[Rules] Future Rule Changes

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by EffectiveSprinkles

Obviously, but once again I will ask how that solves anything? You did not answer my question but rather chose to answer a totally different question I did not even ask as an excuse to make a personal attack. Classy.
Anyway, the question stands. More manufacturers are wanted but at the same time their influence is also supposed to be diminished. It seems to me some people are completely missing the very strong relationship between manufacturers being in the sport and having influence in said sport.

If what you describe as 'the hope' happens, how many manufacturers will be left do you think?

Wow, that was a personal attack? Sensitive much are you? And when quoting one should actually use the entirety of a thought not just pick out the part you think makes you look smart. This is a personal attack and I am done conversing with someone who obviously thinks they are smarter than everyone else in the room and is actually just the more childish I think I am smart because I want to "challenge" your opinion. You have offered ZERO actual information here or in the sportscar forum and usually just appear to be that guy who in real life gets 1 of 2 things, his ass beaten and thrown out of every place he goes or ignored until he's the bitter old man venting at the wind. I am choosing the ignore option and taking a break from the entire site as I honestly have better things to do with my life than deal with a site full of mis-information and pompous blowhards that just make it no long enjoyable to read, and yes it is you and two others and frankly it's just not worth blocking, I'll just take my traffic elsewhere and sign out.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by EffectiveSprinkles

Anyway, the question stands. More manufacturers are wanted but at the same time their influence is also supposed to be diminished. It seems to me some people are completely missing the very strong relationship between manufacturers being in the sport and having influence in said sport.

If what you describe as 'the hope' happens, how many manufacturers will be left do you think?

The manufacturers are there for advertising and marketing purposes, they will stay as long as the sport has mass marketing appeal.
Adopting the manufacturers PU specifications is killing the sport financially and preventing other manufacturers from entering the sport due to the very high costs of developing pointless technology.

The FIA must make rules for the good of the sport, and if the sport remains attractive to spectators the manufacturers will stay.

[EffectiveSprinkles]

Originally Posted by wnut

The manufacturers are there for advertising and marketing purposes, they will stay as long as the sport has mass marketing appeal.

That plays a part, but is clearly not the entire picture. Have you maybe considered that the entire hybrid formula is also part of their advertising and marketing purpose? That the supposed technology transfer between the lab (F1) and road cars features in that? For example Mercedes made a huge PR splash when they reached over 50% thermal efficiency for their engine. If it was all just marketing and the engine technology in the back didn't matter why are they fighting so hard to keep it?

Adopting the manufacturers PU specifications is killing the sport financially and preventing other manufacturers from entering the sport due to the very high costs of developing pointless technology.

It's clearly not pointless, otherwise there would be no problem. And once again I will ask what is so good about getting even more manufacturers? Take also into consideration that without the current formula we would not even have the four manufacturers we have now, it would be Ferrari domination against half assed efforts from the likes of Cosworth.


Your post just raises a lot more questions than it answers I'm afraid.

[chillibowl]

Surely it's the technology they are marketing though so the technology does matter. Perhaps not to any of us but certainly it does on a corporate board and advertisig level.

Anyways, many ways to look at this but for me more manu involvement, regardless of the engine formula in effect, will hopefully lead to a greater diffusion of the technology and through manu competition lead to a lower price point for customer teams.

And/or more sponsorsrship dollars for said customer teams as well more money for driver salaries...as we have seen with Honda recently.

You may feel that this is not an answer to your question but that's life.

[Akrapovic]

I really don't understand the technology marketing aspect of it. Does anyone buy a Mercedes A-Class and think that it's in any way based on the F1 tech? I understand buying a product based on that company performing well in a sport (for example, buying under armour clothing when pro athletes use under armour equipment), but marketing the tech itself doesn't seem like it'd be much use?

Even back in the 90s, Renault made a V10 in the Williams and used to put F1 World Championship stickers on the road cars. That's fine. At no point did anyone think their Renault Laguna had F1 tech though.

[Mike Harte]

You are not looking at the overall picture.



The main board of Daimler Benz only gave the green light for the Mercedes F1 team to continue under the current rule set was because the team were able to predict that the technology behind the PU would demonstrate a considerable fuel saving over previous PUs. If they hadn't had the technology, it is highly likely that the team would no longer be running, and nor would their PUs be powering other teams.


And it does have relevance to their road going vehicles as a lot of the research prior to the new technology being introduced in F1 was being done by engineers/technicians within their road going divisions, and they were drafted in to the racing team when the new regulations were agreed.


In fact, the fuel saving that swung the directors' decision has actually been exceeded by the team.


And technology does have a bearing on other manufacturers view of F1. It must be remembered that the only reason that Renault re-signed to continue as a power plant provider was that the technology had relevance to their road going vehicles, which is why they insisted that the basic ICE unit had to be a smallish capacity engine with turbo assistance.


Even in it's most basic form, it's all part of the technology.

[Akrapovic]

I think that's a bit of a stretch, and even that is being generous. But that's how it's always been for F1 I guess.

Seems like the manufacturers have a lot of say, and if I'm honest, don't seem to bring that much to the sport other than insane costs and a lot of arguing about rules.

[Mike Harte]

What's the stretch?


If you go back to 2010/11 and look at what was being said by both Mercedes and Renault prior to the new PU regs being announced, you will find that what I wrote is factual.


For Renault, it had to be relatively small capacity ICE for them to stay, and for Merc, it was a prerequisite of the main board that the PU had to demonstrate a considerable fuel saving (something like 25%, I seem to remember) to show that the technology was "green" or they wouldn't fund any further involvement in F1 beyond the end of that period - which was eventually extended by a year because Renault weren't ready.

[Akrapovic]

I think the stretch is thinking engine tech really has that much effect on road car development beyond green marketing. They want small engines and fuel savings to prove they are green - I don't particularly believe the engine tech by Mecachrome makes it close to a Renault Kangoo.

I just think the link is tenuous and supported by marketing more than anything else. I also think this push from manufacturers to absolutely take on their engine tech is causing the current issues of cost, since following the route they have defined has locked us into an engine format where it's no longer possible to get a sensibly priced engine, and it's just as hard for a new manufacturer to enter. It has limited the potential options massively, whilst inflating the price for customers. That's...convenient.

[EffectiveSprinkles]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

Anyways, many ways to look at this but for me more manu involvement, regardless of the engine formula in effect, will hopefully lead to a greater diffusion of the technology and through manu competition lead to a lower price point for customer teams.

I just don't see how that follows from another. Maybe I'm dense , but I would like to understand the train of thought here. So far, the more manufacturers there are the less the above is true.

[EffectiveSprinkles]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

I think the stretch is thinking engine tech really has that much effect on road car development beyond green marketing. They want small engines and fuel savings to prove they are green - I don't particularly believe the engine tech by Mecachrome makes it close to a Renault Kangoo.

I think you got it there. Does it matter if it does or not? Like Mike Harte said, these arguments do weigh on boards and one would assume they know their subject matter. Furthermore, innovation is not always (I would say almost never) a planned consequence of a piece of technology. What I'm trying to say is manufacturers view F1 (and Toyota still views LMP1) as a testing ground for fundamental technology that may or may not eventually trickle down to the street.


You may not believe it ever does, but it's hard to prove either way.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by wnut

The manufacturers are there for advertising and marketing purposes, they will stay as long as the sport has mass marketing appeal.
Adopting the manufacturers PU specifications is killing the sport financially and preventing other manufacturers from entering the sport due to the very high costs of developing pointless technology.

The FIA must make rules for the good of the sport, and if the sport remains attractive to spectators the manufacturers will stay.

Marketing's a massive part of it. Take Ferrari, 15 WDCs and 16 WCCs, those achievements are a great way to market their cars.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Marketing's a massive part of it. Take Ferrari, 15 WDCs and 16 WCCs, those achievements are a great way to market their cars.

Yes, and they make the association between their brand and the sport.
Heads up, Aston Martin don't actually make an engine.

The manufacturers will be there for marketing purposes if we go back to V10 NA engines, messing about with the rules and threatening is just about maintaining their current monopoly and subsidizing their involvement off the other entrants to the detriment of the sport. How well backed is LMP1?

Manufacturers will kill any category they have too much (any) say in.

"Seems like the manufacturers have a lot of say, and if I'm honest, don't seem to bring that much to the sport other than insane costs and a lot of arguing about rules." Akroprovic

Well said Akro!

F1 became a dominant sport with very little manufacturer backing, they are just along for the ride, and trying to buy success, they need to be treated as such.

[VIVA GT]

I think it's more simple reasoning. I think that the manufacturers are saying: "We're involved with the high-tech world of Formula One (or any other type of motorsport) so our new Mini Metro could include some of that technology and high build standards." (I use this example as Leyland sponsored Williams many years ago).
Isn't it called "excellence by association" or something similar?

[EffectiveSprinkles]

Originally Posted by wnut

F1 became a dominant sport with very little manufacturer backing, they are just along for the ride, and trying to buy success, they need to be treated as such.

But what does that actually mean? I've tried to ask this many times now and still have no answer.

[loon]

As a counter point you could also say that the non manufacturer teams add very little to F1, at least the manufactures invest money into the sport by building and selling their PU's

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by loon

As a counter point you could also say that the non manufacturer teams add very little to F1, at least the manufactures invest money into the sport by building and selling their PU's

Not sure I see your point (not saying you're wrong, rather I may be missing it!). Non-manufacturer teams provide the backbone of the sport. The sport can and will survive without manufacturers (it has done in the past), however, it cannot survive without the non-manufacturer teams.

You say they bring money by building and selling PUs, but I don't believe that the money they bring is within the interest of the sport. The manufacturers have pushed for the development of the new PUs, which has driven costs sky high. Because of this, we're now in a situation where independent developers cannot possibly enter, thus limiting the engine choices to the manufacturer engines. They can then charge ridiculous prices for them because there are no other choices. They set the rules, which are enforcing extremely expensive products, which only they can make, and others have to buy. If this was any other product, it'd almost look mafia-like.

The flip side is, if you didn't have manufacturers building insane engines, you would have engines available. As soon as LMP1 was made more viable to privateers, Mecachrome, AER and Gibson all provided engines, and Judd has one that's available too. This is on top of the Nissan engine already running, and the Nissan GT3 engine which is prototype adaptable.

I'm going to pick a random F1 year where there were fewer manufacturers, and I've randomly picked 1995. So there was Renault involvement, but as an engine supplier only. There was also Mercedes and Peugeot as engine suppliers. Meanwhile, there was also engines from Yamaha, Hart, Mugen and a variety of Ford engines to choose from.

In 1995, there were more varieties of Ford engines you could put in your car than there are available at all this year. Does that alone not worry people?

[Peter Mallett]

Worries me. But whenever I say go back to proper engines I'm treated as old fashioned.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Worries me. But whenever I say go back to proper engines I'm treated as old fashioned.

I think think many (and I would put myself in this category) feel that the complexity of the power units has reached a point in which it is hard to enter the sport and be competitive. So the pendulum has swung pretty far in one direction. As much as I am "pro technology", I think it can go too far. Or a combination of the technology plus restrictive regulations (such as longevity requirements) makes it an untenable solution.

However, what does the term "proper engine" mean. Most of the time, when people post that here, they tend to describe technology that is decades old. So I think it would be wrong for the pendulum to swing fully to the opposite end and create what I tend to call "vintage racing" equipment.

I personally think that a combination of "slightly" simpler engines (maybe no MGU-H) and much relaxed longevity requirements would do wonders to the sport.

Speaking of MGU-H... What is unfortunate is that the plan for 2021 to drop the MGU-H is in a catch 22 scenario...

* Until the series commits to drop the MGU-H, nobody new will join.
* Until someone new joins, the series will not commit to drop the MGU-H

That is an over simplification as there are likely a number of reasons that are holding back other manufactures from joining the series. I personally think as the series is setup today that a new manufacture would be insane to join either as a supplier or as a direct team owner.

Richard

[Peter Mallett]

Only use horsepower not electric storage etc. Y3s decades old but it works and makes it easy for others to join in.

[Greem]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Only use horsepower not electric storage etc. Y3s decades old but it works and makes it easy for others to join in.

Or say "you can have X megajoules of energy at the start of the weekend" - whether precharged electrical storage or a set weight of known RON fuel.

And that's it.

Some designers would go for the long game, some for variable power output, some for regeneration, some for aero efficiency, some for outright power at the expense of economy.

That would unlock F1 to be a properly relevant series again.

[ASCII Man]

It would also unlock several bankruptcies as you're just replacing one hyper-expensive engine with another.

[Greem]

Originally Posted by ASCII Man

It would also unlock several bankruptcies as you're just replacing one hyper-expensive engine with another.

*many*, surely?

[ASCII Man]

That's even worse, but okay, I'll take it!

[Greem]

If some engineers and designers can follow the fuel limit ethos while still delivering 200mph+ cars, all with different drive trains, that don't look alike - what's not to like?

If it means some of the current crop of teams go to the wall, but get replaced with innovative teams with clever designers, then why not?

Right now we've basically got a spec series, without it being a spec series. If you see what I mean.