261 replies to this topic

[Dipster]

Alonso must be feeling thoroughly brassed off as he incurs yet another penalty due to car problems. What a stupid rule system.

 

Am I the only one wondering how long this nonsense can go on?  F1 wants to be at the leading edge of technology but then gives the teams problems when they encounter difficulties pushing the limits. It s all so daft and is making F1 look simply stupid.

[johnwilliamdavies]

 It s all so daft and is making F1 look simply stupid.

 

It's making Honda look stupid. It's not making Mercedes look stupid.

[Okyo]

Just a part of cost control. If they wouldn't get penalties for using new PU's/parts, what would stop them from using 20 PUs and what would motivate them to make the PUs last more than a race? The only thing i'd change is the penalties, that they wouldn't carry on to the race. If you drop to last place, you drop to last place, no need to make it even worse.

[Kalmake]

And when they break down in the race they get no points. So stupid!

[chunder27]

It makes the sport as a whole look stupid to be honest.

 

Anyone wih any nous knows McLaren and Honda can make decent F1 cars. It's hardly like they have never done it before.

 

It simply shows that with a lack of testing it is very difficult to come into the sort these days as an engine supplier. And not only is that bad for F1, it is also bad for the futire as it will put off future engine suppliers.

 

the sooner this embarassment is got rid of the better.

 

it has done nothing for F1 and a lot for MErcedes, as I always say domination does noone good but the person dominating.

[YoungGun]

BAR anyone?

[TheRacingElf]

The problem is that they are only allowed to use 4 engines per season. Don't think it's a good idea to get back to special qualifying engines but please let them use some more engines per season.. Is that too expensive? Probably yes, but that is only because the costs of engines is way too high!

[SICOM]

Just go for it I say. If they are 'conservative' on the PU/penalty front then they are no incentivised enough to work as hard as possible in my opinion.

 

Just take as many penalties as this can and write off 2015 as open R and D.

[DutchQuicksilver]

4 engines is too small a margin indeed. I mean, I'm sick of hearing the words lift and coast, save engine, save fuel etc. etc. Let them race flat out, make it 6 engines instead of 4, that would solve a whole lot.

[Gyno]

Just make it 1 engine for each race weekend.

[GTRacer]

The problem is whats the alternative?

 

Allowing more testing, More engine use, Free engine development Etc... just gives the bigger teams a bigger advantage, Creates more cost for the mid-field & inevitable drops the mid-field further behind.

 

 

And when it comes to the penalty's for the engine/gearbox changes again whats the alternative?

 

If there is no penalty then there's nothing stopping the top teams from changing engine's every race/session again, If you introduce fines or points drops instead of grid penalty's then your hurting the smaller teams more than the bigger teams who can easily afford to pay the fines & in some cases wouldn't miss a few points.

 

 

 

I would also point out that the current restrictions & penalty system is something the teams themselfs came up with back when FOTA was still around.

[Requiem84]

For god sake, think through when you post something on a public forum.

 

I am starting to believe the problem F1 has is its fans, not the sport itself.

 

Why blame the F1 regulations when Ferrari and Mercedes can build a fast engine that doesn't break down? Honda had all the time in the world to run the engine on its testbench, to even test it before the start of the season (Abu Dhabi post season test), but they couldn't drive a single meter that test. Mercedes on the other hand, could do a lots and lots of laps at their first winter test. 

 

And let's say we will lift these restrictions on engines etc... if you take some time to understand the consequences, you will realize we will have 3 teams left eventually because all the midfield teams will fold. 

[sopa]

It makes the sport as a whole look stupid to be honest.

 

Anyone wih any nous knows McLaren and Honda can make decent F1 cars. It's hardly like they have never done it before.

 

These things are often claimed, but to be honest they do not mean anything. That McLaren and Honda could do something in the PAST.

 

Lotus has proven they can win races, as late in 2012-13. So current situation is wrong.

Sauber has proven they can compete for podiums (2012). So current situation is wrong.

Renault has proven they can win titles with their engines. So current situation is wrong.

Ferrari and Williams have proven they can dominate the sport. So current situation is wrong.

[Button4life]

Till Jenson Button and Alonso retire...

[brr]

McLaren should be fined 100 million dollars for bringing the sport into disrepute.

[Massa]

4 engines is too small a margin indeed. I mean, I'm sick of hearing the words lift and coast, save engine, save fuel etc. etc. Let them race flat out, make it 6 engines instead of 4, that would solve a whole lot.

 

 

Small teams can afford to pay for 6 engine a year.

[Dalton007]

The problem isn't one manufacturer ruling, the root of the problem is that engine manufacturers are involved in the rule changes. It needs to be the FIA and they need to make the sport simple and set rules which don't penalise winners and help smaller teams to get a good portion of the winnings. 

[kapow]

The rules don't work:

Engines are still too expensive. Half of the engine manufacturers are having to use more than the allowed number of engines and we're only halfway through the season. There's still not enough competition. Teams are still at risk of going broke. Ridiculously low testing limits mean that Honda and Renault have no chance of catching up - locking in the Mercedes and Ferrari advantage for the entire year. These stupid grid and drive through penalties are embarrassing the sport and actually make it more beneficial to retire after the first lap and save the engines.

It's all wrong.

[ConsiderAndGo]

The problem is Honda and Renault have done a crap job!!! It isn't the rules! 

[Rob]

How do we know that all this is saving money? Has anyone verified this?

 

I've often wondered if they might have to spend even more on the design work of the power units to improve their reliability. I guess it's the trade-off between NRE and manufacturing costs. But they must be constantly doing design work so I can't imagine that there's a huge cost benefit, if there is a benefit at all.

[Marklar]

The rules don't work:

Engines are still too expensive. Half of the engine manufacturers are having to use more than the allowed number of engines and we're only halfway through the season. There's still not enough competition. Teams are still at risk of going broke. Ridiculously low testing limits mean that Honda and Renault have no chance of catching up - locking in the Mercedes and Ferrari advantage for the entire year. These stupid grid and drive through penalties are embarrassing the sport and actually make it more beneficial to retire after the first lap and save the engines.

It's all wrong.

Didn't we said the same about Ferrari?

[V8 Fireworks]

The problem is whats the alternative?

 

 

These:

 

 

2.2 turbo, no ERS, cheap, 700bhp -- these things are bulletproof.  It's not hard to have sensible rules and sensible cheap powerful engines. 

 

$20-40m for a two-car F1 engine lease

$1.2m for a two-car Indycar engine lease

 

F1 is utterly ridiculous and out of touch IMO.

Edited by V8 Fireworks, 20 June 2015 - 11:45.

[kapow]

For god sake, think through when you post something on a public forum.

I am starting to believe the problem F1 has is its fans, not the sport itself.

Why blame the F1 regulations when Ferrari and Mercedes can build a fast engine that doesn't break down? Honda had all the time in the world to run the engine on its testbench, to even test it before the start of the season (Abu Dhabi post season test), but they couldn't drive a single meter that test. Mercedes on the other hand, could do a lots and lots of laps at their first winter test.

And let's say we will lift these restrictions on engines etc... if you take some time to understand the consequences, you will realize we will have 3 teams left eventually because all the midfield teams will fold.

What's the net cost difference to an engine manufacturer to build 10 engines rather than 4? I can't believe that it would be high enough to put teams out of business. The major costs will be research, infrastructure and staff - that exists if you build 4 engines or 100.

Take into account the marketing benefits that an increase in engine allowance would bring - better PR, better racing, fewer penalties making everyone look bad - then I'd bet the cost difference would be nominal.

Edited by kapow, 20 June 2015 - 11:43.

[PaulTodd]

For god sake, think through when you post something on a public forum.

 

I am starting to believe the problem F1 has is its fans, not the sport itself.

 

Why blame the F1 regulations when Ferrari and Mercedes can build a fast engine that doesn't break down? Honda had all the time in the world to run the engine on its testbench, to even test it before the start of the season (Abu Dhabi post season test), but they couldn't drive a single meter that test. Mercedes on the other hand, could do a lots and lots of laps at their first winter test. 

 

And let's say we will lift these restrictions on engines etc... if you take some time to understand the consequences, you will realize we will have 3 teams left eventually because all the midfield teams will fold. 

You have to remember Merc started on these engines years ago. Honda don't have the luxury of time to do the same thing.

[kapow]

Didn't we said the same about Ferrari?

I mean this season. Ferrari "caught up" (they haven't yet) during the off season.

[sopa]

Didn't we said the same about Ferrari?

 

Yep. I was highly sceptical about those freezing rules, but based on what Ferrari has done with their power unit in the 2014-2015 off-season, I have had to adapt my view. And from what I understand, they have slightly loosened the freezing rules as well. Isn't in-season development now allowed, as opposed to last year? Based on Ferrari's effort, Renault and Honda can't blame the rules any more.

[PaulTodd]

McLaren should be fined 100 million dollars for bringing the sport into disrepute.

And so should all the other teams and the FIA and Bernie because of the crap they have turned F1 into 

[PayasYouRace]

Surely an energy based formula like in LMPs would be ideal? An indycar type engine would be one extreme and a lot of hybrid tech on the other.

[SophieB]

Please discuss the opening poster's specific points about the rules/penalty system. There's this thread for general 'this is why F1 sucks now':  http://forums.autosp...15#entry7174616

[V8 Fireworks]

There must a better system for the penalties.

 

How about

 

Instead of ten places +1.50 sec

Instead of twenty places +3.00 sec

 

That way you would start at the back, and that would be that.  No stop-go garbage.

Edited by V8 Fireworks, 20 June 2015 - 11:50.

[kapow]

There must a better system for the penalties.

How about

Instead of ten places +1.50 sec
Instead of twenty places +3.00 sec

That way you would start at the back, and that would be that. No stop-go garbage.

Penalties shouldn't make it pointless to even bother to take part. That's pretty much what's happening to McLaren this weekend.

It's embarrassing that the sport is doing this to itself.

[Ferrari2183]

The problem is Honda and Renault have done a crap job!!! It isn't the rules!

I'm sorry. The state of F1, including these crazy penalties, is symptomatic of the regulations.

[mariner]

It is getting really silly. We now have Andrew Benson commenting on the Austrian penalties “Lots of people complaining re engine penalties, but they're there to keep costs under control. Hard to see how to do that without them"

 

That's the kind of circular argument mentality that has got F1 in this position. Its true that continual criticism will be self fulfilling but the criticism has now spread from forums like this to the general media, and guys with real credibility (and a commentating income at stake) like David Coulthard are speaking out.

 

As a cost accountant of many years including the car industry I very severely doubt that making more engines would dramatically drive up costs. So much is R+D and tooling plus designing for zero failure is always hugely expensive.

 

I’ve wondered if this is just another F1 storm in teacup that will be fixed soon. I’m not sure because I think there is one thing that any sport has to have - Authenticity.

 

Nobody takes pro wrestling seriously; pro boxing is a shadow of its old self due to so many self proclaimed championship organisers and boxers avoiding fights.

 

Conversely the English Premier league may have silly wages etc and 3 -4 team dominance but nobody sees it as anything but authentic.

 

F1 is now in danger of being seen as basically non-authentic due to all the penalties and coasting strategies plus using tyres designed to be sub optimal so the race pace is 10 seconds off car/driver potential. If Premiership rules limited the shots at goal allowed to every player per game it would become similar to F1 ad the criticism would be as loud

[Jamiednm]

I don't understand why some people still think the driver and the team are separate and that drivers should be immune from penalties for 'the team'.

[Requiem84]

What's the net cost difference to an engine manufacturer to build 10 engines rather than 4? I can't believe that it would be high enough to put teams out of business. The major costs will be research, infrastructure and staff - that exists if you build 4 engines or 100.

Take into account the marketing benefits that an increase in engine allowance would bring - better PR, better racing, fewer penalties making everyone look bad - then I'd bet the cost difference would be nominal.

 

We'd have to ask the manufacturers... but let's analyse a bit:

 

Renault charges 40 million $ for its engine per year. Technically, that's for 4 engines. 

 

As you say, the main cost will be R&D and overhead. Let's assume this accounts for 30 million euro. That would leave 2,5 million for a complete engine; materials, time spent working on manufacturing the components, the staff cost to make it etc.

 

So, going from 4 engines to 10 would be a net difference of 15 million euro's a year. An amount that would have drowned Force India and Sauber definitely this year. 

[JHSingo]

I agree. Penalties for the drivers when it's a car issue seems awfully strange, to say the least.

 

Sure, drivers are part of the team...but I think it'd be much fairer if it was instead a points deduction for the team. That way, a driver's weekend isn't wrecked before he's even driven the car, and we've still got the possibility of a good race.

 

One of the reasons why Canada was so dull was because Vettel as starting so far down with his penalties. Yes, I know the red flag thing was entirely his own fault, not going to dispute that, but we might have seen a more exciting race had he started closer to the front.

[sopa]

So what would be non-crazy penalties?

 

If the limit is 4 engines per season, and your engine is so unreliable it is far going to exceed the limit, you should get LOTS of penalties. And those penalties are not crazy at all. These should be heavy penalties that would motivate you to follow the rules. Or at least they would not give you an advantage over those, who have reliable engines. I.e you have designed an unreliable, but more powerful engine, and easily beat the ones, who match the reliability rules! Though I think Mercedes could win races even if they got +10 grid positions every race.

 

I remember in 2005 people were complaining that Raikkonen kept getting +10 grid positions every other race. But Mercedes had the most powerful engine. You could almost say they had built an engine, which lasted for one weekend as opposed to two, which the rules demanded. If you do not follow the rules strictly, you need to be penalized heavily.

[Timstr11]

Alonso must be feeling thoroughly brassed off as he incurs yet another penalty due to car problems. What a stupid rule system.

 

Am I the only one wondering how long this nonsense can go on?  F1 wants to be at the leading edge of technology but then gives the teams problems when they encounter difficulties pushing the limits. It s all so daft and is making F1 look simply stupid.

 

@Dipster

 

Take note of what Jonathan Neale said about the situation.

 

 

 

You might expect McLaren chief operating officer Jonathan Neale to be one of those criticising the current system of engine penalties, given the state his team are in at the moment. Not a bit of it: 'This is a sport and to win a race you have to be pretty good at everything. It is a meritocracy. The guys at the front are doing a really good job. When it is all predictable, we get endless whining from journalists, pundits and some people in the sport. The moment we serve up something that throws up a bit of jeopardy and anguish, I thought that's what people wanted. Come on, get on with it. The rules are the same for everybody. As a top team we shouldn't be performing like this.'

[sopa]

I agree. Penalties for the drivers when it's a car issue seems awfully strange, to say the least.

 

Sure, drivers are part of the team...but I think it'd be much fairer if it was instead a points deduction for the team. That way, a driver's weekend isn't wrecked before he's even driven the car, and we've still got the possibility of a good race.

 

One of the reasons why Canada was so dull was because Vettel as starting so far down with his penalties. Yes, I know the red flag thing was entirely his own fault, not going to dispute that, but we might have seen a more exciting race had he started closer to the front.

 

Driver's weekend is wrecked when he parks his car with a blown engine on the last lap after dominating a race, i.e Hakkinen in Spain in 2001. It IS a team sport.

 

Also team's weekend is wrecked, when driver crashes the car into the barrier.

[kapow]

We'd have to ask the manufacturers... but let's analyse a bit:

Renault charges 40 million $ for its engine per year. Technically, that's for 4 engines.

As you say, the main cost will be R&D and overhead. Let's assume this accounts for 30 million euro. That would leave 2,5 million for a complete engine; materials, time spent working on manufacturing the components, the staff cost to make it etc.

So, going from 4 engines to 10 would be a net difference of 15 million euro's a year. An amount that would have drowned Force India and Sauber definitely this year.

You're assuming that the manufacturer sells the engines at cost and isn't making any profit from it. You're also excluding any the benefits of increasing the engine limits - improved car sales and sponsorship income that an improved F1 would bring.

[RealRacing]

It's idiotic. With the amount it costs to design and build 4 of these engines, they could probably make one engine for every race of the season so drivers could race. I mean, this is like an endurance race distributed in 20 races. Mark Webber said it, these guys want to go fast, race, show their talent like Rossi, Ianone, Marquez. etc. are doing in MotoGP. Please give them the best possible conditions, equipment and otherwise, so that they can do that. I mean, what a waste to have 5 WDCs in the same season with two of them unable to do anything for a whole, if not two, seasons.

 

And if they want to keep this nonsense, penalize the team, not the driver.

[superden]

25 place penalties are moronic.

[kapow]

25 place penalties are moronic.

Especially when there's only 20 cars...

[Jimisgod]

Way to completely destroy the series. Why didn't they just give the WCC title to Mercedes at the start of the year for making the best engine instead of slowly ruining the rest of the season?

[onewingedangel]

I have no problem with the drivers taking grid place drops or starting at the back as a penalty, but taking time penalties into the race as well is too harsh a penalty and takes the driver out of the race entirely.

 

If a team chose to take a new engine every race and start from the back of the grid, let them. Once they have reliability and performance they will try to prolong the engine life to avoid penalties and improve their grid position.

 

Perhaps have a system like for gearboxes where you have to last 3 or 4 races,and changing before that gives you a 10 place drop.

Edited by onewingedangel, 20 June 2015 - 12:37.

[August]

Driver penalties for car issues, what else could you do? Imagine a team with nothing to lose in the WCC in final races with a WDC contender. If all penalty would be for WCC, thay'd change engines to boost that driver's WDC chances.

Try a different approach, car #14, driven by Alonso, was penalized.

[kapow]

50 place penalty for McLaren for something that actually isn't actually against the rules.

[sopa]

50 place penalty for McLaren for something that actually isn't actually against the rules.

 

I know +25 and +50 penalties are crazy, but...

 

the problem is that Honda (and Renault) are just sooo far off matching the rules. You need to use max 4 power units only, but they'll reach 10 at least by the end of the year. So that's what brings those penalties. It is a result of heavily missing the goal.

[Nonesuch]

Alonso must be feeling thoroughly brassed off as he incurs yet another penalty due to car problems. What a stupid rule system.

 

Am I the only one wondering how long this nonsense can go on?  F1 wants to be at the leading edge of technology but then gives the teams problems when they encounter difficulties pushing the limits. It s all so daft and is making F1 look simply stupid.

 

I don't see the problem with the first part. Fernando Alonso doesn't race with a McLaren like in the old days, he races for McLaren. He is as much a member of the team as Ron Dennis or some random engineer down at the factory is.

 

The second part is indeed rather silly, but as has been pointed out it's all part of the team's effort to cut costs.

[SenorSjon]

It is just so over the top it gets funny.

 

When you look wrong to the camera: 10 places

Different line through a corner, less Rolex advertisements in view: 10 places

Use more than 4 front wings a season: S&G

Etc.

It is getting pointless. Also, count the entie PU as one, not every single part of it. Q and Race with one engine is the best imo. No Q engines that way and no silly saving over different weekends. When they build more engines, they get cheaper a piece. I don't believe any cost reduction is achieved with the current rules, especially if you play catchup and cannot test. Yet another stupid rule that ensures for example McLaren has a $200+m test session in 20 countries. That isn't sustainable, building 20 instead of 4 engines is.