Ferrari Engine Mods

[SGWilko]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/83320

Looks like the Scuderia did have an inherrant issue with the pneumatic valve system.

Now when Alonso tells us he is 'no worried about reliability' we can take the comment at face value - lol. ;)

[Retro Formula 1]

Were the engines OK last year? What's changed between then and now during the engine freeze?

So many changes get done to these engines by all teams in the name of Reliability that there's little point having an engine freeze.

[Dave B]

Were the engines OK last year? What's changed between then and now during the engine freeze?

Apparently the problem was there last year, but air could be added during the pit stops. With the faster stops since the refuelling ban, this is no longer an option.

Edit: here's what I was looking for:


This year Fernando Alonso has already lost two engines from his allocation of eight, and Ferrari has been troubled by its pneumatic system. In the past it was replenished at pit stops, but with today’s shorter tyre-only stops, there has been no time to do it.
Source and full article: http://adamcooperf1.com/2010/05/05/ferrari-engine-mods-passed-by-fia/

[scaliwag]

Hit the nail on the head there SKC, are we to believe that all engine freezes are equal except for the red engine freeze.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave Brockman.
Apparently the problem was there last year, but air could be added during the pit stops. With the faster stops since the refuelling ban, this is no longer an option.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well if that is true, tough, if Ferrari with all their resources couldn't figure that out it shows rank bad management and a lack of engineering input, it puts them on a par with virgin racing, and as all the teams have pneumatic systems why are their engines not showing the same vulnerability? I have to say, something smells about this.

scaliwag.

[Mysterious Rock]

Well surely they better be making time then, surely to finish a place worse off is better than not finishing at all?

[Hawkmoon]

Hit the nail on the head there SKC, are we to believe that all engine freezes are equal except for the red engine freeze.


It took until post number 4 for "OMG the FIA are biased towards Ferrari!!!" post to appear. What's wrong with you people? It normally only takes until post number 2 for this kind of thing. :rolleyes:

But what am I saying? Of course the FIA are favouring Ferrari by allowing them to modify their engine. Just as they were favouring Renault, twice.

[scaliwag]

It took until post number 4 for "OMG the FIA are biased towards Ferrari!!!" post to appear. What's wrong with you people? It normally only takes until post number 2 for this kind of thing. :rolleyes:

But what am I saying? Of course the FIA are favouring Ferrari by allowing them to modify their engine. Just as they were favouring Renault, twice.

As usual don't face facts just attack the messenger.

scaliwag.

[Mysterious Rock]

if Ferrari with all their resources couldn't figure that out it shows rank bad management and a lack of engineering input, it puts them on a par with virgin racing, and as all the teams have pneumatic systems why are their engines not showing the same vulnerability? I have to say, something smells about this.

scaliwag.


Thats not nice to tar Virgin Racing with the same brush as Ferrari Lol

[Dave B]

There's a suggestion (can't remember where I heard this so excuse the lack of link!) that the modifications could cost them around 7 horsepower, so it's a compromise.

[AndyL]

Hit the nail on the head there SKC, are we to believe that all engine freezes are equal except for the red engine freeze.

All the manufacturers have been allowed to make reliability improvements during the engine freeze, and they haven't always had to wait until engines have actually blown up to do it either. Since Ferrari demonstrably have a reliability issue I can't see how this can be painted as favouritism towards Ferrari.

[Saint Devote]

Williams have not protested.

[Hawkmoon]

As usual don't face facts just attack the messenger.

scaliwag.

When the messenger completely ignores facts and says something stupid I will attack him.

Ferrari quite clearly have a reliability issue. They are granted a modification which is clearly within the regulations. Renault were granted modifications because their engine was down on power for god's sake and it's Ferrari-favouritism from the FIA and poor engineering on Ferrari's part.

It's not me whose not facing the facts here.

Now when Alonso tells us he is 'no worried about reliability' we can take the comment at face value - lol. ;)

Maybe he wasn't worried because he knew it would be fixed?

[jas123f1]

When the messenger completely ignores facts and says something stupid I will attack him.

Ferrari quite clearly have a reliability issue. They are granted a modification which is clearly within the regulations. Renault were granted modifications because their engine was down on power for god's sake and it's Ferrari-favouritism from the FIA and poor engineering on Ferrari's part.

It's not me whose not facing the facts here.

Sure - all teams should be allowed to make their engines better during seasons.. ;)

[Retro Formula 1]

Hit the nail on the head there SKC, are we to believe that all engine freezes are equal except for the red engine freeze.


Sorry Scaliwag, I wasn't suggesting Ferrari were being preferred but I think all manufacturers make modifications that might improve reliability but certainly don't harm performance if you catch my drift.

[Hawkmoon]

Sure - all teams should be allowed to make their engines better during seasons.. ;)

Of course they should. The rule is stupid but to suggest that the FIA is favouring Ferrari when Renault and I think Mercedes have been allowed to do the same is equally stupid.

[scaliwag]

AndyL.
All the manufacturers have been allowed to make reliability improvements during the engine freeze, and they haven't always had to wait until engines have actually blown up to do it either. Since Ferrari demonstrably have a reliability issue I can't see how this can be painted as favouritism towards Ferrari.

Link to your statement that all the manufacurers have been allowed to make reiability improvements please.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hawk answer my point below, and please refrain from insults.

Well if that is true, tough, if Ferrari with all their resources couldn't figure that out it shows rank bad management and a lack of engineering input, it puts them on a par with virgin racing, and as all the teams have pneumatic systems why are their engines not showing the same vulnerability? I have to say, something smells about this.

Link to your statement that all the manufacurers have been allowed to make reiability improvements please.


http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,12433_4632147,00.html

http://en.espnf1.com/mercedes/motorsport/story/11662.html

http://www.auto123.com/en/racing-news/other/f1-toyota-backs-renault-amid-engine-freeze-spat?artid=99925

[Hawkmoon]

AndyL.
All the manufacturers have been allowed to make reliability improvements during the engine freeze, and they haven't always had to wait until engines have actually blown up to do it either. Since Ferrari demonstrably have a reliability issue I can't see how this can be painted as favouritism towards Ferrari.

Link to your statement that all the manufacurers have been allowed to make reiability improvements please.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hawk answer my point below, and please refrain from insults.

Well if that is true, tough, if Ferrari with all their resources couldn't figure that out it shows rank bad management and a lack of engineering input, it puts them on a par with virgin racing, and as all the teams have pneumatic systems why are their engines not showing the same vulnerability? I have to say, something smells about this.

When Mercedes couldn't get an engine to last 5 minutes in 2005, costing Raikkonen a title, they obviously got something wrong. The Renault didn't blow up if you so much as sneezed at it yet it had all the same components as the Mercedes. In 2006 F1 moved to rev limited engines and the Mercs stopped being handgrenades. Something fishy there too? Did the FIA institute the rev limit to help McLaren? No and no.

You can compare Ferrari to Virgin all you like, I don't care. They obviously got something wrong in the engine design, just as Mercedes did a few years ago. But your suggestion that the FIA are favouring Ferrari by allowing them to fix the problem is just plain wrong.

[Easy Drifter]

Do you think the newly added turbocharger will really improve reliability????? :eek: :D

OK OK I have a wierd sense of humour.
Nobody take that seriously PLEASE. :vader:

[Hawkmoon]

Do you think the newly added turbocharger will really improve reliability????? :eek: :D

OK OK I have a wierd sense of humour.
Nobody take that seriously PLEASE. :vader:

Not as much as the extra 4 cyclinders! :D

[christophulus]

My first instinct was to question why the engines had become less reliable over the winter, but the point about not being able to top up the air makes sense. Although they could just, y'know, take a longer pit stop?

[Easy Drifter]

How about a bellows that the driver could pump with his knee? :eek: :dozey:

Or if rumours were correct Nelson Piquet Sr. could supply compressed hot air on demand albeit rather smelly. :D

[Bagwan]

How about a bellows that the driver could pump with his knee? :eek: :dozey:

I like it .

I have one of those $10.00 mini air pumps from Canadian Tire they could plug into the cigarette lighter .
Incidentally , how come they get a hard time over bar codes , but nobody says anything about the cigarette lighter ?

I guess they wouldn't try it , though , being it would fall under moveable aeros in the regs .

[SGWilko]

One thought I had (yes, I had to sit down for a bit afterwards) was, Ferrari did, you hope, realise that the pit stops would be shorter this year, right, what without refuelling, and they had done lots of testing miles.....???

Are we to believe that the engines were fine until the races started?

Or, were their race runs conducted with longer pit stops to top up the air???

Can anyone provide youtube clips showing last years Ferrari stops where they topped up the air.

I just fail to see how this was overlooked. There were the usual press mutterings of 'no issues, everything is rosy', and here we are, a re-design of the valvesystem is required cos they keep going bang.

It was only a couple of races ago that the issue with the BMW's Ferrari engines was electrical/sensor related.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/8625019.stm

Ferrari's head of engine and electronics Luca Marmorini had said earlier this week he was not overly concerned by Alonso and Sauber's engine failures in Malaysia.

"We have carried out an in-depth study and the problems are not related," he told the Ferrari website.

"In Sepang, Fernando's engine suffered a structural failure, of a type we never saw during the winter.

"We believe there was a role played by the unusual way in which the driver had to use the engine during the race, because of the gear selection problems he experienced right from the start.

"Additionally, there is no connection with the problem the BMW Sauber team experienced on the engine front at the last race, which we believe was down to an issue with electronic sensors.

[SGWilko]

I like it .

I have one of those $10.00 mini air pumps from Canadian Tire they could plug into the cigarette lighter .
Incidentally , how come they get a hard time over bar codes , but nobody says anything about the cigarette lighter ?

I guess they wouldn't try it , though , being it would fall under moveable aeros in the regs .

Aha, it's not really a cigarette lighter any more. I have one in the boot of my car, it has no insert and is termed merely a 12v socket.

Anyway, I hate the lighter insert, despite neither my wife or myself smoking, whenever I have occasion to lift the cover to access the garege door opener fob, the little sign of a lit cigerette is always wonky, and I just HAVE to get it level.

[ioan]

Hit the nail on the head there SKC, are we to believe that all engine freezes are equal except for the red engine freeze.

Only if you don't know what you talk.
What about Renault and Toyota and Mercedes, and BMW and pretty much everyone being allowed engine upgrades during the last seasons? Do they all have red cars?

[ioan]

As usual don't face facts just attack the messenger.

scaliwag.

What FACTS? Get a dictionary!

[ioan]

Williams have not protested.

Quite a feat that is. ;)

[ioan]

One thought I had (yes, I had to sit down for a bit afterwards) was, Ferrari did, you hope, realise that the pit stops would be shorter this year, right, what without refuelling, and they had done lots of testing miles.....???

Are we to believe that the engines were fine until the races started?

Or, were their race runs conducted with longer pit stops to top up the air???

Can anyone provide youtube clips showing last years Ferrari stops where they topped up the air.

I just fail to see how this was overlooked. There were the usual press mutterings of 'no issues, everything is rosy', and here we are, a re-design of the valvesystem is required cos they keep going bang.

It was only a couple of races ago that the issue with the BMW's Ferrari engines was electrical/sensor related.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/8625019.stm

Ferrari's head of engine and electronics Luca Marmorini had said earlier this week he was not overly concerned by Alonso and Sauber's engine failures in Malaysia.

"We have carried out an in-depth study and the problems are not related," he told the Ferrari website.

"In Sepang, Fernando's engine suffered a structural failure, of a type we never saw during the winter.

"We believe there was a role played by the unusual way in which the driver had to use the engine during the race, because of the gear selection problems he experienced right from the start.

"Additionally, there is no connection with the problem the BMW Sauber team experienced on the engine front at the last race, which we believe was down to an issue with electronic sensors.

Never believe what a teams declares when they clearly have problems. Not even Ferrari.

[Mia 01]

If Alonso blows one moore this wekeend, he will run out of engines.

[Big Ben]

If Alonso blows one moore this wekeend, he will run out of engines.

OMG :O. They have only 3 engines per year?

[F1boat]

What FACTS? Get a dictionary!

And very recently the Renault engine was updated, possibly giving advantage to Red Bull and Renault F1. But hey, if it's not Ferrari, it is OK for the haterz.

[scaliwag]

When Mercedes couldn't get an engine to last 5 minutes in 2005, costing Raikkonen a title, they obviously got something wrong. The Renault didn't blow up if you so much as sneezed at it yet it had all the same components as the Mercedes. In 2006 F1 moved to rev limited engines and the Mercs stopped being handgrenades. Something fishy there too? Did the FIA institute the rev limit to help McLaren? No and no.

You can compare Ferrari to Virgin all you like, I don't care. They obviously got something wrong in the engine design, just as Mercedes did a few years ago. But your suggestion that the FIA are favouring Ferrari by allowing them to fix the problem is just plain wrong.


Ok Hawk, let me explain, I'm not putting down your team because I dislike it, I don't care one way or another, I'm simply asking three questions.

(1) Is there an engine freeze or not?

(2) what does the engine freeze entail/demand?

(3) How could Ferrari have overlooked the fact that pit stops are shorter this season?

As I tried to explain before something doesn't add up here, and incidentally I would query any other of the teams if the position was reversed.

scaliwag.

[AndyL]

Link to your statement that all the manufacurers have been allowed to make reiability improvements please.

I'm surprised you're not already aware of this. It was how we ended up with Renault being 20bhp+ down on Ferrari, Mercedes and BMW by the end of 2008. Those three manufacturers had taken advantage of permitted reliability upgrades to also improve power, while Renault had not done so. As a consequence Renault were then permitted to make some performance improvements to try to equalise performance again before the 2009 season (not entirely successfully as they were still down on power).
Here are an ITV F1 article and the Wikipedia page referring to the subject.
http://www.itv-f1.com/news_article.aspx?id=46897
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formula_One_engines#2007.E2.80.932009
If you want any more detailed information you can do your own research. You'll find the rules permitting reliability upgrades in appendix 4 of the sporting regulations.

[AndyL]

Well this is interesting. Apparently Alonso has denied that the problem is a pneumatic one, and according to James Allen's sources one of the parts Ferrari want to replace are the con rods:
http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2010/05/ferrari-to-attack-barcelona-with-new-rear-wing-and-updated-engines/
Not the design, they claim, but the method of fabrication.
My guess would be that as long as the weight isn't changed, then it shouldn't improve performance... a strength improvement wouldn't translate to a performance gain when you have a set rev limit. Perhaps someone with more mechanical engineering expertise can tell me if that's right or wrong!

[Retro Formula 1]

Ok Hawk, let me explain, I'm not putting down your team because I dislike it, I don't care one way or another, I'm simply asking three questions.

(1) Is there an engine freeze or not?

(2) what does the engine freeze entail/demand?

(3) How could Ferrari have overlooked the fact that pit stops are shorter this season?

As I tried to explain before something doesn't add up here, and incidentally I would query any other of the teams if the position was reversed.

scaliwag.

(1) There is an engine freeze on power development but changes to improve reliability can be made.

(2) See (1)

(3) Good question. Looks a bit amateur if you ask me. However, hardly unfairly favouring Ferrari though.

[V12]

Ah, I give up. No not with the whole FIArrari thing which to be honest is probably just a myth, but the fact we have this situation where the governing body is arbitrarily deciding who can develop and who can't, they just just stick the engine freeze in the bin where it belongs and let people get on with it.

[Retro Formula 1]

Ah, I give up. No not with the whole FIArrari thing which to be honest is probably just a myth, but the fact we have this situation where the governing body is arbitrarily deciding who can develop and who can't, they just just stick the engine freeze in the bin where it belongs and let people get on with it.

A voice of reason.

[scaliwag]

I'm surprised you're not already aware of this. It was how we ended up with Renault being 20bhp+ down on Ferrari, Mercedes and BMW by the end of 2008. Those three manufacturers had taken advantage of permitted reliability upgrades to also improve power, while Renault had not done so. As a consequence Renault were then permitted to make some performance improvements to try to equalise performance again before the 2009 season (not entirely successfully as they were still down on power).
Here are an ITV F1 article and the Wikipedia page referring to the subject.
http://www.itv-f1.com/news_article.aspx?id=46897
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formula_One_engines#2007.E2.80.932009
If you want any more detailed information you can do your own research. You'll find the rules permitting reliability upgrades in appendix 4 of the sporting regulations.


Many thanks AndyL, I was obviously labouring under the misapprehension that the engines used last season were the engines to be used this season,[the same design the same components ect] if I remember correctly Ferrari didn't have engine problems last season, however this season their engine reliability is suspect and we are led to believe it's because pit stops are shorter, I don't except that explanation, that is not because I'm anti Ferrari, it's because I'm anti FIA in their drive to make innovation a thing of the past, a one size fits all gambit, I enjoyed F1 when we had the Ferrari V12's BMW V10'S ect.

scaliwag.

[AndyL]

Ah, I give up. No not with the whole FIArrari thing which to be honest is probably just a myth, but the fact we have this situation where the governing body is arbitrarily deciding who can develop and who can't, they just just stick the engine freeze in the bin where it belongs and let people get on with it.

Not quite true that it's just the FIA deciding who can develop - all changes to the homologated engines have to be approved by all the other engine manufacturers. If you look at the James Allen link in my earlier post it seems that they're all reluctant to veto each other's changes because they want their own changes to be passed.

Well this is interesting. Apparently Alonso has denied that the problem is a pneumatic one, and according to James Allen's sources one of the parts Ferrari want to replace are the con rods

Well, the conrods push the piston, which would hit a valve that had dropped due to a pneumatic failure, so in a very round about way the conrod is a part of the problem!

As is the crankshaft, come to think of it.

Which just shows what a ridiculous rule the current engine regulations are, since you could drive a double-decker bus through the loophole created by "reliability".

As Mercedes, Ferrari & BMW already had.

[SGWilko]

If Alonso blows one moore this wekeend, he will run out of engines.

Moore? Blows?

Oh deary dear, James bond is lucky.....

[edv]

Moore? Blows?

Oh deary dear, James bond is lucky.....
..thought you'd make a reference to The Saint instead LOL

[V12]

Not quite true that it's just the FIA deciding who can develop - all changes to the homologated engines have to be approved by all the other engine manufacturers. If you look at the James Allen link in my earlier post it seems that they're all reluctant to veto each other's changes because they want their own changes to be passed.

Fair enough :up: - must admit to not knowing that, it's still all a bit arbitrary though...

[truefan72]

I'm not sure why Ferrari are allowed to make the mods on the engine. As far as I'm concerned it has won a race and podiumed in others so despite its reliability issues it is still up there in performance. That to me is just tough luck and the breaks in F1. If Renault had to wait until the end of the year to make engine changes then so should Ferrari. Either allow all teams to make engine mods or allow none. Not this secretive team by team basis crap.

I think it is gaining an ever so slight advantage for them. They have had 4 races to analyse the data and now want to make improvements to an already extremely competitive engine. :down:

[DexDexter]

Moore? Blows?

Oh deary dear, James bond is lucky.....

I don't know, how's your Swedish? ;)

[Mia 01]

A grid penalty of ten places is no yoke.

[ioan]

I'm not sure why Ferrari are allowed to make the mods on the engine. As far as I'm concerned it has won a race and podiumed in others so despite its reliability issues it is still up there in performance. That to me is just tough luck and the breaks in F1. If Renault had to wait until the end of the year to make engine changes then so should Ferrari. Either allow all teams to make engine mods or allow none. Not this secretive team by team basis crap.

I think it is gaining an ever so slight advantage for them. They have had 4 races to analyse the data and now want to make improvements to an already extremely competitive engine. :down:

It is exactly because the changes are allowed only for reliability reasons, that's what the engine freeze rule says.
So instead of questioning why Ferrari gets the right to modify it's exploding engines you should ask yourself why did Renault and Toyota been granted the same last season on the grounds of a lack of performance.
Just my 2c.

[Mia 01]

Whatever. It´s no use to them this year.

Most wants kimi back. But for now RBR is superior.

[ioan]

Whatever. It´s no use to them this year.

Most wants kimi back. But for now RBR is superior.

Just to let you know that you are not 'most'.

[scaliwag]

BBC and others report.

"Brazilian Rubens Barrichello is hoping that an engine upgrade from Cosworth scheduled for the Turkish Grand Prix at the end of May will help Williams make much needed progress on track this season."

I guess an upgrade means what it say's a technological improvement, if so how can that upgrade be deemed a reliability issue.

scaliwag.

[DexDexter]

BBC and others report.

"Brazilian Rubens Barrichello is hoping that an engine upgrade from Cosworth scheduled for the Turkish Grand Prix at the end of May will help Williams make much needed progress on track this season."

I guess an upgrade means what it say's a technological improvement, if so how can that upgrade be deemed a reliability issue.

scaliwag.

From what I gather, Cosworth are allowed to develop their engine up to a certain point to make it equal with other engines. Currently it is not that.

[Robinho]

from what i heard during the testing sessions yesterday the engine changes have to be shown to give no discernable improvement in performance, and in this case they have actually yielded a BHP loss to ferrari

[scaliwag]

Hey Dex/Rob'o.
If that which you write is true, and I have no reason to doubt it's true, it reinforces my contention that the FIA are continuing their bullheaded rush down the road of one size fits all.

scaliwag.

[Mia 01]

They are dune now.

[wmcot]

They are dune now.

That's all you've got to add after no comments for 2 months???

By "dune" do you mean as in Frank Herbert's Sci-Fi novel? Perhaps Ferrari have discovered that the spice comes from the sandworms and will make their cars travel through space-time...