Max's letter to the teams on the engine tender.

[f1manoz]

Let's all go time travelling to 1975 and see how it was gone then.

Revert to 2010.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Exactly right.

So, it's not a standard engine, but rather a spec engine.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

So, it's not a standard engine, but rather a spec engine.

Standard-spec,Tamata-Tomato.

[Adam43]

Max and his blummin' transparent letters. Has he thought of being good rather than transparent?

Better F1 dies than this rubbish. It seems this man isn't up to the task of achieving the aim allowing competition and reducing costs. He is chosing the weak path.

[Stefvh]

For the engines, just ban pneumatic valve system. revs will drop.

[Mekola]

Originally Posted by AdamAshmore

Better F1 dies than this rubbish. It seems this man isn't up to the task of achieving the aim allowing competition and reducing costs. He is chosing the weak path.

And if it is an oportunity to choose, which one is the right path???

[Adam43]

As long as it is transparent it is OK.

Putting the human aspect of jobs aside. It is better it dies. Although you can argue, correctly, that if you remove the competition aspect of F1 then it is dead anyway.

It is saying that the BRM V16, the Ferrari V12, the Cossie, Renault saying "hmm what about a turbo", the "I know we can get a V10 to work", the fire engine Climax engine, are worthless the idea and principles are abandoned. Stop trying to be better, just be uniform and transparent.

Pah, F1 is dead. Max can't hack it, the only way he can think of saving F1 is by destroying it.

[Jimmy Magnusson]

Originally Posted by AdamAshmore

As long as it is transparent it is OK.

Putting the human aspect of jobs aside. It is better it dies. Although you can argue, correctly, that if you remove the competition aspect of F1 then it is dead anyway.

It is saying that the BRM V16, the Ferrari V12, the Cossie, Renault saying "hmm what about a turbo", the "I know we can get a V10 to work", the fire engine Climax engine, are worthless the idea and principles are abandoned. Stop trying to be better, just be uniform and transparent.

Pah, F1 is dead. Max can't hack it, the only way he can think of saving F1 is by destroying it.

A man of my own sentiments. Amen to that!

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Magnusson

A man of my own sentiments. Amen to that!

Well yes...but we are racing cars here,not sending men to Mars.

We seem to have come to a bit of a crossroads and at a time when the cost of making and developing one specific brake duct for one specific track could have put two cars through a whole season not too many years ago.

[wapomumalo]

Bernie´s Standard Engine Ultimatum could not have been publicly disclosed in any better momment...

This guy isn´t opportunistic...at all.

Said that, it´s not the worse of MadMax´s ideas. And even Cossie´s engines would be seen again in F1 after those years...if somebody wants their products over a Ferrari, Mercedes or Renault manufactureed equal spec engine...

Well...who cares.

The choices Max had offered are just ridiculous:

-If a Manufactureer chooses to keep the development on the current 2.4 V8 engine: same costs, not competitive against spec 4.0 V8.

-If a Manufactureer chooses both to build or buy the Cossie 4.0 old V8, no research will be made, and not transfer of technology through road cars.

The only end to this proposal is to manufacture your own 4.0 Spec V8 as the power output will be at least equal to current 2.4 engines, and you´ll have a big increase in the amount of torque as a bigger engine anticipates.

The two other main factors to take into account will be weight and dimensions-integration on the package.

No big increase in weight is much anticipated, but just a higher center of gravity. Bigger size is obvious and its integration won´t be a big difficultie.

In advance the 4.0 litre V8 Formula seems to be the right choice in terms of performance...

BUT, is this what the Future of F1 is all about???

The New Deadly IRL or Died ChampCar?

F1 was dead alongtime...I knew something worse could happen.

I´ll keep my eyes on Endurance...the only place where it will lie the so called "pinnacle of motorsports"...

[Datsun]

F1 = DEAD to me.

It's been a long time coming, but those two arse-clowns have finally put the last nails in the coffin.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by wapomumalo

-If a Manufactureer chooses both to build or buy the Cossie 4.0 old V8, no research will be made, and not transfer of technology through road cars.

There's very little if any transfer anyway.Most road car development actually comes from F1s somewhat poorer relations.

Originally Posted by wapomumalo

I´ll keep my eyes on Endurance...

You'll have to look very hard next season.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Datsun

F1 = DEAD to me.

It's been a long time coming, but those two arse-clowns have finally put the last nails in the coffin.

What do you suggest they do...in the nicest possible way of course.

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by Datsun

F1 = DEAD to me.

It's been a long time coming, but those two arse-clowns have finally put the last nails in the coffin.

And your suggestions for sorting it out are?

[wapomumalo]

Originally Posted by Marbot

There's very little if any transfer anyway.Most road car development actually comes from F1s somewhat poorer relations.




You'll have to look very hard next season.

All electronics of your car (I don`t know yours but mine has lots) from the ECU to powertrain management, paddle shift, tires, etc, have the commonality of be a direct transfer from Motorports research and namely from F1 development.

That´s not in doubt mate.


Next season will be two great battles at Sebring and Mans, The Acura Monopoly of ALMS and Peugeot´s at LMES...

But hey, there new examples of pinnacle of motorsports like the R15 or the new LMP1 Acura for next year.

Anyway...I´ll see you at Algarve´s LMES Night race...

PD: Making fun of F1 status is something forbidden here?..Since when?...we can laught at Max..but not at F1 itself?..Poor sense of humor by Mods..

[FPV GTHO]

Originally Posted by wapomumalo

-If a Manufactureer chooses to keep the development on the current 2.4 V8 engine: same costs, not competitive against spec 4.0 V8.

-If a Manufactureer chooses both to build or buy the Cossie 4.0 old V8, no research will be made, and not transfer of technology through road cars.

The only end to this proposal is to manufacture your own 4.0 Spec V8 as the power output will be at least equal to current 2.4 engines, and you´ll have a big increase in the amount of torque as a bigger engine anticipates.

.....


In advance the 4.0 litre V8 Formula seems to be the right choice in terms of performance...

Where is it said the Cossie will be a 4L engine? Max's letter states it will be a "current spec" engine, which would surely confirm its going to be based off the 2.4L V8 last raced by Williams in 2009. The 2011 low cost engine formula is then rumoured to be 1.8L turbo engines.

[wapomumalo]

Originally Posted by FPV GTHO

Where is it said the Cossie will be a 4L engine? Max's letter states it will be a "current spec" engine, which would surely confirm its going to be based off the 2.4L V8 last raced by Williams in 2009. The 2011 low cost engine formula is then rumoured to be 1.8L turbo engines.

Yep...I read the letter on another forum and it was said 4...were it must be 2,4 litres...

But I do not understand this:

The FIA revealed on Friday that they are in exclusive negotiations with Cosworth, along with gearbox specialists Xtrac and Ricardo Transmissions (XR), to supply a complete low-cost power train that will be made available to all teams. The engine will be based on the current V10 specification, while the gearbox will be an all-new, state-of-the-art unit.

What's up with the V10?

Another Cossie 3.0 litres V10 engine with air restrictor ala Toro Rosso??

That engine can last a whole season...if air restricted to 16.000 rpm...but won't be competitive against current V8's...unless they let it breathe to 18.000 rpm's-800HP...It will last the mandated 4 races anyway.

Pure speculation...but i hope V10's are back if F1 wants to take me again...

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by nycuk

I think so - at least it looks like that could be the ultimate scenario.

Losing the manufacturers at some point was always inevitable - they were only ever going to stay in F1 as long as it suited their needs. They are not racers, they are businesses, and F1 is nothing more than a marketing strategy. So who will survive? The independants like Williams are probably in the best position ultimately, provided they have the funding. In the late '60's it wasn't unheard of to see grids of 13 or 14 cars; this situation may recur.

I don't believe losing the manufacturers will necessarily make F1 less relevant, and I think the sport was glamorous before the manufacturers came in and will continue to be once they have gone. The technical aspect, although appealing, isn't the reason most people watch F1 - it's the human aspect that attracts people, and that will remain.



So, a second era of the 'garagistes' may be imminent. A shame in many ways, but I'd rather have a Formula 1 grid of customer chassis' and engines than no Formula 1 grid at all.

I agree.

In fact the popularity of F1 was built under the time of the garagistes not under the rule of the manufacturers.
FOCA came to fruition in the early 80's in the wing car era the DFV alongside the Matra V12 and the Ferrari flat 12.

The manufacturer era as it is now began in the late 80's but has only really really taken hold during the last six-seven years.

I actually think this could be the beginning of an era of really good competition.
The current climate will force a rethink of the entire way the sport is structured and financed and if the right solutions are adopted we could see F1 benefit from all of this in a way none of us would have predicted 12 months, or even 6 months, ago.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

And your suggestions for sorting it out are?

To do nothing, actually. If the current credit crunch will indeed result in a depression as some economists predict, no 'cost cutting' measure will make manufactures to stay in Formula 1. In fact, cost cutting is an illusion in Formula 1.

The only thing the FIA should do is to allow the customer chassis and introduce rules to make Formula 1 more road relevent.

[Devilsadvocate]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

To do nothing, actually. If the current credit crunch will indeed result in a depression as some economists predict, no 'cost cutting' measure will make manufactures to stay in Formula 1. In fact, cost cutting is an illusion in Formula 1.

The only thing the FIA should do is to allow the customer chassis and introduce rules to make Formula 1 more road relevent.

In my humble opinion, the only way you could do that in reality is to go totally retro and ban wings front and rear. How many road cars do you know that have them? I don't mean boyracer spoilers or the flimsey efforts on a Mtsi Evo or Scooby, I'm talking a proper F1 front and rear wing.

I recall Patrick Head in a documentary saying Formula One no longer has much to do with road car technology, in fact he said is was more in tune with aeroplane technology.

Personally I agree with a previous comment and am happy to see any changes to keep the sport alive. Some I would perhaps like to be temporary, I don't want to see F1 turn into a spec formula, we have enough of those already.

As much as I and just about everybody dislikes Max, he spoke a lot of truth yesterday, F1 teams should be spending £30m per annum max, not £300m.

No idea what planet Bernie was on though, did anyone else hear him saying "F1 is being run by technicians who should be at home on their Playstations"???? What sort of comment is that to make in the current situation? Bernie should wake up, smell the roses and change the habit of a lifetime and get some PR advice.

It gets harder and harder to be otimistic about the future of F1, despite the last two fantastic seasons, and a crop of young talented drivers.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by wapomumalo

All electronics of your car (I don`t know yours but mine has lots) from the ECU to powertrain management, paddle shift, tires, etc, have the commonality of be a direct transfer from Motorports research and namely from F1 development.

That´s not in doubt mate.

Mine has lots too,far too much really,and especially if you ask any BMW,Mercedes owner,but it keeps the dealers happy.

The "paddle shifts"-Work really well in an F1 environment,has anyone actually managed to get one to work perfectly on a road car yet! And an expensive unnecessary option too!

ECU's,tyres TC,ABS,etc etc were all being developed in the lesser formulas.ABS was standard on lots of road cars before it ever saw the light of day in F1.And if you think that Ferrari were the first to put paddle shifts on a car,then think again.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by Devilsadvocate

In my humble opinion, the only way you could do that in reality is to go totally retro and ban wings front and rear. How many road cars do you know that have them? I don't mean boyracer spoilers or the flimsey efforts on a Mtsi Evo or Scooby, I'm talking a proper F1 front and rear wing.

Formula 1 aerodynamics have indeed no relevance for road cars, because Formula 1 cars open-wheel. Even without wings and diffusers the aerodynamics would be still unrelevant.

Formula 1 could be of major relevance on the engines. For the next decades the automobile industry will be focused on the development of clean and fuel efficient engines. Motorsports in general and LMP and Formula 1 in particular can and should be the place for prototype technologies. Formula 1 could also, although limited, be a place for the development of fuel efficient, quiet and long lasting tyres.

Sadly, the rules don't allow any of these developments. The regulations reduces Formula 1 to a marketing tool only. Formula 1 can and should do better than that!

[duke_toaster]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

Formula 1 aerodynamics have indeed no relevance for road cars, because Formula 1 cars open-wheel. Even without wings and diffusers the aerodynamics would be still unrelevant.

Surely that means that standard aerodynamics would be a good thing for cost and "the show" reasons, which is a concept that in other threads you didn't like? If, say, all the bodywork in front of the front axle and behind the rear axle was standard as well as the 2009 rules for rest of the car there would be less need for wind tunnels.

Formula 1 could be of major relevance on the engines. For the next decades the automobile industry will be focused on the development of clean and fuel efficient engines. Motorsports in general and LMP and Formula 1 in particular can and should be the place for prototype technologies.

Agreed, depending on implementation. Any engine formula should create a fuel economy war not a power war.

Formula 1 could also, although limited, be a place for the development of fuel efficient, quiet and long lasting tyres.

I also smell lack of road relevancy. Road cars cannot have slicks and have fundamentally different demands. Also, there would be a reduction in mechanical grip which could slow the cars a lot.

Sadly, the rules don't allow any of these developments. The regulations reduces Formula 1 to a marketing tool only. Formula 1 can and should do better than that!

F1 should be a marketing tool, but it should allow R and D development and technology showcasing. But the time to start that is NOT during a recession. I like the idea of teams either using the Cossie unit or their own frozen one with parity adjustments, however it should have a sunset clause of the end of the current economic crisis. When we're out of that, some form of blue sky engineering (no rules on cylinders, aspiration or capacity) with road relevancy (power limit rather than fuel limit, manufacture cost of engine limit) and provisions for a supply of cheap engines to privateer teams (IndyCar style price cap) is what we need.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Mine has lots too,far too much really,and especially if you ask any BMW,Mercedes owner,but it keeps the dealers happy.

The "paddle shifts"-Work really well in an F1 environment,has anyone actually managed to get one to work perfectly on a road car yet! And an expensive unnecessary option too!

ECU's,tyres TC,ABS,etc etc were all being developed in the lesser formulas.ABS was standard on lots of road cars before it ever saw the light of day in F1.And if you think that Ferrari were the first to put paddle shifts on a car,then think again.

In 1941 Chrysler was the first manufacture to use a semi-automatic gearbox. Porsche was the first manufacture to use a semi-automatic gearbox for racing in the Group C in 1987. But ironically, when Porsche was the first to use a semi-automatic gearbox in racing the technology was already out-dated: in the 1960's DAF already used CVT technology in a Formula 3-car.

Any way, this all isn't a valid argument against technology. A valid argument against is that Formula 1 should remain a drivers' championship in the first place. Another argument is safety.

[chrisp2006]

when has F1 ever been road-relevant. No racing car is road relevant thats the whole point.