New Engine Format Agreed

[RWC]

This is ,on the surface,a sensible change to achieve a reductions in speeds
It's not meant to reduce costs but it may a little.
On the other hand it won't increase cost much because the engine basics will stay pretty much identical (bore,stroke,combustion shape,etc,etc)

But when one thinks about it this is a 'nothing' change.It's meant to increase safety but it won't reduce top speeds or cornering speeds much at all.Also cars will still lose masses of grip and braking ability when turned side (and have effectively none when sliding backwards!!)

Like all max's 'decisions' this one is a pitifull attempt to look like doing something while it's actually doing nothing.

[Gt_R]

Sometimes, FIA think of "short term" solutions which may solve short term problems but they totally ignore the long term effects.

We've been downsizing engines consistently...what next if V8's reach 900BHP again? Are we gonna make it 1.5L inline 4s? Yeah...why not? We had it long ago and it didn't hurt...but what works last time isn't definitely best for tomorrow.

I think 3.0l V10 is just nice. 2.4l V8 may be a short drop from V10, but it sounds aweful, and so far less appealing.

It doesn't reduce costs, it doesn't increase safety, and it doesn't improve racing...so essentially a redundant move to throw teams off.

Reduce performance?There are so many more options than just adjust the numbers of cylinders. I'm not a fan of this move.

[freud]

Originally posted by pirenzo
Why not?

1952-3 2.0l
1954-60 2.5l
1961-1965 1.5l
Eras in which Ascari, Clark, Hill, Fangio, Moss and the like drove, but not Formula 1?

What?? F1 should never step backwards. I dont know what's cooking inside Moseley's head but 2.4 v8 is definitely 'no' exciting news for speed buffs.

[JAG]

Restrictors, revv limiters etc will never be used in F1 as the philosophy of the sport is to allow manufactuers unhindered development of the engines, hence why perfromence increases so quickly in F1.

When the 2.4l V8s reach 900BHP they will be replaced by an even smaller engine, and rightly so. This pushes development and technology in F1.

And how someone can say a V8 does not sound good baffles me!

V10's are hardly great sounding engines, all revs and no soul. Listen to a DFV from the 70's to hear a good sounding engine.

All F1 engines, of whatever configuration and size will have their own unique sound and eventually loved by the fans.

[JAG]

Originally posted by freud
What?? F1 should never step backwards. I dont know what's cooking inside Moseley's head but 2.4 v8 is definitely 'no' exciting news for speed buffs.

Can you not see going to 2.4l V8s is a step forward!

Development will eventually mean these engines put out 900BHP.

The orignal 3l V10s only put out 650BHP.

[freud]

I just dont see 900 BHP coming out of these v8s as you postulate. I expect the top speeds and the acceleration/decceleration speeds of f1 cars with v8 engines to reduce substantially. I can understand the fact that teams with greater resources and money will eventually build faster v8s with BHPs around 750-800 but it will take much time, resources, effort and testing.

If you look at the big picture, Moseley's agenda is NOT safety or reducing costs. Teams with big budgets like Ferrari and McLaren will continue to invest. Basically the rule changes are the best possible mechanism for these 'top' teams to maintain their heirarchy.

Say if the rules werent changed for a considerable period of team. I believe that will actually bring the teams more closer to each other and increase the competition. It will make it more difficult for the 'top' teams to make a difference. If you look at the 'timesheets', 1997 was one of the closest seasons. The top 10-15 drivers on the grid used to be within 1 second after the qualifying. They changes the rules in 1998 and afterwards almost every year there's been some change. This year its the one-engine-weekend BS.

[Adam43]

Originally posted by freud
If you look at the big picture, Moseley's agenda is NOT safety or reducing costs. Teams with big budgets like Ferrari and McLaren will continue to invest. Basically the rule changes are the best possible mechanism for these 'top' teams to maintain their heirarchy.

Say if the rules werent changed for a considerable period of team. I believe that will actually bring the teams more closer to each other and increase the competition.

...They changes the rules in 1998 and afterwards almost every year there's been some change. This year its the one-engine-weekend BS.

I disagree, teams with most resources will always come out on top whatever the rules. I do agree change does favour pwopel who can change quickly, but at the moment the rules have been stable and we still haev dominance.

I also disagree we have seen any major rule changes. At present we are in one of the longest periods of stable rules (with only minor changes) that has happened in F1. The chassis rules are in their seventh year, the engine rules its tenth. There was a change to V10s only, but that happened when everyone was running them anyway.

[freud]

Well if you think that 'we are in one of the longest periods of stable rules' then let me ask you... 'what do you think are stable rules?'.

Past 10 years we were used to seeing engines being changed on cars on a daily basis. There were different engines for qualifying, practice and races. If FIA changes that to a one engine per weekend and you dont call it a change of colossal magnitude, then, imho, you need a little more learning. Its a BIG BIG change... a dramatic change in rules. And many in the paddock were p****d off.

I might be looking at this scenario with too cynical an eye but thats what I have come to learned after following f1 for all these years. The stakes are simply too high.

[Adam43]

I bow down to your knowledge over all these years and accept more humblest apologises for disagreeing with you

Those changes did make a difference. Otherwise there is no point. However, signifacant? No that is banning turbos, changing from 1.5 to 3.0l, changing to F2 rules. Or changing from 3.0l V10s to 2.4l V8s.

The one engine per weekend rule has made a much smaller difference to power, installation and overall speed. Most engine manufacturers said it made little difference. It is nothing compared to a change to 2.4l V8s.

Its all where you draw the line of signifance, but teams make bigger changes over the off season even without a rule change like the one engine per weekend.

[freud]

Well, I completely agree with you in that technologically the changes are a step forward. I am just looking at the broad agenda behind the changes. You or my humble self cannot conceieve what goes inside Mr Moseley's head when he decides to make these changes. Is his motive safety? Or is it the average fan like me sitting on the fences? Is he one of the most powerful man in motorsport to appease a simple fan like you and I? I am not sure if he even cares about an average fan. I would really advise all to read an article by Peter Windsor in 'F1-racing' in some 1997 issue. He elaborate on these so-called 'rule changes' and gave valid reasons on why he thinks these are done to maintain heirarchy of the top teams. Again, imho, I might be too cynical and I might be wrong May be things are just as good as they seem

And as far as spending goes, some teams would spend as much a 4 to 5 million dollars during mid-end season for a 0.1 second advantage over their rivals. Big teams, as you mention, will always spend more.

PS- lets get back to Nurburgring now. Just a few minutes left... happy racing

[golem]

All those whiners talking about F2 and these engines being hopeless: Put brain into gear before trying to use your mouth.

The V10 wail? F1 V10's are just noise. They're not really an attractive sound like a tuned 4AGE or AJP8 or Ferrari 360 V8. They're just a mechanical wail. And on that note, an 8 should give a more gutteral sound as the space between the air-pulses increases. So there'll be a pitch change, maybe a minute drop in dB, but overall it won't change a hell of a lot.

As for power: They're dropping weight with the upcoming regs, and power always keeps going up. At the start of the V10 era, mention 19000rpm and you'd have had mechanics in hysterics and engineers knowing it would become possible but no idea on how.

And wheel to wheel, it'll only matter in that the speeds will reduce to a point hopefully where they don't need to keep kneecapping tracks to satisfy safety.

A 600hp motor is heaps of power to shuffle 600kg with massive downforce and the best tyres on earth that I know of.

[gttouring]

V10's are hardly great sounding engines, all revs and no soul. Listen to a DFV from the 70's to hear a good sounding engine.
well Coswroth is retooling and selling new versions of the DFV so maybe they can share this tooling with other manufacturers and let them work some magic...
a full field of Cosworth DFV, the Ferrari DFV Mercedes DFV... costs cut, speeds cut and the soul and sound is back in F1

[Red]

Originally posted by golem
Put brain into gear before trying to use your mouth.

[Kicking-back]

BMW are kicking up a stink about it now, anyway.

[Knowlesy]

Got to agree with the sound aspect gttouring......all V8's sounded wonderful! Not quite like a 12 cylinder mind....

But there was a time when V10's sounded nice as well......I always liked the Renault V10 sound for some reason, back in 1994.

[Gt_R]

At the rate we are going, Max will introduce a 1-car-per-driver-per-season rule..

Every driver is only entitled one car/engine/tires... and preserve it over 18 races...

We'd have engines that last 6 races, and doesn't that mean that no longer we can see diff-race-spec engines? I mean if a race in Hungary comes after one in Monza, we'd see a common-spec...I'd be so much less interested in the updates we see from the cars at different races.