehicles must have the following safety equipment for drivers/occupants:
-
-
- (list of required stuff)
-
-

3. No deliberate running off or damaging other vehicles.

4. Race starts at 10:00. Have fun.

In other words, build what you want, crew it how you want, use whatever power plant(s) you want, etc. Whatever tires, whatever fuel, etc. Then you'd see real innovation.

That was Can-Am. The dominant 917 killed the series.