Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Motorsport)   F1: Ok, you're only allowed three engines for the entire year. Honda F1: Umm... you meant per weekend, right? RIGHT?   ( motorsport.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, leader Yusuke Hasegawa, Formula One, Ferrari president Sergio, chief Christian Horner, power unit usage, Strategy Group meeting, FIA president Jean, short shrift  
•       •       •

1064 clicks; posted to Sports » on 03 Jan 2018 at 10:50 AM (6 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



31 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2018-01-03 10:48:11 AM  
When Acura first game to market, Honda really touted their F1 heritage.

Guess that ain't such a selling point anymore.
 
2018-01-03 10:48:34 AM  
Would be super amusing if Honda fluked it, and got it all spot on immediately and run away with it this year using just two engines and prompting a rule change next year limiting everyone to two.
 
2018-01-03 10:48:39 AM  

gar1013: When Acura first game to market, Honda really touted their F1 heritage.

Guess that ain't such a selling point anymore.


Came to market. Not game to market.

Damn you, autocorrect.
 
2018-01-03 10:57:31 AM  
I would love to hear NASCAR teams cry if they ever instituted an engine limit.  Last I checked, they can run a new engine every race.  Granted they're limited to running the same engine from qualify to race day, or start at the back of the line if they change engine or cars.

colinspooky: Would be super amusing if Honda fluked it, and got it all spot on immediately and run away with it this year using just two engines and prompting a rule change next year limiting everyone to two.


They were saying it is easy to do, if they want to drive slower.  At lower speeds and RPMs, they can race every race with one engine.  The problem is, hard to win a race if you're driving slower than everyone else.
 
2018-01-03 11:30:02 AM  

gar1013: When Acura first game to market, Honda really touted their F1 heritage.
Guess that ain't such a selling point anymore.


When Acura came to market, if you wanted a place on the podium you needed a Honda engine.  Basically they were tiny engines boosted out the wazoo.  But still, somehow Honda refused to sell a turbocharged engine  for the next 25 years or so.

/yes, there were odd exceptions
//I don't think they were designed/built by Honda
///something about a turbo motorcycle
 
2018-01-03 11:34:36 AM  
3 engines, 4, 20, I really don't care.

But fix the penalty system.
McLaren were averaging around a 20 grid spot penalty per race last year.
Even in races where it may have been fun see Alonso try and compete, starting from the parking lot made it meaningless.

If you want to punish the teams for overspending on engines, punish the teams.  Start docking them constructor championship points when they go over the component limits.
 
2018-01-03 11:43:06 AM  
Engine limits are stupid. Fundamentally, "cost control" shouldn't be words that exist in a discussion of top tier racing. Go fast. Take chances. Dammit.
 
2018-01-03 12:03:16 PM  
Is it three engines per team or per car?

I wonder how teams will have to drop out mid season because they've run out of engines.
 
2018-01-03 12:15:45 PM  
still no passing right ?
 
2018-01-03 12:26:34 PM  

mikey15: still no passing right ?


A Mercedes, Ferrari, or Red Bull driver should have to start at the back every race, except Monaco.
 
2018-01-03 12:38:34 PM  

oryx: Is it three engines per team or per car?

I wonder how teams will have to drop out mid season because they've run out of engines.


I would hope car.
 
2018-01-03 01:18:19 PM  

SFSailor: Engine limits are stupid. Fundamentally, "cost control" shouldn't be words that exist in a discussion of top tier racing. Go fast. Take chances. Dammit.


Without cost control F-1, and other top tier racing, one would have died years ago. You only had two or three teams that could possibly keep up with it.
 
2018-01-03 01:20:03 PM  

mikey15: still no passing right ?


Given how out of their minds the current rules committee is, it wouldn't surprise me if they required bump to pass.
 
2018-01-03 02:06:14 PM  

dywed88: Without cost control F-1, and other top tier racing, one would have died years ago. You only had two or three teams that could possibly keep up with it.


So, the solution is hamstring everyone?  Or become a fan of monster truck racing if "run whatever ya' brung" is more philosophically interesting?

Maybe a luxury tax?  Or a stratified set of restrictions -- "win a race, no testing for the rest of the season; haven't earned points yet?  Test/upgrade/replace whatever you want."?  Or maybe a claiming rule -- "win a race, the car can be bought by any team underneath you on the constructors' leader board"? Or?

I'm not a fan of one-design races, and would like to see what engineers can do with no handcuffs on.  Then again, I am not upset by a team lapping the entire field every race, if they're that superior, I guess.
 
2018-01-03 02:18:54 PM  

SFSailor: dywed88: Without cost control F-1, and other top tier racing, one would have died years ago. You only had two or three teams that could possibly keep up with it.

So, the solution is hamstring everyone?


Well one solution is an actual fair distribution model rather than a Ferrari welfare system that the current revenue split produces.  If there were a more equitable split, then maybe the rules could mandate a few more engines available for teams without bankrupting all but the top tier.
 
2018-01-03 03:05:44 PM  

Daedalus27: SFSailor: dywed88: Without cost control F-1, and other top tier racing, one would have died years ago. You only had two or three teams that could possibly keep up with it.

So, the solution is hamstring everyone?

Well one solution is an actual fair distribution model rather than a Ferrari welfare system that the current revenue split produces.  If there were a more equitable split, then maybe the rules could mandate a few more engines available for teams without bankrupting all but the top tier.


This. More money for the mid-pack and tail end teams would help level the field. Although I think without the F1 prize money for just sticking around the longest, Ferrari might have actual money problems outside the racing team.

I like what Motogp has done with their concessions on testing, number of engines per season, and mid-season engine design changes for teams that had success the previous year vs those that hadn't made the podium.
 
2018-01-03 03:09:58 PM  
Why 3? Why not 5 or 7? Are they trying to bring in Isuzu or Geo or something? What is the goal here?
 
2018-01-03 03:28:55 PM  

hottestsauce: Why 3? Why not 5 or 7? Are they trying to bring in Isuzu or Geo or something? What is the goal here?


Two goals:

1) The very top teams want to make it harder for the teams next tier of teams to catch up, fewer cycles means an advantage can be more easily maintained.

2) To reduce costs so as to not bankrupt the lowest teams.

It is the good but not great teams that would be hit by these rules.
 
2018-01-03 03:43:04 PM  
I, for one, miss Steve Hobbs going "KABLAMMO" when a lump would expire.  The unreliability added unpredictability.  The kind we only get now from wet weather.
 
2018-01-03 03:43:08 PM  

colinspooky: ...prompting a rule change next year limiting everyone to two.


Aren't they doing that anyway? Or is that 2020?
 
2018-01-03 05:29:31 PM  

dywed88: hottestsauce: Why 3? Why not 5 or 7? Are they trying to bring in Isuzu or Geo or something? What is the goal here?

Two goals:

1) The very top teams want to make it harder for the teams next tier of teams to catch up, fewer cycles means an advantage can be more easily maintained.

2) To reduce costs so as to not bankrupt the lowest teams.

It is the good but not great teams that would be hit by these rules.


Less competition for the top, more chaos below? Sports in the age of capitalism
 
2018-01-03 06:42:42 PM  

dywed88: hottestsauce: Why 3? Why not 5 or 7? Are they trying to bring in Isuzu or Geo or something? What is the goal here?

Two goals:

1) The very top teams want to make it harder for the teams next tier of teams to catch up, fewer cycles means an advantage can be more easily maintained.

2) To reduce costs so as to not bankrupt the lowest teams.

It is the good but not great teams that would be hit by these rules.


This is actually pretty spot on, except that it actually INCREASES costs, instead of reducing them.  But they happen 'off-sheet', as it were, so they don't count against the cost controls.

There's also a 'green' aspect to things as well, which isn't necessarily a bad thing in and of itself.  That also goes into the fuel management they're doing in F1.  Mercedes is reportedly getting better than 50% energy efficiency from gasoline... that's unheard-of.

But it's way, way, WAY more expensive to design a whole new power unit that can survive for a third of the season, than it is to just make a 4th power unit.  Engine costs, while astronomical by ordinary standards, are almost a write-off expense at F1 level.
 
2018-01-03 07:11:55 PM  
Cutting costs seems like a hollow excuse to limit the number of engines.
 
2018-01-03 10:29:24 PM  

Kurohone: dywed88: hottestsauce: Why 3? Why not 5 or 7? Are they trying to bring in Isuzu or Geo or something? What is the goal here?

Two goals:

1) The very top teams want to make it harder for the teams next tier of teams to catch up, fewer cycles means an advantage can be more easily maintained.

2) To reduce costs so as to not bankrupt the lowest teams.

It is the good but not great teams that would be hit by these rules.

This is actually pretty spot on, except that it actually INCREASES costs, instead of reducing them.  But they happen 'off-sheet', as it were, so they don't count against the cost controls.

There's also a 'green' aspect to things as well, which isn't necessarily a bad thing in and of itself.  That also goes into the fuel management they're doing in F1.  Mercedes is reportedly getting better than 50% energy efficiency from gasoline... that's unheard-of.

But it's way, way, WAY more expensive to design a whole new power unit that can survive for a third of the season, than it is to just make a 4th power unit.  Engine costs, while astronomical by ordinary standards, are almost a write-off expense at F1 level.


As I said, it is cost cutting for the back of the pack teams because they just use it as an excuse. Not for the competitive or almost competitive teams.
 
2018-01-04 02:55:29 AM  

Ball of Confusion: I, for one, miss Steve Hobbs going "KABLAMMO" when a lump would expire.  The unreliability added unpredictability.  The kind we only get now from wet weather.


Actually, F1 engines still fairly regularly give up the ghost during races.  They aren't nearly as reliable as they are getting in the WEC or even NASCAR
 
2018-01-04 08:58:08 AM  
Getting rid of wings will save more money than any engine rules.
 
2018-01-04 10:56:56 AM  

Daedalus27: Ball of Confusion: I, for one, miss Steve Hobbs going "KABLAMMO" when a lump would expire.  The unreliability added unpredictability.  The kind we only get now from wet weather.

Actually, F1 engines still fairly regularly give up the ghost during races.  They aren't nearly as reliable as they are getting in the WEC or even NASCAR


NASCAR teams use a fresh new engine every weekend, and still blow a few engines in a single race.  I wouldn't count them in the engine reliability club.  The big teams rebuilds their motors after each race, then sells them to the smaller teams or use them for practice.  The smaller teams rebuilds the engines, and reuse, but they are using new internals.  Granted, I would imagine F1 is rebuilding their engines after every race as well.  I'm sure every league of racing does that, drag racers rebuild their engines after every pass.

/big NASCAR teams are only reusing the car body and driver
 
2018-01-04 04:09:13 PM  

lack of warmth: Granted, I would imagine F1 is rebuilding their engines after every race as well.


Nope. The FIA puts "seals" on the engine so that if a team tries to open it and repair they break the seal, and that counts the same as a brand new engine. Same with the transmission.

Kurohone: But it's way, way, WAY more expensive to design a whole new power unit that can survive for a third of the season, than it is to just make a 4th power unit.  Engine costs, while astronomical by ordinary standards, are almost a write-off expense at F1 level.


This. I've heard stories about teams thirty years ago using, like, two new(ish) engines per car per weekend, which is insanely expensive even with rebuilds, but three engines per season is just as insane only in the opposite direction. And like you said, there's no real cost savings because they have to pour so much money into the design to make it last that long. A good middle ground would be something like 2-3 weekends per unit, which would also allow for developments to be introduced on a regular basis and allow engines to be run closer to their limit, as well as requiring some reliability.
 
2018-01-04 06:48:50 PM  

Victoly: lack of warmth: Granted, I would imagine F1 is rebuilding their engines after every race as well.

Nope. The FIA puts "seals" on the engine so that if a team tries to open it and repair they break the seal, and that counts the same as a brand new engine. Same with the transmission.


Wow, that's pretty cool in the strict sense.  That wouldn't fly in NASCAR for sure, they'd be lucky to finish 6 races on 3 engines like that.  NHRA gives the drag racing teams a strict 60 minute window to rebuild their engines before their next race.  Funny how wide the range of rules can be through motor sports.
 
2018-01-04 10:39:34 PM  

lack of warmth: NHRA gives the drag racing teams a strict 60 minute window to rebuild their engines before their next race.


Ok, _that's_ cool. I gotta go see if there are YouTube vids of that.

I can't change my farkin' _oil_ in less than 60 minutes.

/ betting they drink less beer during their projects, though...
 
2018-01-04 11:28:53 PM  

SFSailor: lack of warmth: NHRA gives the drag racing teams a strict 60 minute window to rebuild their engines before their next race.

Ok, _that's_ cool. I gotta go see if there are YouTube vids of that.

I can't change my farkin' _oil_ in less than 60 minutes.

/ betting they drink less beer during their projects, though...


They show parts of the of it during NHRA competitions on tv.  The teams have it down to a process, trays with tools and new parts ready to go, engine stays in the car.  They remove the whole fiberglass body on funny cars, almost looks like top fuel dragster, only with the engine in the front.  IDK if the prostreet cars do all that, but top fuel and funny cars do for sure.
 
Displayed 31 of 31 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report