Clicky

Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

DOF_power

2 Different Interpretations Teams On What "engine Freeze" Actually Means Legally

Recommended Posts

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/69598

Mario Theissen:

"We have gained some performance on the engine side but always outside the boundaries (of what can't be changed). These boundaries have been tightened last year, so since then we have only been working on exhausts, on the air inlet above the filter and on oil and fuel. But there are no big steps any more because we have been developing oil and fuel for a long time."

Aldo Costa:

"Rules are frozen on the engine but you are allowed to change components for reliability reasons and also, if you demonstrate that you are implementing a more economic, a cheaper component, you can also ask permission. The information gets circulated and all the teams have to express an opinion. So if they want to say no, they say no. And having listened to all the competitors, the FIA can decide not to allow these modifications."

Flavio Briatore:

"Renault have stuck to the letter of the current regulations on frozen engines and we've been buggered: others didn't do that and are far ahead, while we suffer. It's not fair."

Pascal Vasselon:

"From the Toyota side, we have obviously had the same approach as Renault: that means more legal than legal. It was an engine freeze, our engine has been frozen."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Engine failures in F1

What is interesting about Felipe Massa's engine failure in Hungary is that it is a sign that engine development is not dormant as it is supposed to be with the FIA-imposed engine freeze.

In the modern era F1 engines do not generally fail. Teams test everything an enormous amount (both on the track and on rigs at factories) and the percentages of cars that finish races are higher than ever before as a result. In an effort to reduce costs and improve reliability, the FIA introduced an engine freeze which meant that - in theory - nothing could be done to the F1 engines. But it is clear that some manufacturers looked at ways around the freeze and began to request changes to their engines, necessary for reliability, which had the side-effect of improving performance. This is old-style Formula 1 thinking, working within the rules, but pushing them to the limit.

The teams who have not done that have inevitably suffered as a result.

Flavio Briatore recently told Italy's La Gazzetta dello Sport that his team had conformed with both the spirit and the letter of the rules and complained that others used a different approach. The result is that there is now a gap of perhaps 20-30 horsepower between the fastest cars and those at the back. And people are pushing again.

Felipe Massa's engine failure in Hungary was a clear sign that risks are being taken in an effort to win.

That is the essence of Formula 1 ingenuity and, as such, should be applauded.

www.grandprix.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's sad that they're all (except for Flav and his pure as the driven snow Renault team.......) having to eke out ever smaller advantages due to the current regs. Change the regs and let them find BIG advantages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the thing is teams could throw up flags against some of the changes other teams make to their engines but nobody does because they know that they may one day want to use the same loophole.

F1 has been a sport of finding loopholes in the regulations ever since its start. The only thing tighter restrictions do is increase the gap between the top and bottom teams because the top teams have more resources to exploit the loopholes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...