|
| Site Partners: | SpotterGuides | Veloce Books |
| Related Sites: | Your Link Here |
|
|
|||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
|
22 Mar 2006, 08:41 (Ref:1557350)
|
#1 | |
|
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
  |
Freeze on engine technology
Today (Wednesday) the FIA plan to implement a freeze on engine technology for the 2008-2010 seasons.More importantly using engines that will be homologated before the end of June this year!http://www.f1racing.net/en/news.php?newsID=113007
P.S.:Not sure why they're showing a picture of a gearbox. |
|
|
|
|
22 Mar 2006, 14:28 (Ref:1557486)
|
#2 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,986
|
This is just ridiculous! Renault has suggested the dumbest rule change yet! Which manufacturer would seriously back a plan like this one? I am 99% sure of at least one that would leave the sport.
|
||
|
|
__________________
Eventually we learn
|
|
22 Mar 2006, 14:30 (Ref:1557488)
|
#3 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,192
|
This must be a joke. If the FIA will introduce this rule, engine manufactures could lose their interests in Formula 1 very soon. If an engine manufacture is not capable to supply a reliable engine, they won't be able to do so for three full years.
|
||
|
|
|
|
22 Mar 2006, 14:50 (Ref:1557501)
|
#4 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,618
|
and yet another rule that seems to be the antithesis of the idea of F1.
Are renault worried they are already behind and will only become more so? |
||
|
|
__________________
I refuse to let fact get in the way of my opinion
|
|
22 Mar 2006, 15:10 (Ref:1557509)
|
#5 | |||
|
Racer
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 180
|
Quote:
It wouldn't be such a bad idea if all teams were granted some more time to develop their V8's. Until the end of 2007 instead of June this year for example. |
|||
|
|
|
|
22 Mar 2006, 15:25 (Ref:1557516)
|
#6 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,056
|
Make rules and guide lines by all means...but this caps the essence of Formula One.
In as much as warfare stimulates massive technological advances...In peacetime Auto racing should develop automotive technology...if Formula One is to be considered the ultimate form of motorsport! |
||
|
|
|
|
22 Mar 2006, 15:33 (Ref:1557520)
|
#7 | |
|
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 7,979
|
I don't think that F1 has ever been the ultimate in anything except maybe aerodynamics, electronics and the most advanced F1 car ever, the FW15 from 1993, seems a long ways away now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
22 Mar 2006, 15:36 (Ref:1557522)
|
#8 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,434
|
Whilst this rule could have some merit in more 'junior' formulae, Formula 1 is supposed to be the top formula within motorsport; then by placing limitations on technological innovation is contary to this position.
|
||
|
|
|
|
22 Mar 2006, 15:37 (Ref:1557523)
|
#9 | |||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,056
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
|
|
|
22 Mar 2006, 15:45 (Ref:1557527)
|
#10 | |
|
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 7,979
|
Yeah, advanced, but for what?
F1 engine and gearbox technology is about as useful for the 'normal' car industry as a jetpack is to personal transportation, it's high tech but useless. |
|
|
|
|
|
22 Mar 2006, 16:34 (Ref:1557557)
|
#11 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 13,000
|
Tyres which only last 50 miles aren't much use to road cars either. If F1 is to be appealing to car manufacturers as a technology-devleopment base, they have to be making things which are useful to road car design. Please don't let them use things which make the driver's job too easy though - that's not what racing is all about.
|
||
|
|
|
|
22 Mar 2006, 16:40 (Ref:1557562)
|
#12 | |
|
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
Well,it's no joke.http://www.f1racing.net/en/news.php?newsID=113043
|
|
|
|
|
|
22 Mar 2006, 16:53 (Ref:1557569)
|
#13 | |
|
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
Correspondence letters between FIA and teams.http://www.fia.com/resources/documen...ers_letter.pdfAndhttp://www.fia.com/resources/documen...r_MM_Manfs.pdf
|
|
|
|
|
|
22 Mar 2006, 16:56 (Ref:1557572)
|
#14 | |
|
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
World motorsport council meeting.http://www.fia.com/mediacentre/Press...220306-02.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
22 Mar 2006, 16:58 (Ref:1557573)
|
#15 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,760
|
I would think the teams will run an engine development programme for those three years, they just would not race any of them, in order to produce the best possible product post-ban.
It seems pointless to me. |
||
|
|
|
|
22 Mar 2006, 17:06 (Ref:1557576)
|
#16 | |
|
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
Unless of course they change the engine regs again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
22 Mar 2006, 17:14 (Ref:1557583)
|
#17 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,760
|
I was thinking that, but the chance would be taken.
I guess it could work out if the FIA made it very clear that the engine regs would be changed, and in such a way it would make it a total waste of time and money to develop through those 3 years. However, would the teams not then spend money on broadly investigating the various options? Would changing the engine regs, in order to prevent "dead" development, really help save money? Would the R&D, and what not, associated with quickly developing a the new formula not just be well pricey anyway? |
||
|
|
|
|
22 Mar 2006, 17:41 (Ref:1557609)
|
#18 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,618
|
I can see wanting to homologate parts to an extent for cost savings but this is dumb. maybe say that you have to homologate all your parts at the begining of the year (prior to first race) and then are only allowed two or three part design changes during the season...maybe no changes.
|
||
|
|
__________________
I refuse to let fact get in the way of my opinion
|
|
22 Mar 2006, 17:47 (Ref:1557615)
|
#19 | |
|
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
Worse still,imagine the engine you have now is a real dog and in June you have to present this engine to the FIA for homologation!
|
|
|
|
|
|
22 Mar 2006, 18:30 (Ref:1557636)
|
#20 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,760
|
What if the teams "change supplier" every year?
|
||
|
|
|
|
22 Mar 2006, 18:49 (Ref:1557653)
|
#21 | ||
|
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
Quote:
|
||
|
|
|
|
22 Mar 2006, 19:09 (Ref:1557665)
|
#22 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,760
|
In practical terms nothing would change, it would just need the creation of a new company.
Ferrari Engines Ltd one year, F1EngineFSports Ltd the next...and so on. |
||
|
|
|
|
22 Mar 2006, 19:35 (Ref:1557688)
|
#23 | ||
|
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
Quote:
|
||
|
|
|
|
22 Mar 2006, 19:44 (Ref:1557700)
|
#24 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,760
|
Well, my thinking is any new suppliers would need to create an engine to something equitable to whatever is set then, but they would, being new suppliers and all, need to create themselves.
So, they will be working from a base of contemporary development. So, if a team were to "change suppliers" in the meaning outlined above, then they could create an engine with development involved that would otherwise be unavailable. Perhaps I am misunderstanding the proposal? |
||
|
|
|
|
22 Mar 2006, 21:42 (Ref:1557784)
|
#25 | |
|
20KPINAL
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 29,853
|
This is just crazy!
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Anti freeze and corrosion | Tim Falce | Racing Technology | 3 | 3 Nov 2005 08:53 |
| F1 Technology | bobdrummond | Racing Technology | 31 | 19 Jul 2000 11:05 |
Linear Mode
