447 replies to this topic

[FirstnameLastname]

https://www.motorspo...4553225/?nrt=54

Would make sense as the ban on non electric cars gets closer in the UK and beyond.

A big development platform like F1... would hopefully help push development of electric tech if the regulations were relaxed a little

Edited by FirstnameLastname, 05 October 2019 - 15:16.

[doc83]

Way too early...The same goes for manufacturers who say they will produce only electric cars in a few years.

Edited by doc83, 05 October 2019 - 15:21.

[Ross Stonefeld]

1. How much will it cost to buy out Agag/Formula E

2. Those bans on ICE cars are impractical. They won't happen. 

[Kalmake]

Article doesn't say that. They just want to freeze ICE and focus on electric side of the PU.

 

Full electric wouldn't make sense unless there is a huge breakthrough in battery tech by then.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Well, he says within the current* regulations he wants to freeze ICE development and work on expanding the other bits.

 

 

*sorry for pun

[alframsey]

It is going to happen eventually but I can't see it happening before 2030, not sure why just 2025 seems far too soon to make this move. I suppose freezing development of ICE might happen. Thing is if they were to do that there would be an exponential increase in battery tech, F1 would find a way.

[TheGoldenStoffel]

"Renault looks for an excuse to leave F1"

[ArrowsLivery]

Good bye Reno. I will miss your exploding PUs, but with horrific ideas like that, F1 is better without you.

https://www.motorspo...4553225/?nrt=54

Would make sense as the ban on non electric cars gets closer in the UK and beyond.

A big development platform like F1... would hopefully help push development of electric tech if the regulations were relaxed a little

No, no it wouldn’t. F1 is insignificant compared to the R&D budgets of the major automakers.

[Ross Stonefeld]

The whole reason they go racing is because it helps intensify and speed up R&D, when it's relevant. Le Mans had appeal to some manufacturers because it was so hybrid intensive. It's also a smart racing move because you can get more and more of your budget out of R&D(which is massive) than marketing. It's better for internal manufacturer politics, etc. 

 

For instance doing a Vettel and going back to V12s would be the absolute wrong move. 

[Ben1445]

Renault want to freeze the ICE and focus development on the electric side of the hybrid? Makes perfect sense to me. As I’ve said continuously been saying in the 2021 rules thread.

[JavierDeVivre]

https://www.motorspo...4553225/?nrt=54

Would make sense as the ban on non electric cars gets closer in the UK and beyond.

A big development platform like F1... would hopefully help push development of electric tech if the regulations were relaxed a little

The ban on non electric/internal combustion cars is never going to happen, it's yet more idealism from EV fantasists.

Such a move would effectively ban the majority of the world's population from owning a vehicle.

It's a policy announced by people who lack the experience to be able to see the real world implications of actually putting it into practice.

EVs have existed for well over a century, and the many drawbacks still exist. They failed then against internal combustion for the same reasons they will fail this time.

[JHSingo]

I struggle to imagine F1 becoming fully electric, and certainly not as early as 2025. What I can imagine is Ferrari vetoing that idea before you can say "grazie ragazzi".

 

Not going to happen.

[red stick]

Well, that does it. Won't see me darkening the doors at any U.S. Renault dealer any time soon . . .

[Ivanhoe]

I struggle to imagine F1 becoming fully electric, and certainly not as early as 2025. What I can imagine is Ferrari vetoing that idea before you can say "grazie ragazzi".

Not going to happen.

Ferrari also moved to turbo engines and hybrid technology, so it’s just a matter of time.

Edited by Ivanhoe, 05 October 2019 - 16:49.

[goldenboy]

It always works out well for Renault when they push for engine changes..

[Ben1445]

EVs have existed for well over a century, and the many drawbacks still exist. They failed then against internal combustion for the same reasons they will fail this time.

It's not a point up for discussion that we have to radically reduce global greenhouse emissions within the next decade - it's a fact. In all the historic trade offs between ICEs and EVs, this situation is unprecedented. Unless a realistic solution to make ICEs carbon neutral can be found, then the ICE will fail for that reason and that reason alone. 

[KWSN - DSM]

Electric F1 is not F1 to me.

 

[Ross Stonefeld]

No, being ahead of the game is not the tradition of F1. 

[sopa]

It's not a point up for discussion that we have to radically reduce global greenhouse emissions within the next decade - it's a fact. In all the historic trade offs between ICEs and EVs, this situation is unprecedented. Unless a realistic solution to make ICEs carbon neutral can be found, then the ICE will fail for that reason and that reason alone. 

 

Yep.

 

To be blunt. I don't see a future for F1 beyond the next decade. At the very best they will manage a merger with Formula E.

 

The next decade will be a turning point in societies, and the pressure for change is going to mount ever harder. We will see massive changes. If you think we have issues right now in the society, you haven't seen anything yet.

[Ben1445]

Should we really have "Renault push for fully electric F1 from 2025 onwards" this as the thread title? It's not accurate and it is misleading. 
 
What I see is an article in which Abiteboul and Wolff both quite rightly discuss the implications of sustainability and electrification and push to bring forward that discussion over how F1 is going to have to deal with that in the fast changing world we now live in. 
 
Toto's words: "...this is a discussion we need to have."

 

Yes. Yes it is, and I am so glad that we are. If F1 does not do enough to stay with the times, it will die. Seems impossible now but we've seen the likes of Kodak, Nokia and Blockbuster go from strong market leaders to going bust or becoming a minnow in a very short time simply because they failed to adapt. 

[JavierDeVivre]

No, being ahead of the game is not the tradition of F1.

Usig technology abandoned a century ago is not ahead of the game, but it does strangely fit in F1 terms.

[Clatter]

Usig technology abandoned a century ago is not ahead of the game, but it does strangely fit in F1 terms.

 

It's a very head in the sand attitude to think what they had a century ago bears any relationship to the tech of today.

[F1Gui]

I hope not as it feels too soon. The previous 3.5/3.0/2.4 litre V12/10/8 formula ran for 25 seasons. Let them develop the ICE up until 2025 I say and then focus on the electrical side of things from then onwards. No fully ele tric PU until 2035 at the earliest.

[Vielleicht]

Sounds like some sensible words from both Abiteboul and Wolff when you read them.

 

F1 needs to have a serious think about what it needs to do about electrification and society's climate obligations is what it boils down to. And I cannot disagree with that one bit.

[KWSN - DSM]

No, being ahead of the game is not the tradition of F1. 

 

We clearly do not see F1 as the same thing, for me F1 will never be F1 if electric.

 

Period.

 

Stop.

 

[Ross Stonefeld]

What is F1 then? Something etched in stone that has to be defended eternally by fundamentalists? I thought F1 was supposed to be innovative? Is it permanently tied in to one rules format forever? If so that'd explain a lot of the current problems. 

[Hyatt]

Article doesn't say that. They just want to freeze ICE and focus on electric side of the PU.

 

Full electric wouldn't make sense unless there is a huge breakthrough in battery tech by then.

That would result in man carrying quadcopter assembly kits @gearbest or banggood fpr 599$ ... noone would waste time watching racecars anymore ;)

[Vielleicht]

How much will it cost to buy out Agag/Formula E

A very interesting question. The supposed 25 year electric single seater exclusivity deal that FE has with the FIA expires in 2039.

 

The strength of the contract is only claimed and very much untested. If it holds, Agag and co. are in an extremely strong position because all single seater series and the FIA will be facing massive pressure to electrify way before then. FE iself will find it an untentable position to obstruct wider motrosport electrification efforts*, but they would call the shots on how much it would cost to buy them out of the contract and the shape of any mergers.

 

If it does not hold, it's anyones game I suppose.

 

_{*so I don't see them putting their foot down and forcing a break away sanctioning body}

Edited by Vielleicht, 05 October 2019 - 17:52.

[Ross Stonefeld]

The problem F1 would have is if if Electric Engines become too potent/efficient, Formula E will just eat them from below. If suddenly Formula E cars were going as fast as Indycars, which meant they'd start moving to real road/street circuits, and etc, that'd be a very serious threat.

 

Formula 1 would have to go all electric purely to avoid becoming "Indycar". The sort of simplified/old fashioned/niche form of racing that people enjoy on the side. 

[Risil]

I've edited the title a bit because it's not really clear that Renault are asking for a fully electric formula in 2025, just that that's where they want the F1-related R&D spending to go. I think. They're not the clearest set of quotes. Anyway. Carry on.

[MattK9]

For the next set of engine regs they should set a limit of the weight of the battery and the weight of the electric motors and remove the limit on the amount of power that can be generated by the electric motor. It sounds like this is roughly what has been proposed which is sensible.

To be road relevant they need the most power density in the battery and efficiency of the motor.

[Risil]

What is F1 then? Something etched in stone that has to be defended eternally by fundamentalists? I thought F1 was supposed to be innovative? Is it permanently tied in to one rules format forever? If so that'd explain a lot of the current problems.

 

F1 has been internal combustion engines for as long as it's existed, turbine experiments notwithstanding. I think it is an open question whether audiences and enthusiasts really would accept electric racing cars as "F1".

 

But equally it wouldn't really be F1 if in the future we all drive electric cars and they're still running on noisy petrol burning tech. Because F1 has also always been some exotic and almost absurd reflection of the cars people drive in daily life.

 

I guess what it comes down to for me is that I don't want petrol engines in F1 to be phased out or hobbled by equivalency formulae purely because electric is more politically acceptable for everyone. I want it to be because electric is faster and more efficient, however you want to define that.

[SonGoku]

That's why we have FE. Hearing Vettel about V12's I think the older drivers in the field won't miss F1 much when it's going full electric in the future.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Exactly, you can't scream The Techonogies@#$! as your USP if they were horse drawn wagons in 2019. 

 

Though lawd have mercy is there a lot of animal excrement in that paddock.

[Fatgadget]

Way too early...The same goes for manufacturers who say they will produce only electric cars in a few years.

Eh! Already significant countries on record phasing out fossil fuelled vehicles by 2030.

[maximilian]

Weirdos... first they pull out of Formula E, and now this.  Make up your mind.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Eh! Already significant countries on record phasing out fossil fuelled vehicles by 2030.

 

Has anyone managed it though? There are serious supply chain/natural resource issues with widespread EV production. It's worse than a petrol/diesel based economy in a lot of ways. 

[AustinF1]

"Renault looks for an excuse to leave F1"

Yep, because the current level of electrification has worked out so well for them.

 

I wonder if this is related to the way McLaren picked up and left Renault so quickly.

[Ben1445]

I guess what it comes down to for me is that I don't want petrol engines in F1 to be phased out or hobbled by equivalency formulae purely because electric is more politically acceptable for everyone. I want it to be because electric is faster and more efficient, however you want to define that.

That would be great. But for me the speed aspect is highly arbitrary these days anyway. Motor racing could go so much faster if cost and/or safety limits were no issue. 

 

What I want is for F1 to be the fastest that modern technological trends have to offer. The current trend of electrification is not a political issue but one of global health and security in which politics, among many other things, naturally plays a part. We need to reduce greenhouse emissions so our lifestyles and industries are and will continue to be changing to that end.

 

I don't see a problem if electric racing only ever makes it half way between FE and current F1 in pace as long as it is zero emissions. 

[milestone 11]

I've edited the title a bit because it's not really clear that Renault are asking for a fully electric formula in 2025, just that that's where they want the F1-related R&D spending to go. I think. They're not the clearest set of quotes. Anyway. Carry on.

It needed a little more.

[AustinF1]

Good bye Reno. I will miss your exploding PUs, but with horrific ideas like that, F1 is better without you.


No, no it wouldn’t. F1 is insignificant compared to the R&D budgets of the major automakers.

Yep. If "an exponential increase in battery tech" were going to happen just by trying harder and throwing money at the problem, it would have happened a long time ago.

[Ben1445]

The merit of the R&D point is not the presumption that racing is going to magically find the solution any better than or independently of dedicated R&D programs. It is that a good proportion of money to go racing in open formula classes often comes out of R&D budgets as a tool that can use to compliment dedicated R&D programs. 

 

It is a point about business and how the racing we love is paid for.

Edited by Ben1445, 05 October 2019 - 18:59.

[AustinF1]

The whole reason they go racing is because it helps intensify and speed up R&D, when it's relevant. Le Mans had appeal to some manufacturers because it was so hybrid intensive. It's also a smart racing move because you can get more and more of your budget out of R&D(which is massive) than marketing. It's better for internal manufacturer politics, etc. 

 

For instance doing a Vettel and going back to V12s would be the absolute wrong move. 

Surely that's part of the reason, but "the whole reason"? No.

[Requiem84]

Marketing is the biggest reason I’d say..

[Ben1445]

Marketing is the biggest reason I’d say..

Certainly a massive reason that wallets are opened to fund racing teams.

 

But manufactures and sponsors (these days at least) generally do not want to be associated with activities that do not have a net-positive impact on the environment. ICE motorsport does not tick that box for a significant number of potential racing bankrollers and that number will only increase. 

 

Again it is a point about business and how the racing we love is paid for.

[AustinF1]

That would be great. But for me the speed aspect is highly arbitrary these days anyway. Motor racing could go so much faster if cost and/or safety limits were no issue. 

 

What I want is for F1 to be the fastest that modern technological trends have to offer. The current trend of electrification is not a political issue but one of global health and security in which politics, among many other things, naturally plays a part. We need to reduce greenhouse emissions so our lifestyles and industries are and will continue to be changing to that end.

 

I don't see a problem if electric racing only ever makes it half way between FE and current F1 in pace as long as it is zero emissions. 

Zero emissions?

 

Good luck with that.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Surely that's part of the reason, but "the whole reason"? No.

 

Uhm, you cut off the bit immediately after where I said When Relevant...

[Ben1445]

Zero emissions?

 

Good luck with that.

*sigh* 

 

But no worries from my part because pedantic humour does not change the fundamental, underlying thrust of the argument. 

[Requiem84]

Certainly a massive reason that wallets are opened to fund racing teams.

But manufactures and sponsors (these days at least) generally do not want to be associated with activities that do not have a net-positive impact on the environment. ICE motorsport does not tick that box for a significant number of potential racing bankrollers and that number will only increase.

Again it is a point about business and how the racing we love is paid for.

Marketing potential is the reason most big OEM’s jumped to FE. So yeah, I fully agree with you.

I have an electric car myself, and it really is so much better than 90% of the ICE cars. I hope F1 will go electric soon, cause otherwise FE will take over F1 sooner than later.

[Vielleicht]

But manufactures and sponsors (these days at least) generally do not want to be associated with activities that do not have a net-positive impact on the environment. ICE motorsport does not tick that box for a significant number of potential racing bankrollers and that number will only increase.

It was Agag's work putting together sponsorship deals for F1 that made him realise that concerns over environemental impact was becoming a huge barrier to closing said deals. That led him towards putting his weight behind FE.

 

So yeah...

Edited by Vielleicht, 05 October 2019 - 19:41.