The F1 2014 season

I did read that they'll be allowing the Power Units to be upgraded every winter to 2020, so we should expect a slow but steady rise in power every year. As the power is currently on par with the outgoing V8s, it bodes well for good advances.
 
Yeah, the engines will be homologated annually, but it comes with increasingly restricted regulations. The core petrol V6 will slowly be homologated into an almost spec part across all the manufacturers. Hopefully the ERS doesn't follow suit.
 
Skeeter said:
Yeah, the engines will be homologated annually, but it comes with increasingly restricted regulations. The core petrol V6 will slowly be homologated into an almost spec part across all the manufacturers. Hopefully the ERS doesn't follow suit.
Click to expand...

Not sure why they're doing that, certainly isn't about saving money.
 
Indy500 said:
Not sure why they're doing that, certainly isn't about saving money.
Click to expand...

Yes and no. Restricting engine development stops them plowing money into it. But that money does just go elsewhere.

I think its more about ensuring a level playing field. The FIA don't want a 5 second field spread due to massive discrepancies between the relative engines performance. They want everyone with the same performance to keep the racing close. It happened with the V8s, the performance was pretty level across all 4 makers. But they need to lock it down gradually to ensure one engine isn't left out in the cold.

Remember, the FIA were pretty serious about implementing a standard engine, so much so they deliberately chose new teams to join the grid that would be on their side of the vote. Fundamentally the FIA don't want Formula 1 to be a competitive engine formula.
 
Skeeter said:
I think its more about ensuring a level playing field. The FIA don't want a 5 second field spread due to massive discrepancies between the relative engines performance. They want everyone with the same performance to keep the racing close.
Click to expand...

F1 now has a less open engine formula in several respects than Indycar (which allows V4 or V6, in-season upgrades, major development every 2 years), but you wouldn't know it if you only listened to the audience.

Skeeter said:
Remember, the FIA were pretty serious about implementing a standard engine, so much so they deliberately chose new teams to join the grid that would be on their side of the vote. Fundamentally the FIA don't want Formula 1 to be a competitive engine formula.
Click to expand...

I guess we can look forward to more lessons from the Adrian Newey and friends' school of aerodynamic design. :p

Gerhard Berger said recently that F1 is too-aero oriented, and that the cars lack power so are less challenging to drive. He also mentioned the huge run-offs at many tracks. (http://www.crash.net/f1/news/199403/1/gerhard-berger-critical-of-underpowered-modern-f1.html)

I can't help but agree with that sentiment.
 
The aero argument is a misguided one. The engineers aren't going to magically forget what they know about aerodynamics if the engine rules are relaxed. They will still chase performance in all areas.

Focus is on aero as there are few other areas of development. With less tight engine rules teams wouldnt divert resources from aero to engine, they would bring in extra engineers and need more cash. I can totally understand the FIA wanting to stop F1 being all about who has the biggest wallet.

The biggest spenders the sport has ever seen (car makers in the 00s) all jumped ship because they couldnt afford the investment at a time when aero rules were stable and engine rules fixed. I don't see how teams with less money could be expected to survive more open rules now?

But restricting the ERS development is a mistake.
 
Skeeter said:
Focus is on aero as there are few other areas of development. With less tight engine rules teams wouldnt divert resources from aero to engine, they would bring in extra engineers and need more cash. I can totally understand the FIA wanting to stop F1 being all about who has the biggest wallet.
Click to expand...

Plenty of series with restrictions still see the bigger wallet prevail. It may even magnify the effect (Hendrick in Nascar is a good example, their Adrian Newey is Chad Knaus - great at finding grey areas and loopholes). Audi spends significantly more than their competition in WEC.

Skeeter said:
The biggest spenders the sport has ever seen (car makers in the 00s) all jumped ship because they couldnt afford the investment at a time when aero rules were stable and engine rules fixed.
Click to expand...

We've been over this before (global recession, 2009 rules change). When has there been rules stability in F1?
 
The engine rules were static for 8 years. That's pretty stable, and pretty pathetic for the "pinnacle of motorsport. We will have the V6 rules for 7 years at least, and within a few seasons they will be static.
 
Shimmy said:
From those, my faves are; Magnussen's, Ericsson's, Kobayashi's and Bianchi's.
Click to expand...

I would add Hulkenbergs to that too. Some of them the designs are just too busy IMO.

Regarding the Helmets though, I thought they had to have the number on top of the helmet where the roll hoop camera could see and unless I am missing something Perez doesn't :confused:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom