Motorsport Off Topic Thread

Skeeter said:
I think you have missed the point deuse. The chassis is entirely separate to the engine. With the standard engine mounts you should be able to chop and change.
Click to expand...



But there are none. Lots of ifs and but's. If will never work because anyone in their right mind would buy the best going.

And if you haven't got that kind of money then stay out of F1.

On another topic

"On Mercedes’ team radio at the time Hamilton was told “yellow, yellow turn five”. He replied “ah, that was very good of him” after seeing
Rosberg’s car parked in the slip-road at Mirabeau. “Very good,” Hamilton added again" :eek:

Can't wait to watch 2014 review blu ray.
 
Skeeter said:
And MissCheif, I can see Williams point. Teams like Williams and Sauber exist only as F1 teams, of which the only part they produce is the chassis. Removing the requirement to build chassis would remove the main part of their workforce. But, I'd happily see a few customer teams reduce in size if it increased the competitiveness on the grid. And what's to say Williams wouldn't become a leading chassis manufacturer supplying 2 or 3 teams?
Click to expand...

Personally think Williams is a bad example.

Williams are in F1 for the sport themselves, I just cant see why they of all teams would just become a chassis provider.

Im also not 100% convinced having standard engine mounts is the correct way to go across all teams. At the end of the day engines are a major differentiator, and that should be everything that includes - whether its layout, mounting options, how it connects to the gearbox etc etc

One of the good things about this year was what Merc came up with in regards to the extended casing that was detailed earlier in the season. These kinds of things would disappear if you make too much "standard".
 
FrankJH said:
Personally think Williams is a bad example.

Williams are in F1 for the sport themselves, I just cant see why they of all teams would just become a chassis provider.
Click to expand...

I'm not suggesting they stop racing, I'm suggesting they carry on exactly as they are now, but also sell chassis' to other, smaller teams unable to make them themselves. Imagine, replace Caterham and Marussia with a couple of customer teams running Williams chassis's... a chassis able to score podiums and pole positions. F1 would surely be stronger?

deuse said:
But there are none...
Click to expand...

Yes there are. Standard engine and gearbox mounts came in as part of the V6 regulations.

5.3 Power unit dimensions :

5.3.1 Cylinder bore diameter must be 80mm (+/- 0.1mm).

5.3.2 The crankshaft centre line must lie on the car centre line and 90mm (+/-0.5mm) above the reference plane. The power unit may only transmit torque to the gearbox by means of a single output shaft that must be co-axial with the crankshaft. The output shaft must rotate clockwise when viewed from the front of the car.

5.3.3 Valve stem diameter must not be less than 4.95mm.

5.3.4 All elements of the power unit specified in the relevant column of the table in Appendix 2 of these regulations must be installed in the union of the volumes that exist between two vertical planes normal to the car centre line separated by 700mm and in a box 150mm long, 250mm wide and 800mm high which lies symmetrically about the car centre line immediately ahead of the front vertical plane.

5.3.5 Power unit mountings may only comprise six M12 studs for connection to the survival cell and six M12 studs for connection to the transmission. All studs must be used and may be fitted on the survival cell, power unit or transmission. The installed end of the studs must be M12 and the free end may be a different diameter. The mounting faces of the studs for connection to the survival cell must lie on the forward of the two planes described in Article 5.3.4 and be located at Y215/Z15(2), Y340/Z260(2) and Y175/Z420(2). The mounting faces of the studs for connection to the transmission must lie on one vertical plane normal to the car centre line and be located at Y100/Z15(2), Y150/Z140(2) and Y255/Z345(2). A tolerance of +/- 0.2mm will be permitted on all of the above dimensions, all dimensions refer to the centre of the studs. The distance between the two planes is fixed at 480mm (+/-0.2mm). Any part which provides an additional load path from the survival cell to the gearbox, with a connection to the power unit, may only do so if this is incidental to its principal purpose.

5.3.6 The ES must be installed wholly within the survival cell.
Click to expand...

There is basically a standard sized 'box' in a defined location in which the engine must fit, with 6 standard mounting points at each end.

In thery you can attach any of the V6 engines to any of the 2014 chassis' or gearboxes. Obviously in reality there is more to it as they need understand the cooling and air feeds, but the principle is there that a team could buy a chassis, an engine, a gearbox, and build a race car. And I don't think its far fetched to think that it would be both cheaper and quicker than the jokes Marussia and Caterham rolled out for 5 years...
 
Last edited:
Skeeter said:
There is basically a standard sized 'box' in a defined location in which the engine must fit, with 6 standard mounting points at each end....
Click to expand...


Yes and in that box you can put what you like were you like.
I think in 2017 there will be new(old) engines being used in F1. Next Jan 6th is when they start discussing it.
 
deuse said:
Yes and in that box you can put what you like were you like.
Click to expand...

Of course you can, that's the whole point of only standardizing the mounting points...

I think in 2017 there will be new(old) engines being used in F1. Next Jan 6th is when they start discussing it.
Click to expand...

I thought you said it was 2016, and the date was 18th December?

Regardless, do people really think the future of F1 for 2017 is an engine format drawn up in... 2004? People complaining that the V6 is "not the pinnacle of motor sport" only to then suggest a 13 year old engine format is used instead are a whole new level of retarded.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure moving backwards is ever the answer, especially in something like F1.

Surely these meetings are supposed to discuss this type of thing going forward to make sure we don't end up in this kind of position.
 
Skeeter said:
I'm not suggesting they stop racing, I'm suggesting they carry on exactly as they are now, but also sell chassis' to other, smaller teams unable to make them themselves. Imagine, replace Caterham and Marussia with a couple of customer teams running Williams chassis's... a chassis able to score podiums and pole positions. F1 would surely be stronger?
Click to expand...

Apologies I thought you meant they were to stop racing.


It would make them weaker though (in the sense that they are most likely be competing against their own chassis with the same engine combo). Their best chance of doing well in the WDC/WCC is to have a better chassis than everyone else, if they are selling their own at the same time it might fill the coffers a little, but it makes their job a lot harder at the same time

Personally I dont see this as being worthwhile for a team of Williams' size. Ferrari / Merc doing it, yes that I can see working (being a factory team, any tweak can be "tested" for a race or two before rolling down to the customer teams)
 
No worries Frank.

The problem is making teams think of more than just themselves. Your totally right regarding teams wanting to beat others by making sure only they have their own developments. In reality what you would likely see is strong 'sister' team relationships spring up where sharing technology is less of an issue (RBR/STR, Ferrari/Haas, etc).
 
I can't seriously see them going back to the old engine formula. It'd be far too damaging to the sport in so many ways. Honda would immediately be left out in the cold and be almost forced to leave the sport. Mercedes are going to be seriously ****** off having invested heavily in getting a competitive edge which is then taken away from them and could also walk away. That would leave Ferrari and Renault as the only engine providers, with a possible cheap as chips Cosworth option for the also-rans. Even Renault have nothing to gain from producing V8s. It has zero relevance to the world of cheap and cheerful shopping trolleys.

My belief is that the plan to bring back the old engines is another of Bernie's masterstrokes, the current engines aren't well liked and he knows it, but he also knows the sport cant really go back. By putting the option on the table he'll allow everyone to consider the implications and before you know it everyone will be vehemently backing the V6 hybrids as the alternative will be too painful to stomach.
 
Skeeter said:
Of course you can, that's the whole point of only standardizing the mounting points...
Click to expand...

You don't get it. Have you ever worked in the engine industry?
Just because the FIA say where the mounts should be doesn't mean were they place the power plant.

I.E the Merc turbo is in a different place then other F1 cars ect. RB moved the hybrid parts which caused over heating.


I thought you said it was 2016, and the date was 18th December?

Regardless, do people really think the future of F1 for 2017 is an engine format drawn up in... 2004? People complaining that the V6 is "not the pinnacle of motor sport" only to then suggest a 13 year old engine format is used instead are a whole new level of retarded.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should go and read more before asking things. There was a meeting on the 18th.
Now it goes forward to to next year to talk about what engines will be used. obversely it can't be done for 2016.
 
kaiowas said:
I can't seriously see them going back to the old engine formula. It'd be far too damaging to the sport in so many ways. Honda would immediately be left out in the cold and be almost forced to leave the sport. Mercedes are going to be seriously ****** off having invested heavily in getting a competitive edge which is then taken away from them and could also walk away. That would leave Ferrari and Renault as the only engine providers, with a possible cheap as chips Cosworth option for the also-rans. Even Renault have nothing to gain from producing V8s. It has zero relevance to the world of cheap and cheerful shopping trolleys.

My belief is that the plan to bring back the old engines is another of Bernie's masterstrokes, the current engines aren't well liked and he knows it, but he also knows the sport cant really go back. By putting the option on the table he'll allow everyone to consider the implications and before you know it everyone will be vehemently backing the V6 hybrids as the alternative will be too painful to stomach.
Click to expand...

Yep. Its a paper pushing exercise to keep the idiots quiet for a while. All the V6 manufacturers will be annoyed, plus I'm pretty sure there would be grounds too sue for lost earnings. Honda would leave, Mercedes and Renault also stated they would leave if they stuck with V8s, so can't see why they would stick around if we went back. Ferrari have also stated they are now fully backing the V6 format. Plus the teams are onboard too. A recent statement from Sauber said the V6s were the right way to go, and Williams agreed although questioned (rightly so) the methodology around the introduction.

So it seems like Bernie is banging a drum over an issue that most people have already moved on from. There's just a few retards floating about with stupid ideas that will soon fizzle out, and then hopefully F1 can move on and leave the cave men behind.
 
Skeeter said:
No worries Frank.

The problem is making teams think of more than just themselves. Your totally right regarding teams wanting to beat others by making sure only they have their own developments. In reality what you would likely see is strong 'sister' team relationships spring up where sharing technology is less of an issue (RBR/STR, Ferrari/Haas, etc).
Click to expand...

As I said, I can totally see Ferrari wanting to do this and possibly even RBR even if they arent strictly a works team, but the smaller current teams just wont have the capacity and its against their interest to do so

(in fact prize money wont grow considerably will it - so Im wondering if its anyone's worthwhile to supply customer chassis to make it easier for anyone else to enter F1, as the same prize pot will only shrink further - so could end up costing them in the long run.

Obviously from our point of view the more competition the better, so more competitive teams then the better the show gets, but from a business perspective......
 
Yep. Its a lop sided argument. Customer chassis benefit the teams that would buy them, and possibly disadvantage the teams that build them. Yet it would need the top teams to build them to be an option.

Its why it will never happen unless the decision is taken away from the teams. But as the FIA have recently accepted a $40m cheque to hand over the rule making to a bunch of self interested parties, getting an agreement now is like asking a group of toddlers to pick what game they want to play.

Ive recently realised that the biggest "issue" with F1 is actually the FIA.
 
I wonder if a deal to sell chassis/tub to new teams for the first season or two seasons, perhaps with reduced input in the second year would be something doable? Let's new teams in and gives them a head start but if they stay then they need to develop their own expertise?
 
How many people in 2009 would have predicted Alonso leaving Ferrari without any more titles?

Tough times both behind and ahead for Ferrari. I'm not sure going there was a particularly clever move by Vettel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom