Ecclestone wants to scrap 2014 engines because they don't sound good

Bring back V10 alien-battle-droid-monsters-a-mile-away sound!

I prefer watching these 50 kg boxers go for it full bananas than watching alien and predator walking in circles around each other in a challenging fashion.

These cars were cool but there was no fight.

Whe I was for the first (and so far only, sadly) time on a GP, I was seriously shocked how much better engines sound compared to TV.

Exactly, instead of complaining about the possible sound of future engines, Ecclestone should make sure the current ones don't sound like **** on his FOM feed. Every other youtube video filmed with phone camera sounds better.

Wait, Ima gonna let you finish, but...

Another thing:

for many years, since the 90's, the metrics of F1 was always "astounding to more astounding". IMO that is the main part of the technical allure of it, the mechanical gestalt.[...]

For many years, F1 seemed to do fine with low-revving V8s, L4ts and V6ts. Are you suggesting F1 really started in 1989 and everything up to that point was just boring, second-tier racing?

Also love this part:

F1 is going backwards, [...] Bring back V10....

For many years, F1 seemed to do fine with low-revving V8s, L4ts and V6ts. Are you suggesting F1 really started in 1989 and everything up to that point was just boring, second-tier racing?

Uhm... it's not 1989?

F1 has a lot more to compete with these days for one's Entertainment Dollar; and ironically, unless one wants to say "let's get rid of tv coverage!" you've got to have a motivating factor for someone to go to the races.

Otherwise Bernie may as well just have them run around in karts at Paul Ricard every other weekend. I'd watch, it would be interesting. But it wouldn't be Formula One, and the viscerally exciting aspects of it would, "more than likely" create a wayyyyyy smaller audience.

If one wants to get right down to it, karts are pure racing. There really isn't any reason to have bigger, faster or stronger vehicles to *race* with. By the same token, nobody *really* needs a 60" tv to watch an F1 race, do they? Do we really need color tv? IPods? Loud rock concerts with lots of lighting effects? We don't *really* need a rock concert to be loud, and one can see a band perfectly well lit by florescent lights.

People are not ascetic monks living on a hill. If a group wants to ask a lot of money from me to see and hear something, *seeing and hearing it in person has to be a dramatic thing*.

Soft cars, bad viewing areas (Montreal - Austin downslope GA?), is NOT how you sell Formula One in the 21st century.

Edited by Rubens Hakkamacher, 01 October 2012 - 16:03.

The sound is all important. It's the first impression a person has of F1 at the track. It precedes the car, it announces it's arrival.

We lost a good bit from the V10s.

1) the V8's are not quite as loud.
2) they're not as strong: when they're upshifting they don't sound as aggressive. The V10's sounded like angry cyborg death machines. That is cool.
3) we've lost the ultra-high end revving. Let them run higher; not only is it NOVEL, an important aspect to F1, but the wider pitch range was, again, more impressive.

Anyone that rubbishes these aspects are being insular. You've never noted your fellow F1 fans that surround you *headed to the track*, an *at the track*, who are grinning and shouting at each other BECAUSE OF THE IMPRESSIVENESS OF THE SOUND.


We don't care if someone else finds no glee in this. I find it hard to imagine a "car guy" that isn't thrilled by the *sound* of a car. The V10 F1 cars ruled.

A 1.6l V6 cannot be the same by default. Just by nature of being more efficient with the turbo, you're subtracting energy from the exhaust - it can't be as loud. Factor in much less displacement, again it can't be as loud. Just the fact that there is a turbo interrupting the exhaust changes it.

V6 turbos make no sense on any level. The average road car doesn't use a V6, doesn't use a turbo, won't use a turbo, and is headed towards being all electric. Make electric wide open energy, technology and engineering wise - THAT makes sense. Otherwise it's just another EXPENSIVE boondoggle.


This would be the most brilliant thing Bernie has done for F1 if he gets this concept across to the FIA and teams. The promoters are right: I'm not very motivated to go see weaker, softer, less aggressive sounding F1 cars at a track in 2014. That's half the live experience, are they going to cut tickets prices in half?

I have to agree completely. The sound of the V-10s at full blast was enough to make your bones rattle inside you as the cars screamed down the front stretch at Indy..... The Honda was almost too much to bare Sound is such an important factor, dont neuter the cars.

What a load of bull. If true why isn't Ferrari and Bernie pushing for a return to V12's and unlimited revs, only then would it really be about the sound.

V12 sounds, enjoy!

and BRM V16

Edited by senna da silva, 01 October 2012 - 16:50.

Alain Prost could give Renault's 2014 engine an on-track test

"Driving a modern Formula 1 car is very helpful and maybe I have another chance to do it with the new engine in the next two months. That would be another good experience.I am already thinking about the new technology coming in Formula 1 with the new engines. I am going to work very hard with Renault on that; it is our new target."

Cool news!

V12 sounds, enjoy!

senna da silva the V12 sound is fantastic.

Edited by AlexS, 01 October 2012 - 18:43.

Out of the 12's i loved the low growl of the Honda but also loved the high scream of the Ferrari.

I am okay with new engines if they get more power. but they do not.

The good thing about the new engines is that they will not hit the rev limiter so easily on the straights as the peak power is not at peak rpm.

But since the teams are forced to run one set of ratios pr gear pr season its likely that it will not happen all that often anyway.

Unless you simply say.. Monza? spa? well thats just two races. lets focus on the average top speed on the other tracks and pick our top speed based upon those.

meaning Monza and Spa will go slowly or close to the rpm limit anyway.

I am okay with new engines if they get more power. but they do not.

The good thing about the new engines is that they will not hit the rev limiter so easily on the straights as the peak power is not at peak rpm.

From what I have gathered, the new engines won't rev even close to the 15k limit. They will be fuel limited at 10.5k rpm, if I'm not completely mistaken. How high they will go? 12k?

The average road car doesn't use a turbo.

Yes, they do. 80% of the cars sold in Europe are turbos.

Edited by MrFondue, 01 October 2012 - 20:53.

Yes, they do. 80% of the cars sold in Europe are turbos.

And the rest of the world?

And the rest of the world?

How many F1 teams are from the rest of the world?

And the rest of the world?

Will catch up.

And the rest of the world?

To be fair the route being pursued in the industry for future IC engine design is smaller capacity turbo, hybrid designs. F1 if anything is behind the curve than ahead of it. Just be glad they aren't pursuing Diesel as a proposal and don't take America as an example, they still think a 3.4 litre V6 is efficient.

I used to think the V8's sounded awesome. Emphasis on USED to. That was until a few weekends ago when I went to the Ferrari Racing Days and witnessed a V10 on an open track for the first time (as opposed to a half-arsed run up Goodwood.) The V8's though still loud, sound dull compared to the scream of the V10 which just seems to rip through the air. Use this video to judge for yourself.. http://www.youtube.c...;feature=relmfu

So as I'm bored of the V8's, I'm kind of looking forward to the V6T just because it will be a change. I'm pretty sure Bernie is just chatting nonsense.

Scrap the plans and bring the V10's back.

next year will be the last time i attend an f1 race (assuming new engines in 2014). i've been to races in 2004, 2006, 2010, and 2011. the v10s were spectacular. a unique experience thats hard to describe. a good chunk of the f1 experience is the sound. tickets are expensive. if they sound like crap (which they will), then i'd rather watch on tv (where they've always sounded like crap). v8s were a definite step down, but they still sound infinitely better than any other car (or object) on the planet earth (besides any classic f1 v10's). in the future i will spend my money on going to events that feature the old v10s, rather than going to any races. everyone needs to hear them at least once in their lifetime.

Engine sound, of course, contributes to the whole impression. But I don't regard it as the decisive factor. We have had I4 turbo engines in the past, but what attracted me was the abundance of power and the master craft of the drivers to tame that power and translate it in speed.
Since then F1 goes the way of less and less power, controlled with ever more clever electronic gizmos and the drivers having game pad consoles instead of a steering wheel.

Engine sound, of course, contributes to the whole impression. But I don't regard it as the decisive factor. We have had I4 turbo engines in the past, but what attracted me was the abundance of power and the master craft of the drivers to tame that power and translate it in speed.
Since then F1 goes the way of less and less power, controlled with ever more clever electronic gizmos and the drivers having game pad consoles instead of a steering wheel.

^^^^^^^^ This.

The difference isn't even that big on these videos.
Also the turbos will be a lot better and more efficient, as well as allow better racing since cars won't be stuck on the rev limiter.
There are also other benefits like possible new manufacturers, which will absolutely not happen with any NA engine.

Edited by BigCHrome, 02 October 2012 - 05:40.

Why this bickering? Let them build engines they want.
For exempla:
Turbo: xx max pressure
Fuel tank: max 100 liters
Petrol: road car super 98
cc: max 1500
Don't mix up turbo/non-turbo engines, that is always horrible and gets LeMans situations where the diesel engine has great advantages.

And then, let them free! If Ferrari wants a 1.5l V12T, let them have it. There are different brands and each one has a different segment in which they sell car their name maker cars. For example:
Ferrari/Mercedes V8, V10 or V12
Renault V6 or I4/6
BMW: I6 or V8
Ford/Cosworth: V8
Subaru/Porsche: boxer 6 or 8 (low center of gravity).

I loved those rules in the early nineties. You had 3,5l engine and you could make a V8, V10 or V12. Each brand has its own market segment, so they can actually use what they learn. What use does Ferrari have with a V6? They have no cars with such an engine. Renault doesn't sell V8's unless it is for the World Series. You can enlist more engine manufacturers if they can actually put the technology to good use.

Why this bickering? Let them build engines they want.

Nice idea, but based on the various discussions here and on the technical board, it's typically only one type of engine that eventually proves successful under certain rules. Ferrari would never build a turbocharged V12 for the reason that under the proposed rules a L4 would be superior. People who propose free engine formula forget that Ferrari gave up V12s voluntarily for the 1996 season. Similarly, BMWs turbocharged L4s became uncompetitive since the rules were changed to limit turbo boost to 4 bars for the 1987 season.

Renault was having a field day in the Williams, so everyone adopted the V10 format. There were talks that Honda and Ferrari were developing a V12, but that got binned when the formula became strict 3.0 V10's.

The RPM limit is the thing I hate most...

Ecclestone is an ongoing disaster for F1.

Ecclestone is an ongoing disaster for F1.

-1

Renault was having a field day in the Williams, so everyone adopted the V10 format. There were talks that Honda and Ferrari were developing a V12, but that got binned when the formula became strict 3.0 V10's.

The RPM limit is the thing I hate most...

It was Toyota who were really hurt by the V10 rule. They were planning to enter with a V12 and had to delay by a year to redesign their engine, but it was because they were going this route that other teams started to look at the V12 again.

And the Ferrari V12 in the first half of the nineties was not the most reliable unit around... *cough*

And the Ferrari V12 in the first half of the nineties was not the most reliable unit around... *cough*

Neither was the V10.

But there were less moving parts.;)

-1

Has he made F1 a better spectacle?

Do the fans get better value for money?

Do the tracks get a fair share of the proceeds?

Is it right that France doesn't have a GP because of his ludicrous fees?

Is it right that Bahrain has a GP just because 1 of the princes fancies it whilst they kill people who are much more interested in democracy and then lock up medics who dare to treat them?

Is it right the the massive majority of the proceeds is syphoned off to already ludicrously wealthy people?

His dumb ideas like medals and sprinklers and this short term nonsense are only a minor part of the problem.

Uhm... it's not 1989? [...]

Well, duh. But that doesn't change that F1 is more than just the engine sound spectacle you make it look like. Plus, the money does not come from the few spectators at the circuit, but the millions of people worldwide in front of their TV screens. And they don't get the whole sound experience anyway and won't hear much of a difference with some changes to sound mixing on the world feed.

Of course F1 has more to compete with nowadays, but i doubt the engine sound is that much of a factor. How many spectators does BOSS GP get on their standalone weekends? How many fans do you expect to drop their teams and drivers and stop watching because the engine sounds different? I can remember the same discussion back in 2005 when the V8s were going to be introduced - about how everyone will stop watching and how this is going to kill F1 etc. Doesn't seem to have happened. Will it now? I have my doubts. And if Bernie is concerned about GP attendance, he could easily adjust the fees and bring more spectators to the track than engine sound would ever have.

I can understand you miss the V10s, V12s and will also miss the V8s once they're gone. But i for example am missing engine development and the V6ts will bring some of that back. They should also be cheaper in the long run - which was one of the reasons they were introduced in the first place. Something that neither opened-up V8s nor those big engines from yesteryear will accomplish. So what do you want them to do? Spend more money to reintroduce prehistoric engine concepts or continuing with unfrozen V8s, risking some manufacturers to leave while ending any chance of a new one to join? Or just keep the status quo for another 6 years or so, after which we'll have the same discussion?

The old F1 may have been more spectacular than the modern era F1, but it will never come back.

@SenorSjon: That would be nice, but i don't think any manufacturer would agree to that.

Edited by dau, 02 October 2012 - 10:11.

The sound is all important. It's the first impression a person has of F1 at the track. It precedes the car, it announces it's arrival.

We lost a good bit from the V10s.

1) the V8's are not quite as loud.
2) they're not as strong: when they're upshifting they don't sound as aggressive. The V10's sounded like angry cyborg death machines. That is cool.
3) we've lost the ultra-high end revving. Let them run higher; not only is it NOVEL, an important aspect to F1, but the wider pitch range was, again, more impressive.

Anyone that rubbishes these aspects are being insular. You've never noted your fellow F1 fans that surround you *headed to the track*, an *at the track*, who are grinning and shouting at each other BECAUSE OF THE IMPRESSIVENESS OF THE SOUND.


We don't care if someone else finds no glee in this. I find it hard to imagine a "car guy" that isn't thrilled by the *sound* of a car. The V10 F1 cars ruled.

A 1.6l V6 cannot be the same by default. Just by nature of being more efficient with the turbo, you're subtracting energy from the exhaust - it can't be as loud. Factor in much less displacement, again it can't be as loud. Just the fact that there is a turbo interrupting the exhaust changes it.

V6 turbos make no sense on any level. The average road car doesn't use a V6, doesn't use a turbo, won't use a turbo, and is headed towards being all electric. Make electric wide open energy, technology and engineering wise - THAT makes sense. Otherwise it's just another EXPENSIVE boondoggle.


This would be the most brilliant thing Bernie has done for F1 if he gets this concept across to the FIA and teams. The promoters are right: I'm not very motivated to go see weaker, softer, less aggressive sounding F1 cars at a track in 2014. That's half the live experience, are they going to cut tickets prices in half?

I appreciate your passion for engine noise as it's something I share - it's the most important factor for me...however, your comment about average road cars not moving to turbocharging before going electric is wrong. I work for a major car manufacturer designing engines and all of our engines in a few years will be turbocharged, apart from a few unique examples...including those going to rest of world markets outside Europe. It is very relevant for F1 cars to have turbos...but as you stated, they just ruin the noise

The F1 world feed is more disastrous than anything else. If you hear the sound on YT fan video's it is much better. Even the onboards are quite dim and stripped of sound. Yet many fans have DTS/DD systems at home which can burp out enormous sound levels.

The F1 world feed is more disastrous than anything else. If you hear the sound on YT fan video's it is much better. Even the onboards are quite dim and stripped of sound. Yet many fans have DTS/DD systems at home which can burp out enormous sound levels.

I agree, it was especially noticeable for Singapore, although it may have just been me. The commentary was on full volume but the car sounds were very faint, it completely destroyed the atmosphere of the race. Formula One and the broadcasters need to do more to capture the sounds on track, and to stop doing their mixing so as the commentary overrides everything on track.

F1 sounds like **** on TV anyway, so the new engines won't change anything for most of the people who watch it on TV. The sounds will be different on track, but pretty much all racing cars sound incredible when you hear them live, I doubt it would be too much of an issue either way.

Marussia's Graeme Lowden also has his concerns about the proposed 2014 engine regulations
http://www.jamesalle...of-the-f1-grid/

seems more and more likely to me that the switch to V6 engines will be pushed back

Marussia's Graeme Lowden also has his concerns about the proposed 2014 engine regulations
http://www.jamesalle...of-the-f1-grid/

seems more and more likely to me that the switch to V6 engines will be pushed back

Then what will Lewis do? Can we imagine a U-turn back to McLaren a la Button and Williams-Honda?

You guys are quite funny.

There will never be a good time for a new engine formula for a team like Marussia.

Until Todt says something on the matter, nothing changes...

Then what will Lewis do? Can we imagine a U-turn back to McLaren a la Button and Williams-Honda?

No. The circumstances are entirely different.

I hope it's a calculated move to get the manufacturers to reduce the upfront engine costs so smaller teams don't suffer - they can make their money back over a longer term, or risk having wasted hundreds of millions if the engine remain the same. There is next to no chance of the engines remaining the same and Mercedes and Renault not throwing a wobbly and possibly leaving F1, so I don't think the threat is real, but the threat/risk may be convincing enough.

Also how could you convince Honda, Toyota, Ford, VW/Porche, Peugeot etc. to consider returning when you show that hundreds of millions of dollars of research could be made redundant on a whim.

However, I hope it's not Ferrari being behind schedule on their engine and playing games to delay the introduction.

Edited by onewingedangel, 02 October 2012 - 20:07.

Then what will Lewis do?

He'll race his heart out in a Mercedes AMG with a V8 engine.
lol we possibly could see a significant change in F1 engine-wise scrapped or delayed and you worry about Hamilton??

There's no point for Ferrari to switch to 1.6l V6 engines (yet) and if they found an ally in Ecclestone then a delay is very much on the cards

Edited by ayali, 02 October 2012 - 20:18.

Please, anyone who thinks an F1 car sounds good with any sort of engine, just watch a Top Fuel drag pass. Nothing will ever sound exciting again (although that might simply be because you can't hear it).

There is literally hundreds of millions already invested in the new engines, so it's going to take something of a cataclysm to prevent them from happening.

Ferrari and Ecclestone not being happy is significant, but it's going to take something more than that to make the FIA flip-flop and possibly anger both Renault and Mercedes.

I can see the likes of Marussia and HRT being made to run severely crippled Cosworth V8s way before the whole project of the new engines will be canned.

I would not be surprised if the uncertainty was simply about Ferrari being afraid of not being on top of the new technology, not the engine itself but all the energy recuperation gizmos which are slightly outside their normal field of expertise... and predictably Ecclestone is always gonna look after the most important team and push an agenda that will please them.

I like the sound of atmospheric engines better myself, but we already had more than a decade of turbos in F1 so I think the sound thing is a bogus argument, they just had to talk about something the average fan could relate to, in order to have anything to say about it.

Please, anyone who thinks an F1 car sounds good with any sort of engine, just watch a Top Fuel drag pass. Nothing will ever sound exciting again (although that might simply be because you can't hear it).

IMO those things are just too loud to be enjoyable. They don't sound good at all.

No. The circumstances are entirely different.

But ultimately it doesn't matter about the circumstances when emotion comes into it. I don't remember many people predicting Jenson's U-turn and I don't see many people doing the same about Lewis now so that alone is a similarity. I agree with you that this is not likely to happen but I certainly wouldn't say it is impossible. I would also wager right here that Lewis will be with Merc for no longer than Alonso was with McLaren. He doesn't like losing and with the 2014 regs on ice he will soon see that he doesn't have much hope of winning.

There is literally hundreds of millions already invested in the new engines, so it's going to take something of a cataclysm to prevent them from happening.

Where is your evidence for this? In the past two years Mercedes' investment in F1 engines went down...

I think you have developed an unhealthy obsession and you are now piling far-fetched assumptions on top of several already far-fetched assumptions.

Where is your evidence for this? In the past two years Mercedes' investment in F1 engines went down...

http://en.espnf1.com...tory/79590.html

Renault Sport managing director Jean-Francois Caubet played down suggestions that the price of the engines would cause ructions. "I think we will probably know in September the cost of the new engine. I don't think the cost of the new engine will be a drama."

And he made Renault Sport's stance on the introduction of the new engine in 2014 clear.

"We have already delayed the engine once, from four cylinder to go to six cylinders. I think it cost us around ten or 15 million, probably the same for Mercedes and probably the same for Ferrari. So we have blown nearly 50 million for nothing. If you delay one year, we think it will be never (happen) because the delay will be '15 and then '16. For Renault, it is a strategic choice."

Just changing to V6s while the I4s were at an early stage cost approx. $50m

I think you have developed an unhealthy obsession and you are now piling far-fetched assumptions on top of several already far-fetched assumptions.

It is no assumption that Mercedes F1 engine costs went down over the past two years. Their two most recent financial statements show that. Their research and development costs also decreased. You seem to be making the assumption by saying that hundreds of millions has been spent on the new engines. I use the word 'seem' because I have invited you to provide the evidence. The point you make is at the core of this entire discussion so it would be useful if you could confirm whether it is based on fact or opinion.