Max wants 2.2L 10000RPM engines???

[wmcot]

Posted on Pitpass.com:

http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=31463

Max wants to save the planet from F1 by running 2.2 litre, 10,000 rpm-limited, turbo charged, five-race engines on bio-fuel in 4 wheel drive cars in 2011.

As noble as that sounds, there is probably more pollution caused by the power plants around the world generating enough electricity for all of us to read these "eco-friendly" statements on our computers that F1 produces in a year!!! F1 didn't cause global warming, Max!

Changing F1 (again) and costing billions of $$$ in engineering will have about the same effect on global warming as putting a snowball in Max's freezer!!! Sounds like Max forgot his meds again!

[Ranger]

Someone needs to slap him back together.

I'm fine with the bio-diesel thing, but less power in F1 cars means higher cornering speeds (proven by the V10-V8 transition) and as a result there will probably be less passing.

So keep up the engine power and F1 might save itself the need to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on tailor-making new tracks with overtaking spots.

The barrage of new rules in F1 is making the cars slower and slower and IMO it needs to stop. If they spent less time changing the rules they might actually save themselves money, like they set out to do.

[AndyRAC]

Or to cut emissions, have less races.

[Valve Bounce]

Max is Mad :rolleyes:

[SteveA]

Isn't it possible that less power could lead to more time on full throttle - more fuel used and more pollution created?

I was once loaned a diesel Peugot while my V8 Rover was in the shop. I managed to drive that car so uneconomically that it was costing more in fuel than the V8!

[ShiftingGears]

He could also contribute to saving the planet by not breathing in our oxygen. I wonder if he's considered that?

[DimitraF1]

why you are so against all that? they must have a plan to propose all this changes, you are all acting like old man who don't understand something new.We better wait and see how this changes will work

[Flat.tyres]

i like the bio idea as the development will aid the motor industry but am adverse to the rest. push to pass and tc etc is wrong and 4wd will just increase corner speeds. 10k engines is a joke as well. we may as well have electric cars.

[ShiftingGears]

Four wheel drive means more traction and therefore higher corner speeds, which is what you were campaigning against, Max.

How much power will these engines that he is proposing have? Because if its less than what we have now, he shouldn't expect anyone besides tofu-eaters to warm to it.

[Flat.tyres]

How much power will these engines that he is proposing have? Because if its less than what we have now, he shouldn't expect anyone besides tofu-eaters to warm to it.

I can think of a couple here that would warm to it but as personal attacks are not allowed.... :D

[Brown, Jon Brow]

What cars need is more power and less grip to improve the racing. Reducing the engine power and increasing grip will mean that the cars are easy to drive so drivers make less mistakes, therfore less overtaking. I think that Max Mosely is diliberatly being a burke. He is making me mad :mad: Get Alan Gow in charge of the FIA.

[ArrowsFA1]

Max is certainly assuming that the manufacturers will be around long term if he's building F1 around them.

I'm not sure what I think about all of this, but does F1 have to be a test bed for road cars?

[Flat.tyres]

What cars need is more power and less grip to improve the racing. Reducing the engine power and increasing grip will mean that the cars are easy to drive so drivers make less mistakes, therfore less overtaking. I think that Max Mosely is diliberatly being a burke. He is making me mad :mad: Get Alan Gow in charge of the FIA.

that prat that runs the btcc? in the 80's perhaps when it was a decent series but i don't want reverse grids and success ballast in f1 or safety cars coming out to spice the racing up. no thanks.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

that prat that runs the btcc? in the 80's perhaps when it was a decent series but i don't want reverse grids and success ballast in f1 or safety cars coming out to spice the racing up. no thanks.

80's? decent? He has made the btcc better than the FIA Wtcc.

Maybe he should start a British F1 series ;)

[AndyL]

80's? decent? He has made the btcc better than the FIA Wtcc.

Maybe he should start a British F1 series ;)

Yes, all serious racing series should decide pole position by spinning a wheel of fortune.

[Flat.tyres]

Yes, all serious racing series should decide pole position by spinning a wheel of fortune.

nearly pissed myself. forgot about that.

i suppose its quite a good series if you like the crash em and bash em sort of racing. there are some good drivers in there but its not pure motorsport.

can be good fun though as long as you dont take it too seriously.

[luvracin]

If he wants to save the planet he should just mandate Exhaust gas treatment and require F1 cars pass SULEV emissions. He could also require carbon traps be put on every car.

At least this would contribute to the Auto Industry.

[ClarkFan]

Posted on Pitpass.com:

http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=31463

Max wants to save the planet from F1 by running 2.2 litre, 10,000 rpm-limited, turbo charged, five-race engines on bio-fuel in 4 wheel drive cars in 2011.

As noble as that sounds, there is probably more pollution caused by the power plants around the world generating enough electricity for all of us to read these "eco-friendly" statements on our computers that F1 produces in a year!!! F1 didn't cause global warming, Max!

Changing F1 (again) and costing billions of $$$ in engineering will have about the same effect on global warming as putting a snowball in Max's freezer!!! Sounds like Max forgot his meds again!

Damn - I've already got a car with a 2.2 liter engine and redline of 8300. I slap a turbo on my S2000, take off the fenders, and it's just about ready for F1! :p

More seriously, the proposal is interesting but, as is typical for Max, too clever and complicated by half. Restrict BTU-equivalent fuel flow and you may end up with engines like he discusses. Or not, but you will have pushed the F1 world towards generating its power in the most efficient manner possible, whatever the configuration of the resulting engines may be.

What I really do not want to see is the FIA prescribing engine configuration. Let different manufacturers try different solutions. If someone wants to dust off the old BRM H-16s and try that idea again, let them. The spec-engine configurations of the past 10 years have been b-o-r-i-n-g. Let's get some true creativity into F1 design again.

ClarkFan

P.S. And the 5-race engine idea is just stupid, but that is Max, isn't it? :crazy:

[Allyc85]

**** off max youve been in charge too long. F1 should be the fastest most advanced motorsport on the planet, the pinicle.

[quote="Brown, Jon Brow"]

Great shout :D

[Brown, Jon Brow]

can be good fun though as long as you dont take it too seriously.

Shame that Max Mosely doesn't seem to take F1 RACING seriously. He doesn't know what the fans wants, and seems to think that he is currently putting on a good show. :rolleyes:

[call_me_andrew]

Damn - I've already got a car with a 2.2 liter engine and redline of 8300. I slap a turbo on my S2000, take off the fenders, and it's just about ready for F1! :p

P.S. And the 5-race engine idea is just stupid, but that is Max, isn't it? :crazy:

I'll glue some winglets on my Sunfire and see you there.

The 5-race idea doesn't sound so crazy. I think Champ Car and IndyCar are both using 6-race engines.

[waitey]

that's it. i can't take him anymore, we must change this. If formula one, yes FORMULA ONE goes to v6 engines with 10,000rpm, i will give up. It will not be cost effective, as teams will spend millions trying to figure out how they will make some stupid engine i can get in a road car go quick. It will completely wreck the sound of formula 1, at this stage they don't sound too different to the v10's at all really, and still give that scream and thunder that we all love, but if they go to v6 with 10,000rpm it will wreck it forever.

It will wreck racing, the braking distances will be so small because of less top speed and more time at full throttle it will be near impossible to pass along with cornering speeds increasing. This guy is crazy, honestly, he is going to destroy this sport. Formula One is supposed to be the highest ranks in terms of technology, not with some crappy v6 engine. Don't give me this crap about environmental stuff, f1 is not to blame in the world, and it won't change anything.

WE HAVE TO STOP THIS, AS FANS! what can we do people, a petition that has to reach many formula 1 fans around the world, we have to stop this. I cannot believe i just read that article, and unless we do something, this crazy guy will just keep bringing this sport down. I am actually sick of it, sick to death. Am i the only person feeling this way? We must stop it pleeeeeeease!

All it will do to the sport is turn people away, make the racing worse, make it less exciting with less power and noise and just dumb f1 down with other series having greater specs for the cars. F1 is supposed to be the fastest, if they od this, champ car etc and even GP2 will be as fast if not faster than f1. Someone organise a petition or how we can get a lot of numbers together or stop this now.

[ClarkFan]

I'll glue some winglets on my Sunfire and see you there.

The 5-race idea doesn't sound so crazy. I think Champ Car and IndyCar are both using 6-race engines.

Winglets, that was what I was forgetting! ;)

ChampCar and Indy have little different environment - they both use a single spec engine, so there is no power competition. Don't think that is in Max's plans - F1 as now formulated needs multiple manufacturers.

I'm a lilttle taken aback at the abhorrence of 10,000 rpm engines. When I started watching F1, engines didn't get to 10,000 rpm. I guess we were watching slug races and didn't know it. :s

But if you think those engines didn't sound racy, pick up the DVD of Grand Prix.

ClarkFan

[cy bais]

sometimes i think he's smoking something bad ....

:)

[cy bais]

that's it. i can't take him anymore, we must change this. If formula one, yes FORMULA ONE goes to v6 engines with 10,000rpm, i will give up. It will not be cost effective, as teams will spend millions trying to figure out how they will make some stupid engine i can get in a road car go quick. It will completely wreck the sound of formula 1, at this stage they don't sound too different to the v10's at all really, and still give that scream and thunder that we all love, but if they go to v6 with 10,000rpm it will wreck it forever.

It will wreck racing, the braking distances will be so small because of less top speed and more time at full throttle it will be near impossible to pass along with cornering speeds increasing. This guy is crazy, honestly, he is going to destroy this sport. Formula One is supposed to be the highest ranks in terms of technology, not with some crappy v6 engine. Don't give me this crap about environmental stuff, f1 is not to blame in the world, and it won't change anything.

WE HAVE TO STOP THIS, AS FANS! what can we do people, a petition that has to reach many formula 1 fans around the world, we have to stop this. I cannot believe i just read that article, and unless we do something, this crazy guy will just keep bringing this sport down. I am actually sick of it, sick to death. Am i the only person feeling this way? We must stop it pleeeeeeease!

All it will do to the sport is turn people away, make the racing worse, make it less exciting with less power and noise and just dumb f1 down with other series having greater specs for the cars. F1 is supposed to be the fastest, if they od this, champ car etc and even GP2 will be as fast if not faster than f1. Someone organise a petition or how we can get a lot of numbers together or stop this now.

Agreed - if Max wants some environmentally friendly racing series, he should consider solar powered racing that universities and research institutes have. I reckon the manufacturers could say V6 engines....pffffft please show me the door. :)

[ShiftingGears]

I guess we were watching slug races and didn't know it. :s
ClarkFan

One difference being that back then circuits weren't riddled by chicanes and many many hairpins to slow the cars down... also grip is a big part. If cars are getting sideways/taily then they tend to look faster than cars driving on rails.

[wmcot]

He could also contribute to saving the planet by not breathing in our oxygen. I wonder if he's considered that?

And after a couple of weeks, he'd stop emitting methane, too!!! :)

[wmcot]

why you are so against all that? they must have a plan to propose all this changes, you are all acting like old man who don't understand something new.We better wait and see how this changes will work

About 9000 times worse than the last changes, or the changes before that, or the changes before that...

[DBell]

About 9000 times worse than the last changes, or the changes before that, or the changes before that...

Man that's the truth! Max has put F1 in such a tight box, design wise, that it might as well be a spec series. How far away is F1 away from the days a the 6 wheel Tyrrell and the creativity that designers showed before Max became king? Light years. Colin Chapman must be spinning in his grave over what F1 has become.

I became an F1 fan in the 80's and went to my first GP in Phoenix. (Yeah I was one of the few who did. :) ) Looking at the cars from some distance you could see differences in them. V8's, V10's and V12's all my making their own distinctive sound, it was great. I went to Indy GP last year and had fun, but honestly, all the cars looked and sounded pretty much the same to me. For me something was lost. And now 10,000 rpm turbo-diesels, with 4 wheel drive no less.......Yikes! I hear the Audi sportscars are almost silent running around the track. For me this is not a selling point.


F1 and the FIA need some new blood with new ideas. Someone who cares about the actual sport itself, not the money and power to be gleamed from it.

[Daniel]

80's? decent? He has made the btcc better than the FIA Wtcc.

Maybe he should start a British F1 series ;)
In your dreams. Neither the WTCC or current day BTCC are decent series.

The BTCC is a JOKE in it's current form. I suspect that drivers will leave the fact that they won a BTCC title off their CV because things like success ballast, reverse grid wheel of fortune races and general incompetence make it a crappy series that is not worth much to a prospective employer. I dreamt of coming over here to watch the BTCC in supertourer days and now I'm in the country I wouldn't be seen dead at a BTCC round unless it was to meet some forum people.

I don't particularly like F1 but it is a billion times better than the BTCC Amateur Hour.

I don't really see a problem with them using renewable fuels. You people have obviously not heard just how good a small turbo engine can sound at 10,000 rpm :) They just need to sort the grip issues out and it'll be better. But they won't and we all know it.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

In your dreams. Neither the WTCC or current day BTCC are decent series.

The BTCC is a JOKE in it's current form. I suspect that drivers will leave the fact that they won a BTCC title off their CV because things like success ballast, reverse grid wheel of fortune races and general incompetence make it a crappy series that is not worth much to a prospective employer. I dreamt of coming over here to watch the BTCC in supertourer days and now I'm in the country I wouldn't be seen dead at a BTCC round unless it was to meet some forum people.

I don't particularly like F1 but it is a billion times better than the BTCC Amateur Hour.

I don't really see a problem with them using renewable fuels. You people have obviously not heard just how good a small turbo engine can sound at 10,000 rpm :) They just need to sort the grip issues out and it'll be better. But they won't and we all know it.

You wouldn't be seen dead at a BTCC round? That's a bit harsh. My point is that the btcc is a billion times better than it was in 2001 and 2002 before Alan Gow cam back and improved it.

This is what Alan Gow said he would do to improve F1 when I asked him in his forum.


In simple terms, I (and probably most people) believe that F1 suffers from having cars with too much downforce and too many electronic control/intervention systems.

So, remove all electronic driver-aids, all real-time data/telemetry functions and make all cars use only a single FIA-specified (i.e. less-efficient) aerodynamic package - which would produce far less downforce. Yes, with the aerodynamics being the same for all cars, they would all look nearly identical....but in reality they nearly do now anyway, to the casual observer.

F1 is, and always has been, more of a 'purist' motorsport - so I don't believe they should go down the route of artificially improving the racing.

All they really need to do is allow the performance of the cars to fall more into the hands of the drivers, rather than those of their teams aerodynamic/electronic experts.


I can't see how a 10,000rpm V6 engine will be able to hurt your ears when it goes past like a modern F1 car does. Thats probably the only thing what makes F1 special at the moment. Touring cars are even nearly doing 9,000rpm. :rolleyes:

[Daniel]

You wouldn't be seen dead at a BTCC round? That's a bit harsh. My point is that the btcc is a billion times better than it was in 2001 and 2002 before Alan Gow cam back and improved it.

This is what Alan Gow said he would do to improve F1 when I asked him in his forum.




I can't see how a 10,000rpm V6 engine will be able to hurt your ears when it goes past like a modern F1 car does. Thats probably the only thing what makes F1 special at the moment. Touring cars are even nearly doing 9,000rpm. :rolleyes:
What he said he'd do. Actions speak louder than words and it's a lot easier to stand on the sidelines and say what you think you'd do in a situation.

Saying BTCC today is better than it was in 2002 is like saying genital herpes is better than syphilis. I don't want either......

[Erki]

I can't see how a 10,000rpm V6 engine will be able to hurt your ears when it goes past like a modern F1 car does.

Why should I want my ear to get hurt? :confused: I quite like my hearing thank you very much, there's more than just sheer decibels when it comes to sound.

[Big Ben]

IMO the best way to make f1 more environmentally friendly is not use any engine at all... They should just tie the car to the driver and see who runs faster...

These global warming hysteria really burns me up... Some 30 years ago scientists were trying to convince the humanity that we were entering in a new ice age... what happened with that theory? If I was to believe that I would say now that the global warming is exactly what we need.

The fact that we will burn less fuel but for a longer period of time should do the work...

[truefan72]

I've just about had enough of Mad Max.

Anyway, I'll doubt he'll be in office in 2011

How can One man completely try to ruin the greant and grand Formula 1.

[racing59]

May I interject here.

Max is right to move F1 to bio-fuel as it will focus the motor manufacturers in this area. Currently only a few have embraced it fully, with Saab taking the bull by the horns and producing a car which makes full use of E85 Bio-Ethanol.
They do it thanks to turbocharging, which allows the engine management to wind up the boost and advance the timing to ramp up the power by as much as 30% over 95 octane unleaded.

However, I disagree with the capacity or rev limit. I do agree with 5 race engines, and "multi-wheel drive".

My vision of F1 is a car that fits into a box which is say, 2m wide, 1.5m tall, and 4m long. And "hey guys, here's a 40gallon drum of bio-ethanol which is for the race - and the tank has to be full at the start, no refuelling" Each season, the amount of fuel is reduced, forcing the engine designers to concentrate on efficiency.

By limiting the total consumption of fuel, you will limit the power. By limiting the power you limit the aerodynamics, as more downforce needs more power needs more fuel.

Limiting the designers to the "size of the box" makes scruniteering simple, and who cars if it's got 6 wheels, all driven, of ruddy great wings. It all comes down to finishing the race in first place, and you don't do that by running out of fuel. And it should/will make racing more exciting, and F1 back on the pinnacle of development.

Rob.

[Periapt]

Damn - I've already got a car with a 2.2 liter engine and redline of 8300. I slap a turbo on my S2000, take off the fenders, and it's just about ready for F1! :p

More seriously, the proposal is interesting but, as is typical for Max, too clever and complicated by half. Restrict BTU-equivalent fuel flow and you may end up with engines like he discusses. Or not, but you will have pushed the F1 world towards generating its power in the most efficient manner possible, whatever the configuration of the resulting engines may be.

What I really do not want to see is the FIA prescribing engine configuration. Let different manufacturers try different solutions. If someone wants to dust off the old BRM H-16s and try that idea again, let them. The spec-engine configurations of the past 10 years have been b-o-r-i-n-g. Let's get some true creativity into F1 design again.

ClarkFan

P.S. And the 5-race engine idea is just stupid, but that is Max, isn't it? :crazy:


I fully agree with you about spec-engine configurations being a bad idea and the use BTU-equivalent alternate fuels being a good one. Add to that a mandated maximum downforce that is drastically below the current levels and I would expect some exciting racing.

I further agree that a 5-race engine is silly. I'd rather see a limit upon the number of engines that can be used in a season, then specify what components can be replaced without penalty and what would constitute a "new" engine. The penalties would not be grid spots, but would be deductions from the constructor's championship point total.

Now if someone wanted to really decrease F1 emissions they could leave out the engines and run the race downhill. ;)

Periapt

[wmcot]

My vision of F1 is a car that fits into a box which is say, 2m wide, 1.5m tall, and 4m long. And "hey guys, here's a 40gallon drum of bio-ethanol which is for the race - and the tank has to be full at the start, no refuelling" Each season, the amount of fuel is reduced, forcing the engine designers to concentrate on efficiency.

By limiting the total consumption of fuel, you will limit the power. By limiting the power you limit the aerodynamics, as more downforce needs more power needs more fuel.

Limiting the designers to the "size of the box" makes scruniteering simple, and who cars if it's got 6 wheels, all driven, of ruddy great wings. It all comes down to finishing the race in first place, and you don't do that by running out of fuel. And it should/will make racing more exciting, and F1 back on the pinnacle of development.

Rob.

I agree with you on the concept but it would never be adopted because of two reasons:
1. It's simple.
2. It makes sense.

That's just not the F1 way!

I don't know about the 5 race rule - it's a good thing Max isn't over drag racing where engines in top machines have about a 5 second between rebuilds rule! I don't see any reason that an engine shouldn't be rebuilt between races, not modified, just rebuilt. Right now, the entire car can be rebuilt EXCEPT the engine.

[waitey]

he is mad this bloke, and i doubt it will happen, it's so far away and i don't think he will be in power then or by then people will stop him making such a stupid change to the sport that will ruin it and completely turn me and many others away from f1.

look at this comment he makes on http://www.f1racing.net
"We are in active discussions with the major manufacturers to ensure that, in future, research and development relevant only to formula one will be discouraged, whereas that which has relevance to road-car development will be encouraged"

now hang on, that is totally going against what formula 1 is about. FORMULA ONE IS ABOUT DEVELOPMENT, and he is trying to discourage it, formula 1 is not a spec series and a low grade series with v6 engines that dont make the loudest sound on earth. It is about development, and he is trying to discourage that? he doesnt know what this sport is then, and we need someone in power that loves this sport and knows the right direction it needs to go in, and most importantly, LISTEN TO THE FANS.

Look at this other comment as well:
Mosley furthermore said: "Whilst aiming to achieve these goals we will ensure that the sporting spectacle of F1 remains the same or is even improved by the new developments."

Now how is that possible. If he brings this rule into power, the sporting spectacle of formula 1 will die. And he thinks it will stay the same or improve? he is mad. It will wreck the noise, the high profile side of formula one (people wil frown upon a series with v6 engines, it won't be considered the pinnacle of motor racing) and it will not improve the racing. So he is crazy if he thinks it is good for the sport, it will ruin it.

Again people, what can we do to stop this if he doesn't go out of power by then or so. How does someone else actually come into power? i don't understand how it works with this so could someone clarify how this occurs? We must stop this, i don't think people realise how bad this will be for the sport if this happens.

[ArrowsFA1]

Isn't Max just reflecting the views of the world outside of F1? The environment is becoming the central political and social issue and F1 cannot be seen to be ignoring that.

Also, remember that the FIA is not simply a F1 rulemaker. As they say on their website the FIA "has been dedicated to representing the interests of motoring organisations and motor car users throughout the world." Perhaps it is more with that role in mind that Max is looking to F1 to lead the way.

Added to that is the fact that at the moment the sport is dominated by major road car manufacturers.

The problem that we have as F1 fans IMHO is that we see these proposals as fundamentally changing 'our' sport, but the fact is the sport has changed frequently over the decades. Technology and safety are just a couple of areas where that's obvious, as is the increasing influence of the many sponsors/commercial partners that come and go. It was once the case that a sticker on a car provided cash with few, if any, strings. Not any more.

As fans we may want to see (arguably) the best drivers in the world racing and competing against each other, and in doing so providing us with a great spectacle, but that is just a very small part of what F1 is today.

F1 is a business, and as such it is influenced by the same issues that other businesses are, and I think that is what Max, in his role as President of the FIA, is attempting to deal with.

[millencolin]

2.2 litre, 10,000 rpm-limited

so basically F1 are going to be powered by engines similiar to the one thats in my car right now

not a good thing max

[ShiftingGears]

To be fair...

The turbo era engines were 1.5 litres, and they could produce more than 1000 horsepower in qualifying trim. The most powerful engine - the BMW M12/13 was a 1.5 litre, 800hp 10500rpm beast. Thats a lot less engine capacity, and only a fraction more RPMs. So it might be good, better than these V8s hopefully.
We're probably overreacting a little, but after the switch to 2.4 litre V8s I don't think anyone completely trusts Max when theres an engine regulation change suggested.

[aryan]

I don't have problems with 2.2L 10,000 RPM turbo engines. I just don't think they will happen because as has been mentioned, the 1.5L turbos of the 80s produced near 1000 bhp so with the increase in capacity and technology surely these engines max is proposing will produce more than 1500 bhp, and we all know that is a ridiculous amount which can never be put down meaninfguly on tarmac. So...

Unlike what Audi wants you to believe, 4wd is stupid for racing cars. There is simply less fun driving a 4wd car as opposed to a proper RWD with 50/50 weight distribution. Please test drive the New TT 2.0L FWD and 3.2L AWD to see which is more fun... not to mention that AWD produces huge amounts of grip, which is not what we are looking for if we want more exciting races.

5 races per engine is fine to me. I was opposed to the 1 engine per week and then 1 engine per 2 races idea initially, but now I see that it is saving teams big piles of money, so thumbs up to max for coming up with this one. However there was a suggestion in this thread about limiting the number of engines a car can use per season, which seems even a better idea.

But...at the end of the day, I think FIA should just get over it and if they want true innovation, should remove all limitations and rules on engines, and introduce just one new rule: The amount of fuel a car can use per race (hopefully that fuel is E85 or something). That may make the F1 teams apply their enginnering skills to talcke a real-world issue, and it may well introduce a couple of inventions which might find their way to road cars in a couple of year. This of course will significantly increase R&D costs of the engine department, but I would rather see that money spent on producing better and more efficient engines than coming up with new winglets and aero what-nots every other race.

[ClarkFan]

Arrows - :up: A nice summary of the issues that are in play outside of the spotlight. Whether we fans appreciate it or not, F1 is a commercial enterprise. When an enterprise spends over $2 billion US year, it must stay connected to the larger economic currents to remain viable.

I appreciate the posters arguing for limits on overall fuel use; I would accept that as an alternative to the idea for fuel flow limits (originated, I believe, by Keith Duckworth). I prefer flow limits due to the experience of the 1980's. The turbo era also had a limit on fuel capacity/use. The result was the "fuel economy races" where cars turned down the boost to conserve fuel, and Keke Rosberg's comment about not being a w****r just because he was running slowly to save fuel.

ClarkFan

[Mikeall]

F1 has the potential to be more than just a racing series and can act as a catalyst for change. The FIA is more progressive than many users on here like to think but ultimately they are doing the right thing. Personally I'd like to see F1, WRC, WTCC and FIA GT all make moves towards using bio fuels (especially bio diesel. Race weekends may smell different as a result but there are bigger fish to fry...

[SteveA]

I don't have problems with 2.2L 10,000 RPM turbo engines. I just don't think they will happen because as has been mentioned, the 1.5L turbos of the 80s produced near 1000 bhp so with the increase in capacity and technology surely these engines max is proposing will produce more than 1500 bhp.

Depends on the boost allowed from the turbo. Will they have "pop-off" valves like Champcar engines?

[Daniel]

Depends on the boost allowed from the turbo. Will they have "pop-off" valves like Champcar engines?
And also depends if they have air restrictors

[wmcot]

Isn't Max just reflecting the views of the world outside of F1? The environment is becoming the central political and social issue and F1 cannot be seen to be ignoring that.

Nobody wants F1 to be politically active. It's supposed to be sport. It's supposed to be entertainment. Not much has ever come out of F1 that has found its way onto standard cars. The same can be said for Land Speed Record cars, Drag racers, IRL, Champ cars, and on and on...

As for the effects of F1 on the environment, it would have a much greater impact if F1 tickets were only sold to those having bio-friendly transportation to the event. Better yet, get rid of the spectators, just televise it! Problem with that is that all the TV crews would have to use bio-friendly transporters.

Then you have the problem of getting the cars and teams to the races. How many bio-friendly airlines are there? Perhaps for overseas races the cars could be sent by sailing ship.

F1 is not environmentally friendly, nor is any other form of motor sport. If anyone thinks that major manufacturers are involved in F1 to develop a "green" image rather than to simply sell cars, they are fooling themselves.

You could instantly terminate all forms of motor racing from the face of the earth and it would not have as much impact on the global climate as eliminating 5 seconds of commuting time in every major world city.

[rah]

I like the idea of reducing the fuel idea. I was thinking about that one myself. But I do not like the idea of bio diesel. At the moment its just not a great alternative. Maybe keep petrol at the moment and focus on reclaiming power and increasing efficiency.

One of the problems with passing these days is that everyone has similar cars on similar fuel strategies. If there were teams doing things differently you would see much more passing on the track.

There have been many technological advances passed down from motor racing to street cars. Shouldn't this be encouraged?

[waitey]

it won't happen. The idea will fade out over time i am very certain. And i definately hope i am right.

[ShiftingGears]

From what I've read about it so far, if they ditch 4wd and just make the cars wider so that the cars have more feel then I'll be fairly pleased. Why was 4WD considered anyway?

[Rusty Spanner]

Max is right. :eek: F1 needs to be seen to be making itself cleaner and greener.
Admittedly it has a negligible impact on pollution in its own right, but it serves no practical purpose so will likely come under disproportionate political pressure.
Unless F1 greens-up as pressure and attitudes change the manufacturers will leave since they won't want to be associated with it. Now depending on your point of view that might be a good or a bad thing but ones things for certain it would result in much less money being spent within F1 and on promoting F1.

I wouldn't worry about the details of the proposals too much since they'll almost certainly change.

[aryan]

But I do not like the idea of bio diesel. At the moment its just not a great alternative.


Could you please elaborate on what you mean as "alternative", and on what basis do you say that ATM its[sic] not a great alternative?

Gives more bhp per litre, can be easily made from sources and technology available to us today, has been in use in Brazil for decades, can be used on our "current" engines with little modification.

Seems a great alternative in my book.

The only downside is that we might have to cut down all forrests to plant crops :(

[OmarF1]

Max is tripping on acid big time these days.

[rah]

Could you please elaborate on what you mean as "alternative", and on what basis do you say that ATM its[sic] not a great alternative?

Gives more bhp per litre, can be easily made from sources and technology available to us today, has been in use in Brazil for decades, can be used on our "current" engines with little modification.

Seems a great alternative in my book.

The only downside is that we might have to cut down all forrests to plant crops :(

The problem with bio fuels is it needs to be grown. As you say in Brazil they have been using it for ages and it works for them. They are making ethanol from sugar crops. The problem with increasing the worlds use of these fuels is that ATM they are being made from food crops. This means there will be less food produced just to satisfy the demand for cleaner fuels and drives up the cost of staple foods.

Another example of why bio diesel is not the best option is in SE Asia. At the moment there production of palm oil is increasing to supply bio fuels. Because of the deforestation needed for the farms they are producing around 10 times more CO2 per barrel of palm oil than crude. Not exactly what I would call a green choice.

I say all of this as ATM because things are always changing. There are studies going on currently to produce ethanol from grasses using an enzyme from tomatoes. This could cut the production costs and reduce the other impacts.

How does this relate to F1? Why push a fuel solution that is not a a great solution? Will it impact the racing at all?

BTW I trully hope I never see a diesel powered Ferrari in my lifetime. It just sounds wrong.

[Bruce D]

Having glanced through all the posts above, I can see that everyone is missing the interesting point in this engine rule annoucement. Obviously unlike most people here I follow the IRL closely, watching every race (I think after the boredom of Monaco this weekend the Indy 500 should be a cracker!). I only clicked while watching the cars during qualifying for Indy - these new rules are done for Honda's benefit. Reason - the rules announced by Max are EXACTLY what the IRL is running now! (bio fuel included) And let me tell you the racing is not dull (they do race on road courses these days too BTW). So guys, stop bitching about everything every time somebody tries to make F1 better than it currently is. And start watching other racing series as well - it would be an eye opening experience for some of you.

[Roamy]

bullsh!t

real racers do not use automatic transmissions

[AndyRAC]

I really despair of F1 sometimes, yes I know costs have to be kept down, and to be 'greener', but what happened to variety,i.e v8, v10, v12 engines, different chassis designs. At the moment the cars sound the same, look very similar, doh. We don't want 4WD in F1, it's ruined WRC, too much grip and traction. Were will it end? 1.6 engines running on olive oil....

[Mikeall]

Bio diesel is very different to ethanol. Bio diesel is produced from vegetable fats or animal fats, whereas ethanol is simply alcohol. Its hard to give a definitive answer on which is best but at the moment I would say bio diesel may be the better bet for the future so long as it does not rely on deforestation in the South East Asia.

[xtlm]

Having glanced through all the posts above, I can see that everyone is missing the interesting point in this engine rule annoucement. Obviously unlike most people here I follow the IRL closely, watching every race (I think after the boredom of Monaco this weekend the Indy 500 should be a cracker!). I only clicked while watching the cars during qualifying for Indy - these new rules are done for Honda's benefit. Reason - the rules announced by Max are EXACTLY what the IRL is running now! (bio fuel included) And let me tell you the racing is not dull (they do race on road courses these days too BTW). So guys, stop bitching about everything every time somebody tries to make F1 better than it currently is. And start watching other racing series as well - it would be an eye opening experience for some of you.


Yeah, I noticed this....except that IRL car is not turbo, has a v8, and runs that corn stuff instead of that used food stuff.

The F1's could still be very fast and such....depending on how big the turbo is along with other factors...and someone please explain a 'pop off' valve for me.....I have always wondered what it is.

Probably not relevant but I am a fan of all motorsports.....I could watch anything al long as they are racing each other in some fashion.


edit - misread and forgot that the new plan was not for a v6.
edit - realized that my first thought was right......

[Tomski]

Does it really matter what the max rev's of an engine are?

Does it really matter what the engine capacity is?

Does it really matter what the max boost pressure is?

NO

Ssurely the FIA can come up with a rules framework which allows the designers to come up with unique solutions, so fans again can reconnise the individual cars without resorting to looking a the sponsors stickers, and hopefully the rules will also give us some proper on track action rather than watching some so caller clever pit / fuel / tyre strategy unravel each race.

[waitey]

sorry but i will not be happy with formula 1 having v6 engines with 10,000rpm. Keep the engines they have now or go back to v10's and reduce some of the aero and give them slicks. It will totally ruin the sound of formula 1 if they do this and sorry but it's just a stupid engine rule. Not sure about the fuel situation don't understand that much. But the engine configuration is not right. I'm sure it will change. It's a proposal not definate at all.

[wmcot]

Let's copy NASCAR and switch to leaded gasoline (up to this year at least) That would really show the world!

Seriously, if Max wants to be greener, keep the rules as they are (OK, bring back slicks and wider cars) and just switch to ethanol. In the US, we have farmers being paid by the government NOT to grow crops. It wouldn't take a lot of extra corn to make enough ethanol for F1.

My complaint is that Max seems to make sweeping changes all at once rather than gradual changes. The teams would probably be able to live with a switch to ethanol and slicks, but wholesale changes just end up costing each team a fortune in R&D.

Then there is my earlier post with F1 not being eco friendly when jetting around the world to different races. It's a bit like Leonardo DiCaprio preaching against global warming while flying in his personal Lear Jet to Cannes for the film festival. It's hypocritical if you don't address ALL aspects together.

[Dzeidzei]

To be fair...

We're probably overreacting a little...

Not really. I dont think its the details of any suggestion MM makes, its the thought behind it all. Does he want to makes F1 cars out of plastic and running on flower fluids?

Are we not missing something pretty damn important of F1 if these ideas get to be evolved? So they need to be stopped.

F1 does not cause global warming. Ruining the sport like this will not have any effect on these undoubtebly very important issues. I think Max should help the environment by staying home all the time. Then he would not burn fuel to get the races. And he´d piss off a lot less people.

[ShiftingGears]

Burning fuel does contribute, and also fossil fuels are running out. Its time for a bit of forward thinking. Also, governments are going to have a power trip trying to convince their electorate that they're an environmentally aware party, and burning fossil fuels will lead them to set sights on F1. I don't see how going green would ruin the sport, but I may be surprised. As I mentioned, the Turbo era was generally remembered fondly due to the power exceeding the chassis capability, and those cars were only 1.5 litres.

[Dzeidzei]

Burning fuel does contribute, and also fossil fuels are running out. Its time for a bit of forward thinking. Also, governments are going to have a power trip trying to convince their electorate that they're an environmentally aware party, and burning fossil fuels will lead them to set sights on F1. I don't see how going green would ruin the sport, but I may be surprised. As I mentioned, the Turbo era was generally remembered fondly due to the power exceeding the chassis capability, and those cars were only 1.5 litres.

The point is that F1 does as much to global warming than me drinking coffee. If you really want to stop the global warming with the card manufacturers, stop producing millions of cars. And absolutely dont ever start selling cars to the vast population in China and India.

Dont see that happening though. F1 going green is only about the public image.

[rah]

The point is that F1 does as much to global warming than me drinking coffee. If you really want to stop the global warming with the card manufacturers, stop producing millions of cars. And absolutely dont ever start selling cars to the vast population in China and India.

Dont see that happening though. F1 going green is only about the public image.

Unless you use a few v8's running full time to brew your cuppa, i don't think your comparison is a great one. F1 produces huge amounts of pollution and uses massive amounts of fossil fuels. Although small, it certainly counts to the larger picture. If something is not done sometime soon creat a greener image for F1 then it will only be so long before people turn against it.

The populations of India and China want cars. They deserve them as much as anyone else on the planet.

[Dzeidzei]

Unless you use a few v8's running full time to brew your cuppa, i don't think your comparison is a great one. F1 produces huge amounts of pollution and uses massive amounts of fossil fuels. Although small, it certainly counts to the larger picture. If something is not done sometime soon creat a greener image for F1 then it will only be so long before people turn against it.

The populations of India and China want cars. They deserve them as much as anyone else on the planet.

F1 produces huge amounts of pollution compared to riding a bicycle, yes. Comparing to the real polluting factors it is insignificant. And if you dont believe me, just check the facts. Correcting 0.00000000001 percent of the problem is hardly enough.

I didnt say the Chinese or Indiand dont want or deserve cars. I think they should not have them. I also think private driving should be banned in the US, but dont expect that to happen either.

[ShiftingGears]

I also think private driving should be banned in the US, but dont expect that to happen either.

Maybe Finland should lead by example :D

[Dzeidzei]

Maybe Finland should lead by example :D

Absolutely ;)

[aryan]

The point is that F1 does as much to global warming than me drinking coffee.

The point is F1 should market itself as environmentally friendly, even though everyone knows that in the overall grand scheme of things, F1 makes no difference to the environment.

It's the marketing that matters not the product. Look at all those Windows desktops around you and stop wondering why...

[rah]

F1 produces huge amounts of pollution compared to riding a bicycle, yes. Comparing to the real polluting factors it is insignificant. And if you dont believe me, just check the facts. Correcting 0.00000000001 percent of the problem is hardly enough.

I didnt say the Chinese or Indiand dont want or deserve cars. I think they should not have them. I also think private driving should be banned in the US, but dont expect that to happen either.

F1 produces large amounts of pollution period. The fact that it may be small in comparison means absolutely nothing. I am trying to reduce my energy consumption and mine would be very small compared to F1.

[Flat.tyres]

F1 produces large amounts of pollution period. The fact that it may be small in comparison means absolutely nothing. I am trying to reduce my energy consumption and mine would be very small compared to F1.

f1 as a sport is carbon neutral I think and has been for some time.

[SteveA]

f1 as a sport is carbon neutral I think and has been for some time.

Does that factor in each driver commuting in their own private jet?

[Dzeidzei]

The point is F1 should market itself as environmentally friendly, even though everyone knows that in the overall grand scheme of things, F1 makes no difference to the environment.


I disagree. I couldnt care less about the environmental image of F1, it has nothing to do with sport. To me F1 is about (hopefully) exciting races on Sunday afternoons, period.

Im all for recycling and green values, but having a "greener F1" does not make me feel any better. So who´s conscience do you want to please here?

...nevermind.

[Flat.tyres]

Does that factor in each driver commuting in their own private jet?

im not sure of that but thats hardly the sport is it. at least theyve made the effort which is noteworthy in itself.

[rah]

f1 as a sport is carbon neutral I think and has been for some time.

Really? to tell you the truth this is the first I have heard of it. Does that include transport and testing?

[Flat.tyres]

Really? to tell you the truth this is the first I have heard of it. Does that include transport and testing?

not too sure about testing but transport and events are offset for both WRC and f1.

i dont think it extends to what drivers may or may not do in their private jets :)

[rah]

not too sure about testing but transport and events are offset for both WRC and f1.

i dont think it extends to what drivers may or may not do in their private jets :)

Well what do you know, somehow I missed that little bit of info. Found the article. You would think they would mention it a bit more. I couldn't find it on their website at all.

[wmcot]

The problem with F1 being "Green" is that it is only as green as the money that backs it. The only "green" F1 will ever see has dollar signs on it!

Even if F1 cars were to be 100% pollution free, you would still have hundreds or perhaps thousands of times more pollution generated by the crowds driving to each event than any group of 20 or so cars ever created. If F1 really wants to go "green" it will find a way to use mass-transit to each event and eliminate private vehicles altogether. That might make an impact on pollution generated! The problem is that to do this you would have to hold GPs in an area which already has a mass-transit infrastructure. That would require a lot of venues to be changed and that gets back to F1 (Bernie) wanting more "Green ($$$)" than green.

Any change to regulations to make F1 green are just a token gesture and would have no significance to the world's climate.

[Flat.tyres]

The problem with F1 being "Green" is that it is only as green as the money that backs it. The only "green" F1 will ever see has dollar signs on it!

Even if F1 cars were to be 100% pollution free, you would still have hundreds or perhaps thousands of times more pollution generated by the crowds driving to each event than any group of 20 or so cars ever created. If F1 really wants to go "green" it will find a way to use mass-transit to each event and eliminate private vehicles altogether. That might make an impact on pollution generated! The problem is that to do this you would have to hold GPs in an area which already has a mass-transit infrastructure. That would require a lot of venues to be changed and that gets back to F1 (Bernie) wanting more "Green ($$$)" than green.

Any change to regulations to make F1 green are just a token gesture and would have no significance to the world's climate.

whatever the reasoning behind this inititive, should we not applaud the FIA for at least having the gumption to do this rather than bitching about the motives. how many other sports or industries have made the effort?

[clydekart]

F1 has joined the brigade of eco-propagandist's that blieve in pseudo-science such as put out by Al the stiff Gore's recent movie. There is no significant global warming caused by carbondioxide emissions-actually carbondioxide is necessary for the earth's survival and more so called "pollution" is spewed from one volcanic eruption than all worldwide cars in a year. Peak oil is another BS oil company bottom line padding brainwash.

I say go to 1000+ HP cars with huge slicks and let them rev until they blow.

[rah]

F1 has joined the brigade of eco-propagandist's that blieve in pseudo-science such as put out by Al the stiff Gore's recent movie. There is no significant global warming caused by carbondioxide emissions-actually carbondioxide is necessary for the earth's survival and more so called "pollution" is spewed from one volcanic eruption than all worldwide cars in a year. Peak oil is another BS oil company bottom line padding brainwash.

I say go to 1000+ HP cars with huge slicks and let them rev until they blow.

Mate, I don't know where to start. I would like to argue you post in so many ways, but looking at the language you used I doubt I will have an impact. Also I doubt that this is the best forum to debate it in.

[wmcot]

whatever the reasoning behind this inititive, should we not applaud the FIA for at least having the gumption to do this rather than bitching about the motives. how many other sports or industries have made the effort?

If you think a token, politically-correct gesture deserves applause, then be my guest. I feel that it would be more advantageous for the road car portion of the FIA to be pushing for green vehicles. There just isn't enough pollution generated by the racing teams to be meaningful in any way. If ALL forms of motor racing were to be totally stopped today, it wouldn't make a measurable fraction of a percent difference in the total emissions caused by motor vehicles. It's all about appearances and sponsor appeal.

[ArrowsFA1]

"I don't feel comfortable with regulations designed to favour manufacturers who at any time can stop because it is not their core business. History shows they do choose to stop at short notice for different reasons. So, to construct therefore F1 for the manufacturers is fundamentally wrong."
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/59116

I completely agree with Ron Dennis in what he says :up:

[SteveA]

carbondioxide is necessary for the earth's survival

Yeah, so that the trees can photosynthesize and dispense oxygen so that we can survive. But wait - where are all the trees? Oh yeah, we cut them down to build race tracks!

[Big Ben]

Yeah, so that the trees can photosynthesize and dispense oxygen so that we can survive. But wait - where are all the trees? Oh yeah, we cut them down to build race tracks!

I just wonder how much wood do they use to build race tracks? Well... we shouldn´t let stupid questions disturb our thinking... after all it´s so cool to be an ecologist these days.... predicting the end of the earth and of human kind was never so popular...
There were some wise scientist predicting in the ´70s there wasn´t enough gas to get to the new millennium... and here we are... still leeching....
They were teaching in schools in the ´50s that there was enough gas for 50 years... the same number I've heard some 6 or 7 years while being in highschool
My point would be that most of the people don´t have a clue what they are talking about... the global warming became a fashion.
I recall hearing in some movie someone saying that the world was falling apart and the reply was something like this: was there a time when the world was not falling apart...? my other point is that people just love this kind of catastrophic thinking...
And now it got in F1 too... I´d say... Let´s just burn the damned oil and then move on... It´s going to end some day anyway

[wmcot]

I've also seen research that global temperature cycles can be more closely linked to solar activity than greenhouse gasses. There are geological records in the polar ice of wide climate changes occurring even before the industrial revolution which can be linked to solar cycles.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not against reducing pollution even if it's just to make the air more breathable. I just see a bigger picture of what is needed than eliminating exhaust from 22 to 24 cars every 2 weeks (and during testing.)

[XR8]

SteveA! Mate you must live in the wrong country? Come to AUSTRALIA! You will see more trees than you have ever seen before! Just a shame what the dogs do to them though!That is when those blasted KANGAROOS get out of the way!