Four-cylinder engines in F1 'pathetic'

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DexDexter

Nothing beats the old 3.5V12 Ferrari but those days are gone....

---

Which is exactly why I would like to see the return of V10's, V12's etc and not see pissy 4 potter enter F1!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by schmenke

You sure about that?
Today's cars are almost exclusively built on a uni-body frame, elimniating the need for a steel chassis that weighs a ton.
Also, crash protection in modern cars is achieved largely by designing the front and rear to "crumple" instead of adding steel which was the thought 20 years ago.
Engines today are generally smaller and lighter too.

---

Yes I am sure. Take a look at what a MK1 Golf GTI weighed in the 70's & 80's and look at what a MK6 Golf GTI weighs today. Its increased from 790 KG's to just over 1300 KG's. That a huge jump.

That's just one example.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave B

I want F1 teams to be given a fixed amount of energy per race and given the freedom to exploit it however they wish. Petrol, diesel, electric, whatever works for them. If that means supplementing it with renewable or recovered energy so be it. Stick on a bloody hydroelectric plant powered by the driver's sweat if that's the most efficient.

F1 rules are way too restrictive. We'll never ever see innovation like fans, skirts or 6 wheels under the current regime.

---

Absolutely agree. With more variation you will see more passing and different race stratergies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave B

I want F1 teams to be given a fixed amount of energy per race and given the freedom to exploit it however they wish. Petrol, diesel, electric, whatever works for them. If that means supplementing it with renewable or recovered energy so be it. Stick on a bloody hydroelectric plant powered by the driver's sweat if that's the most efficient.

F1 rules are way too restrictive. We'll never ever see innovation like fans, skirts or 6 wheels under the current regime.

---

This would lead to enormous costs and huge differences between engine manufacturers and would kill F1 in a few years. Too expensive and too "free" on this day and age.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DexDexter

This would lead to enormous costs and huge differences between engine manufacturers and would kill F1 in a few years. Too expensive and too "free" on this day and age.

---

It worked for 50 years, through boom and through bust. In fact there's an argument for the opposite view: that manufacturers like Toyota pulled out precisely because they weren't able to showcase their innovation in regenerative technology.

There have been many examples of series trying to cut costs and going down the 'spec' route, this may work for a short period of time and achieve the lower costs, but ultimately most manufacturers aren't interested in competing in a spec series. They want to show that they are the best, and if they can't, they'll go!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark

There have been many examples of series trying to cut costs and going down the 'spec' route, this may work for a short period of time and achieve the lower costs, but ultimately most manufacturers aren't interested in competing in a spec series. They want to show that they are the best, and if they can't, they'll go!

---

Don't know if I buy that. Proving you're the best is difficult and expensive. Giving the impression that you're the best to people who can't tell the difference is much cheaper, and 90% as effective.

although I personally like the turbo-V4 format, I really think the best engine solution that will suit everyone is to open up the engine rules slightly and allow for different engine classes, but also increase weigth based on engine class.

For example, cars fitted with 1.6L turbo-V4s could have a smaller minimum weight than say a car with 2.5L V10 engine or something that would be more powerful. This would raise an interesting question; what's the best strategy? more power but heavier car? or less power but lighter car? The rules could be set so every type of engine had a similar power to weight ratio.

unfortunatly, this makes sense for everyone, so it will never happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyL

Don't know if I buy that. Proving you're the best is difficult and expensive. Giving the impression that you're the best to people who can't tell the difference is much cheaper, and 90% as effective.

---

That may well be very true and I certainly don't want F1 to become FIA world sportscars mrkII with massive swings between booms and terrible, terrible lows.

That said F1 needs something special to keep the best engineers etc. Newey keeps making noises about quitting to go build boats (and I doubt he's alone) because the rules give limited room for imagination. This is especially true on the engine front.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave B

It worked for 50 years, through boom and through bust. In fact there's an argument for the opposite view: that manufacturers like Toyota pulled out precisely because they weren't able to showcase their innovation in regenerative technology.

---

Sure it worked but the world has changed. F1 is competing in a world where it is more and more difficult to get people's attention and keep them interested since they've so many leisure activities to choose from. That's why the playing field in F1 must be/is levelled so that it is very difficult to dominate and get an edge over others. It must be exciting and dominance of one team or engine manufacturer (which your rules would more likely to lead into) would be very bad for F1 since nobody wants to watch Jenson Button going around the track a minute ahead of everybody even if the car is cool and advanced. They'll turn the channel or do something else, believe me.

As for those who think that 4 cylinders are the end of F-1 - I don't recall the BMW turbo being a boring engine..... I do agree with the sentiment that a a really good (the best?) way to regulate the power of a racing motor is to regulate the amount of energy that can be input throughout a race....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DexDexter

Sure it worked but the world has changed. F1 is competing in a world where it is more and more difficult to get people's attention and keep them interested since they've so many leisure activities to choose from. That's why the playing field in F1 must be/is levelled so that it is very difficult to dominate and get an edge over others. It must be exciting and dominance of one team or engine manufacturer (which your rules would more likely to lead into) would be very bad for F1 since nobody wants to watch Jenson Button going around the track a minute ahead of everybody even if the car is cool and advanced. They'll turn the channel or do something else, believe me.

---

Well said.

They are not, thoose BMW produced 1500 hp.

On the cost argument, teams will basically spend what they can anyway.

And coming up with a clever idea costs nothing. It's all the multiple aero iterations required to develop under the current regulations that burn money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DexDexter

Sure it worked but the world has changed. F1 is competing in a world where it is more and more difficult to get people's attention and keep them interested since they've so many leisure activities to choose from. That's why the playing field in F1 must be/is levelled so that it is very difficult to dominate and get an edge over others. It must be exciting and dominance of one team or engine manufacturer (which your rules would more likely to lead into) would be very bad for F1 since nobody wants to watch Jenson Button going around the track a minute ahead of everybody even if the car is cool and advanced. They'll turn the channel or do something else, believe me.

---

That is a very good point, and to be honest I've resigned myself in recent years to the fact that F1 is clearly setting it's stall out as entertainment first and a sport second (and technology showcase a distant third probably).

Maybe it's time for someone (hell I'd take a stab myself if I had any organisational skills and connections) to have a go at setting up a new form of motorsport where the USP is unlimited technological development besides restrictions of energy, as well as safety concerns and practicality (i.e. max. dimensions so that cars that take up the full width of the track are banned).

If the cars get too quick and approach g-suit territory then lower the permissible energy consumption to peg them back, no arsing around with anything else needed.

Pay all entrants equal "prize" money to aid lesser funded entrants.

And then see what fans, manufacturers and competitors bite. Yes it would be a niche sport, but there's plenty of those around. Judging by these message boards and others there are fans out there who'd take an interest, manufacturers could justify the cost as it would be the ultimate R&D exercise, sponsors who might want the PR of being associated with an activity that is having actual benefits of solving the energy crisis might not expect as many eyeballs for ROI as they would for an equivalent F1 sponsorship too.

If someone wants to enter an F1 car, a sportscar, that Delta Wing thing, or purpose-designed machine, all would be welcome provided they met the basic size, safety and energy consumption regulations.

Yes, it's a pipe dream and might well not get off the ground, but I'd love to see an attempt at something like this.

4 cylinder F1's? That great. I hope who continue watching enjoy it, I won't be. If they do it, I'M OUT.

And talk about money! All the teams will need to totally redevelop their cars engines. What's that gonna cost? Funny they talk about cost-cutting then do stuff like this!

It would only be there for 1 year. No-one would show up. Going V8 was one thing, this is absurd.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by V12

That is a very good point, and to be honest I've resigned myself in recent years to the fact that F1 is clearly setting it's stall out as entertainment first and a sport second (and technology showcase a distant third probably).

Maybe it's time for someone (hell I'd take a stab myself if I had any organisational skills and connections) to have a go at setting up a new form of motorsport where the USP is unlimited technological development besides restrictions of energy, as well as safety concerns and practicality (i.e. max. dimensions so that cars that take up the full width of the track are banned).

If the cars get too quick and approach g-suit territory then lower the permissible energy consumption to peg them back, no arsing around with anything else needed.

Pay all entrants equal "prize" money to aid lesser funded entrants.

And then see what fans, manufacturers and competitors bite. Yes it would be a niche sport, but there's plenty of those around. Judging by these message boards and others there are fans out there who'd take an interest, manufacturers could justify the cost as it would be the ultimate R&D exercise, sponsors who might want the PR of being associated with an activity that is having actual benefits of solving the energy crisis might not expect as many eyeballs for ROI as they would for an equivalent F1 sponsorship too.

If someone wants to enter an F1 car, a sportscar, that Delta Wing thing, or purpose-designed machine, all would be welcome provided they met the basic size, safety and energy consumption regulations.

Yes, it's a pipe dream and might well not get off the ground, but I'd love to see an attempt at something like this.

---

If Ferrari went with the NEW series it would have SOME chance. If not, check this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A1_Grand_Prix

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ari

4 cylinder F1's? That great. I hope who continue watching enjoy it, I won't be. If they do it, I'M OUT.

And talk about money! All the teams will need to totally redevelop their cars engines. What's that gonna cost? Funny they talk about cost-cutting then do stuff like this!

It would only be there for 1 year. No-one would show up. Going V8 was one thing, this is absurd.

---

You are joking, right? You can't honestly think that people follow F1 because there are a certain number of cylinders in an F1 motor? :rolleyes:

Together with the other changes for 2013 I'm pretty convinced F1 will be more exciting than it is today, and. I'm sure most of the 600 million viewers will at least give it a chance before writing it off based on number of cylinders, which will be enough for them to realize it's still worth watching.

I think the sport can spare the few people that doesn't. Bye bye.

I think people who will throw a paddy if we go to four cylinders, forget these things will be turbo charged....

People, relax! I'm not as concerned about the 4-cylinder engine as I am about the push-to-pass nonsense.

Let's not forget that there are very clever people in F1 who can achieve great results.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 555-04Q2

I don't like the way F1 is heading

---

For some time now, formula one has been barreling down the wrong road, with regard to both the technical and "sporting" aspects of the whole enterprise. Technically, the various formulae used in recent years have never been more than more of the same ol' same ol' by sticking with simply tinkering with the size and shape of the internal combustion engine. That a hybrid or alternative power formula has never been implemented or that other means to actually push the technological boundaries has never been used actually means that the usual reason given for following formula one, that it is the cutting edge of automotive technology, is delusional given that it is anything but that. That the Delta Wing concept popped up at the IndyCar corner of the world says something, even if the knuckleheads managed to continued to prove that they are still as clueless as ever despite ditching Tony George by not adopting it or providing for it as being eligible for competition.

To even begin to comment on the many disasters of the "sporting" regulations regarding formula one would be both time-consuming and a waste of time. Since I drifted away from formula one in the mid-Eighties, I have found nothing to cause me to regret that decision. The potential for change and improvement for the better seems to have successfully eluded those running formula one for decades and decades now, with nothing to suggest that it will be any better any time soon.

Things "Back in the Day" really were not much better, but at least they had the advantage of not fully believing their own hype and propaganda, to say nothing of requiring more than the GNP of a small nation to make it through a season. It has all been out of control and lacking adult supervision for longer than most can or would like to remember.

I will leave the damage willfully done to automobile history by the brigands running the sport for another day, but suffice it to say that it has been considerable.

4,6,8,10,12 or 16 ... as long as they produce high HP, I'm good with it! Even better that they scream ... therefore, not a fan, at all, of rev limits. Times change ... the sport moves on. It's been that way in motorsports for over 100 years. No different now.