Engine rules loopholes?

Hazard · 27 Mar 2005, 19:58 (Ref:1263080)

Well, one popped up already. I might have found another one...no one's likely to exploit at present, but:

Rules are that a team can use up to 4 different drivers a season...the number of changes that entails isn't set though (so Red Bull for example, could swap Klien & Liuzzi as often as they'd like - much like Brundle & Suzuki did in 1995).

And engine's have to last each driver two consecutive events.

So if you alternated your second driver - you could change the engine each time without penalty?! Obviously no good to the top runners, but for smaller outfits in the cases of non-paying drivers, they could use this to aid their constructors position if longevitity is causing them an issue.

I'm quite certain these multi-event rules have other issues if looked into.

Kicking-back · 27 Mar 2005, 19:59 (Ref:1263082)

No - it applies to the car.

Davidson had to take on Sato's engine at Malaysia.

Hazard · 27 Mar 2005, 20:03 (Ref:1263087)

My interpretation is different (though not necessarily correct

)

Example doesn't figure...they had a new engine anyway for Malaysia after the parking early situation.

The wording of the regulations say 'driver'. Not driver or car. Else what happens with spare cars? That's a different car, so the driver could change to the spare and not get a penalty?

Kicking-back · 27 Mar 2005, 20:05 (Ref:1263092)

No - once you have started an event, the engine stays with you - so there is a penalty for switching to the spare - but my interpretation is that Montoya will start the San Marino Grand Prix with de la Rosa's Bahrain engine.

Hazard · 27 Mar 2005, 20:16 (Ref:1263104)

Guess I'm gonna have to speak to my lawyer - it doesn't look clear. It'd be interesting to see what would happen...

I don't disagree that your interpretation is the 'intention', but that's not on paper anywhere.

TomS · 27 Mar 2005, 20:38 (Ref:1263121)

I think the engine goes with nominated driver. So surely if they swapped drivers they would be fine? Davidson went into Sato's seat for the Grand Prix so had to use his engine

Don K · 27 Mar 2005, 20:45 (Ref:1263128)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hazard

Well, one popped up already. I might have found another one...no one's likely to exploit at present, but:

Rules are that a team can use up to 4 different drivers a season...the number of changes that entails isn't set though (so Red Bull for example, could swap Klien & Liuzzi as often as they'd like - much like Brundle & Suzuki did in 1995).

And engine's have to last each driver two consecutive events.

So if you alternated your second driver - you could change the engine each time without penalty?! Obviously no good to the top runners, but for smaller outfits in the cases of non-paying drivers, they could use this to aid their constructors position if longevitity is causing them an issue.

I'm quite certain these multi-event rules have other issues if looked into.

Yes, I just noticed that.

I think it is an error within the rules.

And if one team starts using this loophole, I'm afraid a "rule clarification" wouldn't be enough to stop it.
FIA would need a rule change if they want to block this, imho.

BootsOntheSide · 27 Mar 2005, 22:08 (Ref:1263191)

Sato had used that engine during the weekend though, which might make the crucial difference to what Mclaren will be doing if JPM can't race in Bahrain.

Hazard · 27 Mar 2005, 22:28 (Ref:1263202)

Montoya's engine's already done it's two races. So regardless whether Montoya or whoever runs in Bahrain, it'll be a fresh engine. Just how long it has to stay in there was my query.

Mr V · 28 Mar 2005, 11:41 (Ref:1263444)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kicking-back

No - it applies to the car.

Davidson had to take on Sato's engine at Malaysia.

This would make sense imo. Say for example, Sato was ill again in Silverstone, if the engine applied to the driver then Ant (stepping in) would have to use his Malaysian engine (if they could find enough bits to put it back together

)

BootsOntheSide · 28 Mar 2005, 12:46 (Ref:1263481)

The way the rules sound, the engine applies to the driver ordinarily, so JPM would get a new engine on his return, but de la Rosa would theoretically have to use the Bahrain engine again, or face a penalty. This si mentioned in the Montoya thread, but really in belongs here.

It's amusing that KB's (seemingly inaccurate) quote is getting followed up on so much. This man has a worrying amount of charisma - it makes me glad his views are mostly quite mainstream.

Marbot · 28 Mar 2005, 12:50 (Ref:1263484)

It seems odd that if a driver only did the first and last races in a season he would still have to use the same engine!

And could only use a new engine if they could prove there was something wrong with the original.

Kicking-back · 28 Mar 2005, 14:13 (Ref:1263528)

Quote:

Originally Posted by BootsOntheSide

It's amusing that KB's (seemingly inaccurate) quote is getting followed up on so much. This man has a worrying amount of charisma - it makes me glad his views are mostly quite mainstream.

Maybe I should go into politics

Hazard · 28 Mar 2005, 14:42 (Ref:1263546)

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyn bott

It seems odd that if a driver only did the first and last races in a season he would still have to use the same engine!

And could only use a new engine if they could prove there was something wrong with the original.

As stated in the rules...it applies to consecutive events. Therefore I believe the ruls can be interpreted that if a driver drove in the 3rd and 5th races, he could have a new engine everytime.

Whether Monty misses Bahrain or not, surely some driver will swap (and not be using a 3 lap Honda) at some point during the season...I'd love to see how this rule gets interpreted in the field.

Marbot · 28 Mar 2005, 15:16 (Ref:1263553)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hazard

Whether Monty misses Bahrain or not, surely some driver will swap (and not be using a 3 lap Honda) at some point during the season...I'd love to see how this rule gets interpreted in the field.

I suppose if a team is only interested in the constructors championship it could be the way to go.
Obviously most of the drivers stand little or no chance of winning the WDC, so alternating drivers would be a good thing if they want to start each race with a fresh engine.
Surprised RBR haven't thought of that one Hazard,or maybe they have!

Maybe later in the season when TGF is well ahead of RB on points they will alternate RB with another driver to make sure they are more likely to score more points in the constructors championhip-you never know.

Kicking-back · 28 Mar 2005, 15:24 (Ref:1263554)

We've seen the two-race engines largely be 100% reliable - I suspect the advantage of doing this "loophole" would be negligible.

BootsOntheSide · 28 Mar 2005, 15:27 (Ref:1263557)

We don't know whether teams have been pushing the engines to their full potential, or beign careful to avoid over-stressing them. In any case, this will be a big deal if the 6-race engines planend for 2006 are introduced.

TomS · 28 Mar 2005, 15:29 (Ref:1263558)

How do they check the engines internals etc arebeing changed. Presumably the seal the engine but i would have thought something as simple as this would be possible to overcome and so cheat

Marbot · 28 Mar 2005, 15:38 (Ref:1263561)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kicking-back

We've seen the two-race engines largely be 100% reliable - I suspect the advantage of doing this "loophole" would be negligible.

But in the future would it not be better to start each event with what would basicly be a one race engine (more power etc) and change drivers after each event.
Maybe some engines are 100% reliable,maybe some just got lucky but they are probably not as powerful as they could be if they were a 1 race engine.
BMW for example had to shelve what would have been a much more powerful 1 race engine for this season because of the introduction of the 2 engine rule.Maybe they'll use that for the 19th race.

**Adam43** · 28 Mar 2005, 19:28 (Ref:1263715)

The magnitude of the advantage of swapping an engine is probably worth less than the magnitude of the disadvantage of swapping a driver is probably worse.

I certainly wouldn't class any such loophole as a problem with the rule.

manwell · 3 Apr 2005, 00:46 (Ref:1268298)

Im not sure if this has been discussed before.
Dont the rules state that engines must run at least 2 races?
So can they run more than 2 races?
Your probably asking why.
Well couldnt a team thats had an engine in the car for 2 races, take that car and engine to the third race and use that engine in practice which would help getting a good car set-up.
Then they could swap in their new engine once qualifying started and it wouldnt have had any wear and tear on it.
They havent suffered a failure so they shouldnt be penalised any grid spots.
And I dont see why they should get a penalty for it as they are not using an "extra" engine.

Marbot · 3 Apr 2005, 00:56 (Ref:1268302)

Quote:

Originally Posted by manwell

Then they could swap in their new engine once qualifying started and it wouldnt have had any wear and tear on it.

If they swap an engine during an event they have to take at least a 10 place penalty.So overall it's not worth jeopardising your grid position for a slightly fresher engine.

Unless of course you are Minardi.

**Adam43** · 3 Apr 2005, 15:03 (Ref:1268782)

If you were going to do that you may as well take two new engines and swap. You get the ten places anyway as martyn said.

Hazard · 3 Apr 2005, 15:05 (Ref:1268790)

Minardi get the new cossie next race though if the 2005 cars finished. So their swapping days should soon be over.

gert · 3 Apr 2005, 16:38 (Ref:1268934)

I Hazard's original statement is correct, Mclaren would be best off to put Wurz in, instead of de La Rosa - he would get a new engine then? Provided Montoya is still not fit for next race...

Even if Montoya was to return, he could get a fresh one as well? Everyone, just not de La Rosa...

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Engine rules: Alternatives?	Adam43	Formula One	19	5 Aug 2005 12:50
Are the new engine rules too restrictive?	Adam43	Formula One	7	31 Oct 2004 16:54
Engine change rules	RiZLa	Touring Car Racing	7	19 Jun 2003 15:50
BTCT Engine rules	Sodemo	Touring Car Racing	3	30 Apr 2001 13:06
No-rules F1 - engine questions	Jared	Racing Technology	8	30 Aug 2000 10:16