Jump to content


Photo

Engine usage going into Abu Dhabi (merged)


  • Please log in to reply
62 replies to this topic

#1 WhiteBlue

WhiteBlue
  • Member

  • 2,138 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 07 November 2010 - 22:27

Vettel engines:

One: first use Bahrain FP1, last use 1041 km before qualifying Australia - 1150 km
Two: first use Australian race, FP3, quali + race Malaysia + unknown laps FP1/2 > 1090 km
Three: first use FP3 China, quali + China race, FP3 Spain, quali + race Spain, FP3 Monaco, Quali +Monaco race + unknown laps FP1/2 > 1700 km
Four: first use FP3 Turkey, quali + Turky race, FP3 Canada +Canada race + unknown laps FP1/2 > 1360 km
Five: first use FP3 Europe, quali + Valencia race, FP3, quali + British race + unknown laps FP1/2 > 1430 km
Six: first use FP3 Germany, quali + German race, FP3, quali + Belgian race, FP3, quali and race in Korea boom = 1600 km
Seven: first use FP3 Italy, quali + Italy race, Singapore FP3, quali and race, Brazil FP3, quali + race > 1700 km
Eight: first use FP3 Japan, quali + race, 500 km

Alonso will do his third or fourth race on his engine and Webber will have 1.5 races on his #8 engine. His engine will have some 900 kms probably. So Vettel will have the best engine.

Edited by WhiteBlue, 07 November 2010 - 22:29.


Advertisement

#2 sv401

sv401
  • Member

  • 749 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 07 November 2010 - 23:23

Vettel engines:


Which engine was used in Hungary ? :confused: Was it one of the older ones (4 or 5), or was engine 8 actually used first there, meaning no "new engine" advantage now ?


#3 ARENA

ARENA
  • Member

  • 32 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 November 2010 - 23:37

I think engine #6 was used in GER, HUN, BEL, and it was engine #8 that went boom in Korea.

#4 sv401

sv401
  • Member

  • 749 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 07 November 2010 - 23:44

I think engine #6 was used in GER, HUN, BEL, and it was engine #8 that went boom in Korea.


If that is true, it could actually be a worse situation than Alonso's, with a relatively new engine failing and the others already having been used at 3 races and/or being very old.

Edited by sv401, 07 November 2010 - 23:45.


#5 HappyPhantom

HappyPhantom
  • Member

  • 273 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 07 November 2010 - 23:52

I think engine #6 was used in GER, HUN, BEL, and it was engine #8 that went boom in Korea.


I was said that the engine used in Korea, wasn't the one used in Suzuka (which was a new one, no?). I don't know much about the engine situation as I can't be bother to keep up with it. Maybe Mark still has an other engine? I'm just asking as I have no clue, when which engine was used. The same for Alonso.

However, the engine Vettel was using in Korea suffered a spectacular blow-up in the closing laps of the race which cost the 23-year-old victory and the lead of the drivers’ championship.

On the positive side for Red Bull, Horner revealed that the Renault unit had already completed 1,600km of its expected 2,000km life and it had been on his last race anyway.


source

autosport reported the same thing

Red Bull Racing team principal Christian Horner was optimistic, however, that the loss of the Renault unit - which had done 1600 kilometres of its 2000 kilometre life – would not hinder Vettel too much.


Edited by HappyPhantom, 07 November 2010 - 23:53.


#6 JosTheBoss

JosTheBoss
  • Member

  • 571 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 02:00

No way Webber has 900kms on his #8 unit.

#7 magicon

magicon
  • Member

  • 407 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 08 November 2010 - 03:17

Webber has the most engines left. The wet quali was bad for alo/vettel i think.

#8 tifosi

tifosi
  • Member

  • 13,289 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 08 November 2010 - 03:27

According to the SPEED boadcast Alonso has an engine with almost no miles on it.

#9 HappyPhantom

HappyPhantom
  • Member

  • 273 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 03:56

Webber has the most engines left. The wet quali was bad for alo/vettel i think.


I don't think Vettel will use the one he used in the wet quali as it's already done 3 races; he's going to use the one which he only used in Suzuka apparently. He cracked his eight enging open there, but didn't use it in Korea (see my post above) nor this weekend in Brasil (can't find any report on that though)

#10 WhiteBlue

WhiteBlue
  • Member

  • 2,138 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 04:07

http://blog.auto-mot...hapeau-renault/

Confirms with source Renault that #7 Monza, Singapore has also run in Brazil.
Confirms again with source Renault that #8 from Japan will run in Abu Dhabi.

http://www.auto-moto...ig-3025440.html

Confirms again with source Renault that the Korean Engine was #6 which did Germany and Belgium and died at 1600 km in the third race. This engine did not do the Hungarian race. The FiA technical report for Hungary confirms that Vettel did not use a new engine which means that most likely they went back to either #5 or #4.

All races are accounted for and it is not possible that the Japanese engine had more than one race. Therefore the engine cannot have much more than 500 km for FP3, Q and Race.

Webbers #8 engine had approximately 350 km in Korea in FP3, Q and Race and 500 km in Brazil for FP3, Q and Race. So it should have 850 - 900 km.

Edited by WhiteBlue, 08 November 2010 - 04:09.


#11 WhiteBlue

WhiteBlue
  • Member

  • 2,138 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 04:18

Which engine was used in Hungary ? :confused: Was it one of the older ones (4 or 5), or was engine 8 actually used first there, meaning no "new engine" advantage now ?

It was either #4 or #5. http://forums.autosp...w...t&p=4698269


I think engine #6 was used in GER, HUN, BEL, and it was engine #8 that went boom in Korea.

No! Compare http://forums.autosp...w...t&p=4698269


If that is true, it could actually be a worse situation than Alonso's, with a relatively new engine failing and the others already having been used at 3 races and/or being very old.

No! According to Renault he will use the #8 from Japan with very low milage. http://forums.autosp...w...t&p=4698269


No way Webber has 900kms on his #8 unit.

Well, it should have at least 850 kms if not 900. http://forums.autosp...w...t&p=4698269


Webber has the most engines left. The wet quali was bad for alo/vettel i think.

No! Webber and Vetel will both be on #8 and Webber's has more kms. http://forums.autosp...w...t&p=4698269


According to the SPEED boadcast Alonso has an engine with almost no miles on it.

I would be surprised and would like to know which engine that should be.


#12 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 08 November 2010 - 04:32

Shocking state of F1 that the engine should even figure into it.

Sad days.If the FIA laid down decent governance in the first instant we wouldn't be here.

#13 magicon

magicon
  • Member

  • 407 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 08 November 2010 - 05:06

dude engines have always figured in titles. They use to blow a lot more when the engineers could fiddle with it.

#14 rookie

rookie
  • Member

  • 416 posts
  • Joined: November 04

Posted 08 November 2010 - 05:59

I would be surprised and would like to know which engine that should be.


Probably the Bahrain engines they swapped out before qual, the risk with using that "fresh" unit is they swapped it for a reason presumably related to reliability....so it wold be fresh, but potentially unreliable.

SV probably does have the freshest engine, but I don't think it will make a difference in the last race...it's the last race, they are 1500-2000km life engines, they are going to be both maxed regardless of 400 or 500 or 900kms on the clock.

Also, even if your MW 350km mark for Korea is right, which i think it isn't, it was 20 laps of safety car and 1 lap of racing plus a qual session. That's hardly wringing it's neck.





#15 Captain Tightpants

Captain Tightpants
  • Member

  • 8,012 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 08 November 2010 - 06:14

Shocking state of F1 that the engine should even figure into it.

Sad days.If the FIA laid down decent governance in the first instant we wouldn't be here.

I'd say this is better than the title being decided by whoever can afford to use a different engine in every race.

#16 mark f1

mark f1
  • Member

  • 1,932 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 08 November 2010 - 06:26

Webber's #8 had very high temp issues in the race. Will RBR take the risk to use it in Abu DHabi race and does he have another unit with not too many km's on it that he could use instead?

#17 steveninthematrix

steveninthematrix
  • Member

  • 329 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 08 November 2010 - 06:33

if the FIA really think, the teams building 8 engines or 19 engines saves any real money, they are stupid.

race weekends should not be affected by previous race weekends, one new engine per race weekend; but the fia are too stupid to understand this.

ok, moving on, ferrari had a small problem with the engines which they asked the FIA to fix; since then, their engines have been pretty bullet proof... so, lets see;

Webber will be going to abu dhabi with a small advantage, since his korean engine did so few km's

#18 DarthRonzo

DarthRonzo
  • Member

  • 804 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 06:49

http://blog.auto-mot...hapeau-renault/

Confirms with source Renault that #7 Monza, Singapore has also run in Brazil.
Confirms again with source Renault that #8 from Japan will run in Abu Dhabi.

http://www.auto-moto...ig-3025440.html

Confirms again with source Renault that the Korean Engine was #6 which did Germany and Belgium and died at 1600 km in the third race. This engine did not do the Hungarian race. The FiA technical report for Hungary confirms that Vettel did not use a new engine which means that most likely they went back to either #5 or #4.

All races are accounted for and it is not possible that the Japanese engine had more than one race. Therefore the engine cannot have much more than 500 km for FP3, Q and Race.

Webbers #8 engine had approximately 350 km in Korea in FP3, Q and Race and 500 km in Brazil for FP3, Q and Race. So it should have 850 - 900 km.

:up: Thanks for the info.

Vettel #8 seems to be in good shape. :up:
Vettel #6 that blew in Korea: I told you :rolleyes: Vettel should have parked and saved this engine in Spa after he crashed into Jenson and realized it wasn't posible a good point score. The same for Alonso in Spa.

Webber #8 had overheating problems in Interlagos and suffered a crash from Nico in Korea. Will crack for sure... for sure. :down:


#19 Captain Tightpants

Captain Tightpants
  • Member

  • 8,012 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 08 November 2010 - 06:50

race weekends should not be affected by previous race weekends, one new engine per race weekend; but the fia are too stupid to understand this.

Except that building nineteen engines is too expensive - and then the championship becomes decided by whoever can spend the most.

Advertisement

#20 sv401

sv401
  • Member

  • 749 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 08 November 2010 - 11:15

No! According to Renault he will use the #8 from Japan with very low milage. http://forums.autosp...w...t&p=4698269


The other psoter was then probably confused by the way the engine usage stats are written, showing only the total number of engines used, and not the actual engine number at each race.


#21 WhiteBlue

WhiteBlue
  • Member

  • 2,138 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 11:18

Probably the Bahrain engines they swapped out before qual, the risk with using that "fresh" unit is they swapped it for a reason presumably related to reliability....so it wold be fresh, but potentially unreliable.

There are reports that it is very dangerous to use old engines that have not been used for months. I don't know how serious one has to take such info. Ferrari could have used the Bahrain engine for FP1/3 and checked the wear state regularly. We don't know and will not know unless Ferrari publishes something. I Think we can take it for granted that Alonso is worse off than Vettel. I read somewhere that all his #1-4 engines are busted now. We need some reliable data here.


Webber's #8 had very high temp issues in the race. Will RBR take the risk to use it in Abu DHabi race and does he have another unit with not too many km's on it that he could use instead?

No, #8 is still Webber's best engine. The temp issue in Brazil was fuel shortage and lean running. They will have managed that within the engines limits.


if the FIA really think, the teams building 8 engines or 19 engines saves any real money, they are stupid. race weekends should not be affected by previous race weekends, one new engine per race weekend; but the fia are too stupid to understand this.

You are wrong on several counts there. Limiting the numbers of engines is the most successful cost containment strategy that was ever found. All parties agree to that and it is highly unlikely that it will ever change. The FiA nor the FOTA are stupid. If there is a better way to contain cost you should come forward and propose it. The current system is pretty smart I say. They can really apply some management to it.

Webber will be going to abu dhabi with a small advantage, since his korean engine did so few km's

Wrong again. Vettel's engine #8 is lower on kms. Read the thread!

#22 sv401

sv401
  • Member

  • 749 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 08 November 2010 - 11:19

Probably the Bahrain engines they swapped out before qual, the risk with using that "fresh" unit is they swapped it for a reason presumably related to reliability....so it wold be fresh, but potentially unreliable.


I also recall someone (ATM_Andy ?) mentioning it earlier that engines degrade slowly even when not used, so the one from Bahrain might not actually be in a very usable state now ? Of course, it could also just have been used up already at Friday practices.


#23 Ferrari2183

Ferrari2183
  • Member

  • 9,356 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 08 November 2010 - 11:26

Give the teams ten engines per year. 2 races per engine.

#24 Ferrari2183

Ferrari2183
  • Member

  • 9,356 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 08 November 2010 - 11:28

There are reports that it is very dangerous to use old engines that have not been used for months. I don't know how serious one has to take such info. Ferrari could have used the Bahrain engine for FP1/3 and checked the wear state regularly. We don't know and will not know unless Ferrari publishes something. I Think we can take it for granted that Alonso is worse off than Vettel. I read somewhere that all his #1-4 engines are busted now. We need some reliable data here.



No, #8 is still Webber's best engine. The temp issue in Brazil was fuel shortage and lean running. They will have managed that within the engines limits.



You are wrong on several counts there. Limiting the numbers of engines is the most successful cost containment strategy that was ever found. All parties agree to that and it is highly unlikely that it will ever change. The FiA nor the FOTA are stupid. If there is a better way to contain cost you should come forward and propose it. The current system is pretty smart I say. They can really apply some management to it.


Wrong again. Vettel's engine #8 is lower on kms. Read the thread!

I would think that the homologation of the engines is the cost saver.

#25 tifosi

tifosi
  • Member

  • 13,289 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 08 November 2010 - 11:33

I would be surprised and would like to know which engine that should be.


I didn't get the whole stoy but it may be the re-built blown up one. Something about the final race has a slightly different rule about engine use, but they metioned several times that Alonso was content to cruise in Brazil with a podium because he had a very low mileage engine fo the final race.

#26 DILLIGAF

DILLIGAF
  • Member

  • 3,139 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 11:35

No, #8 is still Webber's best engine. The temp issue in Brazil was fuel shortage and lean running. They will have managed that within the engines limits.


Do you have a source about the fuel shortage causing the high engine temp? :confused:

Just curious because if it was due to running lean he should be ok. If the temp issue wasn't due to running lean he could be in trouble with that engine.

#27 tifosi

tifosi
  • Member

  • 13,289 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 08 November 2010 - 11:37

I'd say this is better than the title being decided by whoever can afford to use a different engine in every race.



I disagree. Formula One is fo the big boys. Heck NHRA guys can go through 3 or 4 engines in a weekend.

Engines aren't what are driving F1 costs. Its spending $30M to shave 1/2 a mm off the edge of the front wing to pic up .005 seconds.

#28 search

search
  • Member

  • 211 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 11:39

Webber's #8 had very high temp issues in the race. Will RBR take the risk to use it in Abu DHabi race and does he have another unit with not too many km's on it that he could use instead?


he used a new engine in Singapore, so it should be okay with at most 2 races on it (Singapore and Japan?).

So if he's not able to use his engine from Korea/Brazil anymore he's in the same situation as Alonso with a "1 race advantage" for Vettel. Don't know about Hamilton

#29 tifosi

tifosi
  • Member

  • 13,289 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 08 November 2010 - 11:39

Except that building nineteen engines is too expensive - and then the championship becomes decided by whoever can spend the most.


Designing 19 new engines a year (back in the 80s) is too expensive. Building 19 engines isn't any more expensive then building 8 relatively.

It's aero and fabrication that cost the big bucks.

#30 goingthedistance

goingthedistance
  • Member

  • 2,467 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 11:45

Do you have a source about the fuel shortage causing the high engine temp? :confused:

Just curious because if it was due to running lean he should be ok. If the temp issue wasn't due to running lean he could be in trouble with that engine.


I suspect he has made it up.

According to auto-motor-und-sport: [Google translated]

From lap 35 Webber struggling with a handicap. In the water cycle of his Renault V8 is evaporated, the cooling liquid. To avoid overheating, Renault had to withdraw the pressure in the cooling system. Webber was ordered to reduce speed. "This has cost him three tenths per lap," calculates Fabrice Lom.

The motor falls out for Webber in Abu Dhabi. The risk would be too large to use it. He has now in the final to make do with an engine that came in Singapore and Suzuka are used. Vettel will take up with the Suzuka engine in Abu Dhabi. The training also has the Friday Interlagos on the crankshaft.


http://www.auto-moto...al-3053258.html

What's interesting about that is that it would seem Mark really could have taken the fight to Vettel but for the failure. He was quicker than him by quite a bit at that point in the race. A real shame.


#31 DILLIGAF

DILLIGAF
  • Member

  • 3,139 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 12:05

I suspect he has made it up.

According to auto-motor-und-sport: [Google translated]



http://www.auto-moto...al-3053258.html

What's interesting about that is that it would seem Mark really could have taken the fight to Vettel but for the failure. He was quicker than him by quite a bit at that point in the race. A real shame.


Thanks mate. I had an inkling he had to back off when told about the problem just prior to the SC because after the SC Seb stretched the lead & Webber wasn't responding. Didn't make sense to me at the time that it had anything to do with running lean or that he had to run lean at all. Cheers for the source. :)

Back to the Singapore/Suzuka donk & hope for the best i guess. He's lost the engine advantage now.

Edited by DILLIGAF, 08 November 2010 - 12:08.


#32 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,743 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 08 November 2010 - 12:13

I also recall someone (ATM_Andy ?) mentioning it earlier that engines degrade slowly even when not used, so the one from Bahrain might not actually be in a very usable state now ? Of course, it could also just have been used up already at Friday practices.


Doesnt matter Ferrari blew it in Pratice in China IIRC...

#33 WhiteBlue

WhiteBlue
  • Member

  • 2,138 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 12:50

Do you have a source about the fuel shortage causing the high engine temp? :confused:

Some laps before the end of the race Pilbeam came on the radio and told Webber he was now ok with fuel to the end of the race. That could have been a coded message though.
I agree that http://www.auto-moto...al-3053258.html has a much better source with Fabrice Lom who tells them all the details. The source btw confirms that engine #8 for Webber is now discarded due to the water pressure loss and over heating. Webber will use #7 which has done Singapore and Suzuka. This engine should have 1,000 km on the clock. The source also confirms that Vettel's #8 did the FP1/2 in Brazil. Vettels milage should be more like 650 kms according to that information.

Building 19 engines isn't any more expensive then building 8 relatively.

Building 19 engines takes more than twice the manufacturing resources than building 8 engines. If you scale it up for 6 or 8 cars it becomes prohibitively expensive in terms of head count and size of the operation. For the coming season Cosworth would have to do 160 engines before they even get to extras and test engines. No way they can do this with present resources and work space.

http://www.auto-moto...al-3053258.html

Good find. I missed that one.

#34 tifosi

tifosi
  • Member

  • 13,289 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 08 November 2010 - 12:56

Building 19 engines takes more than twice the manufacturing resources than building 8 engines.


That's a false staement in ANY form of manufacturing. Engines aren't any different.

#35 F.M.

F.M.
  • Member

  • 5,577 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 08 November 2010 - 12:58

Wondering whether Webber's engine has suffered damage this weekend, being close to being cooked for a whole race

#36 smitten

smitten
  • Member

  • 1,448 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 13:00

Engines aren't what are driving F1 costs. Its spending $30M to shave 1/2 a mm off the edge of the front wing to pic up .005 seconds.


There are a number of estimates out on the web that the engines account for nearly 50% of a team's budget. Don't know how true that is as the teams don't publish figures, but IIRC it was published by a fairly reliable source.


#37 tifosi

tifosi
  • Member

  • 13,289 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 08 November 2010 - 13:05

There are a number of estimates out on the web that the engines account for nearly 50% of a team's budget. Don't know how true that is as the teams don't publish figures, but IIRC it was published by a fairly reliable source.


That may be true for the manufactures, but I would venture to say that the vast majority of that is in design and initial fabrication. Once the "mold" is made, replicating is relatively inexpensive.

In the old days when they were literally designing engines continuoulsy, yes the costs could be incredible, but those costs have all been shifted now to aero. Replicating a design is not that much moe expensive as you add units.

#38 WhiteBlue

WhiteBlue
  • Member

  • 2,138 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 13:19

That's a false staement in ANY form of manufacturing. Engines aren't any different.

You obviously do not know what you are talking about. Building F1 engines is an extremely labor intensive process and there is very little cost degression in the doubling of the numbers. So it is fair to say that manufacturing cost, resource use and plant investment practically doubles for going from 8 to 19.


Wondering whether Webber's engine has suffered damage this weekend, being close to being cooked for a whole race

The issue was dealt with in this thread.

There are a number of estimates out on the web that the engines account for nearly 50% of a team's budget. Don't know how true that is as the teams don't publish figures, but IIRC it was published by a fairly reliable source.

50% was true in 2006 but that was before the big cost reductions by homologation and numbers of engines being fixed.


#39 metz

metz
  • Member

  • 9,758 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 08 November 2010 - 13:36

Is there a website that shows engine usage?
I can't believe Heidfeld is attempting the 6th race with the same engine.

Advertisement

#40 plastik2k9

plastik2k9
  • Member

  • 507 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 08 November 2010 - 13:48

dude engines have always figured in titles. They use to blow a lot more when the engineers could fiddle with it.

Exactly. Having a set number of engines also ensures a level playing field; you cannot buy yourself reliability by replacing the engine as many times as your team budget allows. Everyone has 8 engines, and costs are hugely reduced. It's by far the fairest and cheapest way of doing things. Very good regulation in my opinion.

#41 Ferrari2183

Ferrari2183
  • Member

  • 9,356 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 08 November 2010 - 13:55

Exactly. Having a set number of engines also ensures a level playing field; you cannot buy yourself reliability by replacing the engine as many times as your team budget allows. Everyone has 8 engines, and costs are hugely reduced. It's by far the fairest and cheapest way of doing things. Very good regulation in my opinion.

It destroys the racing imo. You never know when someone is pushing. I'd much rather have them driving flat out as opposed to look after your engine we have another race in two weeks time.

#42 Lennat

Lennat
  • Member

  • 508 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 08 November 2010 - 14:10

It's not like the engines wouldn't be marginal otherwise, as they would just be built for maximum power during a short time if the amount were not limited. I don't mind the 8 engines per season rule, but still don't get why they didn't simply freeze and limit the V10:s instead...

#43 Raziel

Raziel
  • Member

  • 2,086 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 08 November 2010 - 14:13

It´s not all about engines at Abu Dhabi, there could be problems with gearbox and especially with brakes, the track is tough on brake discs.


#44 Kelateboy

Kelateboy
  • Member

  • 5,797 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 08 November 2010 - 14:33

I disagree. Formula One is fo the big boys. Heck NHRA guys can go through 3 or 4 engines in a weekend.

Engines aren't what are driving F1 costs. Its spending $30M to shave 1/2 a mm off the edge of the front wing to pic up .005 seconds.

The FIA feels that engine development is a major component for cost escallation in Formula 1. That was why they introduced 1 engine for 2 races back in 2005 and a year later, decided to freeze engine development by homologating the engines. In 2009, FIA put in a more stringent requirements by limiting just 8 engines per season. All these were done with the idea of saving costs to F1 teams.

BMW, Toyota and Honda are all big-boys where cars are concerned and all of them got out of F1 because they could not deal with the huge escalating costs incurred in F1.

#45 J. Edlund

J. Edlund
  • Member

  • 1,295 posts
  • Joined: September 03

Posted 09 November 2010 - 20:47

You obviously do not know what you are talking about. Building F1 engines is an extremely labor intensive process and there is very little cost degression in the doubling of the numbers. So it is fair to say that manufacturing cost, resource use and plant investment practically doubles for going from 8 to 19.


The cost per unit goes down significantly when the number of units built are increased for an advanced low volume production like F1 engines. When the design is finalized and all the manufacturing equipment is in place, the costs for manufacturing additional units is small. You probably need more people for the assembly, and perhaps an extra shift in the machine shop, and of course more raw materials and parts from suppliers. But aside from that, there aren't any significant costs of larger production series.

The american B-2 program is a good example how the number of units produced significantly affect the unit cost. The original B-2 Spirit aircraft cost 2.1 billion dollars per aircraft. The cost of producing additional aircraft was no more than 737 million dollars. Also, if you produce a larger number of units over a shorter time period, the costs are generally even lower.

#46 smitten

smitten
  • Member

  • 1,448 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 09 November 2010 - 21:00

The cost per unit goes down significantly when the number of units built are increased for an advanced low volume production like F1 engines. When the design is finalized and all the manufacturing equipment is in place, the costs for manufacturing additional units is small. You probably need more people for the assembly, and perhaps an extra shift in the machine shop, and of course more raw materials and parts from suppliers. But aside from that, there aren't any significant costs of larger production series.

The american B-2 program is a good example how the number of units produced significantly affect the unit cost. The original B-2 Spirit aircraft cost 2.1 billion dollars per aircraft. The cost of producing additional aircraft was no more than 737 million dollars. Also, if you produce a larger number of units over a shorter time period, the costs are generally even lower.


I get what you are saying about economies of scale, but the manufacturers already hand builds a fair number of engines per year. Mercedes supply 3 teams of 2 drivers which is 48 engines, but my understanding was that they built a fair few more and selected the best ones for the teams (plus they need spares for if a driver takes a 9th etc). How many does a team actually lease from the manufacturer?


#47 Ferrari2183

Ferrari2183
  • Member

  • 9,356 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 09 November 2010 - 21:36

I get what you are saying about economies of scale, but the manufacturers already hand builds a fair number of engines per year. Mercedes supply 3 teams of 2 drivers which is 48 engines, but my understanding was that they built a fair few more and selected the best ones for the teams (plus they need spares for if a driver takes a 9th etc). How many does a team actually lease from the manufacturer?

To make a long story short. It was not the manufacturing of the engines that were that costly. It was the continuous research and development on those engines and the subsequent remanufacturing that drove costs to an unacceptable level.

The engine homologation is the big money saver.

Edited by Ferrari2183, 09 November 2010 - 21:39.


#48 SJ Lambert

SJ Lambert
  • Member

  • 1,588 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 10 November 2010 - 12:55

I must have been asleep when the usual F1 suspects engine status was last discussed, so who's got what left and what sort of nick are they in?

Is Alonso expected to go up in a cloud of Shell smoke?

Is Webber better fettled than Vettel?

Do any of the top three have a fresh engine ready for Sunday?

#49 sawyer_si

sawyer_si
  • Member

  • 347 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 10 November 2010 - 17:46

He is by desperate RedBull/McLaren fans, otherwise not really.

I think so, but he doesn't have any real problems either.

No.

#50 HAM

HAM
  • Member

  • 531 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 10 November 2010 - 18:03

We don't see many DNF in the last 2 races of a season don't we? Maybe the teams check their cars much better than in the other races? 10 double check ups in stead of simply double check up. :rotfl:

Edited by HAM, 10 November 2010 - 18:06.