Fia Announces Standard Engine Tender

[Max Mosley 2]

Formula One has always been about the best driver / engineering combination. Why change what the sport has been built on now???

Well, the engineering component has just held F1 back imho. Much better to have a fair contest for drivers.

Graham, change we can believe in, as Obama would say, once he's done saying change we can believe in. First you talk of new cars each minute, now you say a fraction of the cost. Which will it be? Variety in spec cars? Isn't that a contradictary statement? Hey, let's play spot the difference. Look at all that variety! The cars don't become beastlier without innovation and progress, though, and if you don't make 'em faster and faster, the drivers will just get used to them and they won't be fun anymore. The rules in F1 are restrictive for the opposite reason; it'd be so easy to make a car go faster with moveable aero and turobdiesels and KERS and slicks, and Max is scared of that. Sorry, you ain't developing and mass producing a car like that for a "fraction of the cost," and as I said, if they're willing to pay that much money, you're not going to say no. If someone offered me $2,000,000/year to be a janitor, I wouldn't say "Isn't that a bit much for the job?" And no, the driver who the car was best designed for would win. You'll never get the best driver to win, and that's just auto racing for you. If you want the man to win, watch track and field. If you want the combination to win, watch auto racing. Having that combination adds so many other elements that can keep you interested when the racing is flat. I don't think the best rises to the top in spec cars, either. Look at NASCAR; Jimmie Johnson is leading the points. He's a good driver, but he certainly isn't the best or the most naturally talented in the sport; his rich team and genuis crew chief (think engineer) help set him up to do the easy job of maintaining position.

EL Burro, you can have new cars each minute because the characteristics could be changed electronically by the FIA, though I wasn't suggesting we necessarily do that. The point was just to show you could actually force the drivers to adapt more in spec cars than they do now. You can control the drivers' task however you like with spec cars. You could introduce more variety than we have now by allowing drivers to test out different components, strategies and trade-offs. For example you might let them choose to have more performance in qualifying than in the race. All this could be done while respecting different driving styles, driver strengths and weaknesses and for a fraction of the cost of modern F1. The cars would be as fast as humanly drivable but we wouldn't have teams like they do in NASCAR. Teams just promote inequality, as you point out.

[hookedon-f1 0]

There are plenty other spec series to watch if we wanted to, A1 and GP2 come to mind. Most people watch F1 because of all the different teams etc.

If this happens I can see a breakaway series for sure happening, I can't imagine the teams will be that happy about this news.....

[DOF_power 0]

The ability of a team to bring together a relevant budget is part of the competition.

Restrictions is what makes the sport expensive since the search for alternatives is persecuted.

The 'knowledge' of fans regarding technical aspects of the sports is irrelevant. If democracy were to be evaluated based on the 'knowledge' voters have of government and of the politicians running for office, elections would be eliminated.

F1 will crumble if the big teams (manufacturers) pull out.

To cheer on regulations that force all of us to dress and eat equally poorly simply means that we are a sorry looking bunch... of idiots.

Agreed and amen to that.

[DOF_power 0]

Well, the engineering component has just held F1 back imho. Much better to have a fair contest for drivers.

Motorsport isn't a driver competition. And the "fair" B* and competition are a contradiction in terms.

[monza gorilla 1]

Sorry if I sounded like I was picking on you before. All I meant was that none of us, me included, know how the Ferrari engine is better than the Renault equivalent, or what the thinking behind each design was.

No harm, no foul . You are right that we don't know what makes the Ferrari engine better than the Renault unit or what the thinking was. But one is better than the other. It may be that the Renault has plasticine piston rings and the Ferrari crankshaft is made of plaited spaghetti. But one is definitely different to the other. And that's the point. Teams are free to buy their engine, or to produce their own. They have that choice. Nobody forces them to do it. They believe that they can build an engine that's better than the rest. That's part of the competition, for me. Choice. Not prescription.

[AleHop 0]

I like Murray*.

* The tennis player.

[Insider 0]

It's a constructor's sport. The drivers provide the glamour, the manufacturers are selling cars and developing technology So, Bernie wants standard engines. Who do the punters go to see? What is the attraction? The drivers or the cars? Or both? The day you standardise the engines is the day you kill F1. It will certainly be the day the manufacturers leave the sport. Are Ferrari going to spend 400 million euros a year to run a Cosworth-engined car? You have to be Sh#tting me.

[The Burro 0]

EL Burro, you can have new cars each minute because the characteristics could be changed electronically by the FIA, though I wasn't suggesting we necessarily do that. The point was just to show you could actually force the drivers to adapt more in spec cars than they do now. You can control the drivers' task however you like with spec cars. You could introduce more variety than we have now by allowing drivers to test out different components, strategies and trade-offs. For example you might let them choose to have more performance in qualifying than in the race. All this could be done while respecting different driving styles, driver strengths and weaknesses and for a fraction of the cost of modern F1. The cars would be as fast as humanly drivable but we wouldn't have teams like they do in NASCAR. Teams just promote inequality, as you point out.

Well, you still haven't addressed your "fraction of the cost" deal. This super-car you want to have developed is going to cost a lot to make, who is going to pay for that? And then they have to mass produce it so everyone has some spares etc, so who is going to pay for that? They'll have to sell the cars for a whole hell of a lot of money, and if there are no teams, who is paying for that? You do realize that the sponsors only cover a fraction of the team budgets, which is why the privateers can't afford it: spec engines means no manufactures, no manufactures means it's not going to happen. So even if you ignore the entire "it's not what F1 should be" argument, you still have to deal with the "it's not feasible" argument, and I'm not sure that's going to be such an easy one to win.

[Argento Reloaded 1]

I hope Black & Decker or Makita tools win the tender!

It will be the "cherry of the cake" or F1

[Rainmaster 7]

You all speak a lot about something which I'm telling you won't happen, and I make the rules around here for George's sake! I need my pills.

FOTA discusses response to Mosley

By Jonathan Noble Saturday, October 18th 2008, 13:08 GMT

Formula One team principals will meet again on Sunday morning in Shanghai to try and finalise an agreed set of proposals ahead of a crunch cost-cuts meeting with FIA president Max Mosley scheduled for Tuesday.

With Mosley determined to make radical cost cuts, the Formula One Teams' Association (FOTA) organised a get together after qualifying on Saturday for team principals to discuss their response to his plans.

The need to come up with a considered response has had some urgency added it by the shock announcement made by the FIA on Friday that it plans to introduce standard engines from 2010.

Team principals gathered in the Renault team office in the Shanghai paddock shortly after 3pm for a meeting that was only expected to last for a maximum of two hours.

The aim of the meeting was to come up with a unified approach to Mosley on Tuesday - with the hope that it will be enough to counter the proposal of the standard engine rule that would almost certainly drive manufacturers away from the sport.

And though no details were made available from today's eventual four-hour meeting among the team bosses, autosport.com understands that a range of proposals were agreed in principle.

It is hoped these can be ratified in Sunday morning's meeting - prior to them being presented on Tuesday to Mosley.

One team principal told autosport.com: "We are optimistic that the teams will agree a unified planned approach tomorrow for Mosley's meeting"

However, it has emerged that all team principals are unlikely to attend the Mosley meeting - amid fears of divide-and-conquer tactics being used to weaken the teams' position.

Senior sources have suggested there is a fear within FOTA that Mosley is using the threat of a standard engine, plus recent suggestions of engine equalization rules and the return of customer cars, as a way to break what has appeared to be rare unity in team ranks following the formation of FOTA.

Suspicions of a bid to destabilize FOTA increased in China when high-level sources suggested that the organisation had been asked to change its name because Formula One Management owned the trademark to 'Formula One.'

Most teams and manufacturers have maintained their silence so far on the FIA's bid to introduce a standard engine in F1, or reveal details about what their plans for Tuesday's meeting are.

However, Williams co-owner Patrick Head said on Saturday that he was not surprised Mosley had opted for a shock tactic like the introduction of standard engines to prompt teams into action.

"I think Max is quite serious about it, but I suppose after many years of dealing with F1 teams and representatives of manufacturers in F1 he has rather developed the view that any mechanism of change not only has to be painful but is going to be painful," explained Head.

"If you say to the teams how are you going to reduce costs or how are you going to make change, then none of them want to make change. That is the problem.

"Max is in quite regular contact with people at senior levels of manufacturers, just as he is in regular contact with people in senior positions at teams like Williams or Red Bull. All those people say that current costs in F1 are not sustainable. So his view is that if it is left as it is, there will be a number of departures."

Source

Don't you just love the good old politics of Formula One.

[DriftingGuy 0]

I miss the old days when Ferrari had their own Flat 12 engine, and everybody else had the same spec V8 Ford Cosworth.

[Medilloni 6]

You all speak a lot about something which I'm telling you won't happen, and I make the rules around here for George's sake! I need my pills.

Source

Don't you just love the good old politics of Formula One.

Looks like you're right agian Master Of All Things Wet, not a fan of the source (http://www.f1complete.com/content/view/10708/900/ and probably nicked anyhoo) but here's a snippet.....

"...............Ultimately, the ten F1 team bosses have decided not to travel to Geneva, instead sending only FOTA chairman Luca di Montezemolo, and deputy John Howett, to deliver a unified response on behalf of the alliance.

McLaren boss Ron Dennis said: "All parties had agreed a clear agenda for next Tuesday.

"It is incomprehensible that the FIA torpedos this schedule with a radical proposal," he is quoted as saying by Auto Motor und Sport.

There is no doubt that F1's big spenders are violently opposed to the single engine concept.

Via Montezemolo, they are expected to push for alternative cost-cutting measures on the engine side; the extension of the one engine per two races rule to three races, and perhaps a reduction in the rev limit from 19,000 to 18,500rpm................

I'm getting to the point where I think a beakaway series would be pretty damn good, and the bonus that they would probably use some of the circuits we really miss. Most excellent.

Just a thought, but when I think, "F1", I think of (what is meant to be, to me) the finest, the best of everything in single-seater motorsport. This crap one-size-fits-all is the kiss of death for entertainment, however bleak some think the last few years has been. Which I don't

[cavallino 2]

I miss the old days when Ferrari had their own Flat 12 engine, and everybody else had the same spec V8 Ford Cosworth.

I am sure Ferrari don't..

[5P33D3V1L 0]

Im sorry but I really dont see this working. Formula 1 needs Ferrari, Mercedez, BMW, Renault and Toyota more than they need formula 1. Don't Bernie and Max realise this? If this goes ahead I can safely say F1 is dead.

Why can't they just leave the sport alone and stop tinkering with everything!

[Max Mosley 2]

Well, you still haven't addressed your "fraction of the cost" deal. This super-car you want to have developed is going to cost a lot to make, who is going to pay for that? And then they have to mass produce it so everyone has some spares etc, so who is going to pay for that? They'll have to sell the cars for a whole hell of a lot of money, and if there are no teams, who is paying for that? You do realize that the sponsors only cover a fraction of the team budgets, which is why the privateers can't afford it: spec engines means no manufactures, no manufactures means it's not going to happen. So even if you ignore the entire "it's not what F1 should be" argument, you still have to deal with the "it's not feasible" argument, and I'm not sure that's going to be such an easy one to win.

I don't think we're going to agree here are we! I got bored though, so you're in luck. It just seems to me that there's plenty of money in F1 to build whatever car we want. GP2 budgets are about 100 times smaller and they're only around 8s/lap off the pace of the top F1 teams. Force India have perhaps a quarter of McLaren's budget but they're a mere 2s a lap slower. I'd imagine if FI didn't have to stick to all the speed-reducing rules the FIA have brought in over the years, they might be 10s/lap faster than the McLaren. You know, if they could use supersoft, fat slicks, unrestricted engines, active ride suspensions, ground effects, adaptive aero packages, wider cars with bigger wings etc - they'd gain a hell of a lot of time.

[DOF_power 0]

Why can't they just leave the sport alone and stop tinkering with everything!

Because they're power and money hungry idiots.

They want to sell driver and B* marketing hype as opposed to true Grand Prix racing.

If a team can't afford something it will go under and that's it. There used to be customer cars and F2 cars to make up the numbers in the 50s and 60s, I don't why we couldn't have that today.

[DOF_power 0]

I don't think we're going to agree here are we! I got bored though, so you're in luck. It just seems to me that there's plenty of money in F1 to build whatever car we want. GP2 budgets are about 100 times smaller and they're only around 8s/lap off the pace of the top F1 teams. Force India have perhaps a quarter of McLaren's budget but they're a mere 2s a lap slower. I'd imagine if FI didn't have to stick to all the speed-reducing rules the FIA have brought in over the years, they might be 10s/lap faster than the McLaren. You know, if they could use supersoft, fat slicks, unrestricted engines, active ride suspensions, ground effects, adaptive aero packages, wider cars with bigger wings etc - they'd gain a hell of a lot of time.

The current aero-tires-engine package means on tracks like Singapore and car that's 3 second faster still can't pass. With everyone having the same car under the current or future spec nobody would pass nobody.

Even the '09 package the faster car still have to be 1 second per lap faster, and on tracks like Monaco, Hungaroring, Valencia and Singapore that won't be enough to turn the borefest around.

Cars could have supersoft, fat slicks, unrestricted engines, active ride suspensions, ground effects, adaptive aero packages, wider cars with bigger wings without having to be spec cars.

Spec cars will the death of the series eventually just like IROC because the only loyal fans are the team (tifosi especially) and technology fans, the driver fanboys tend to get bored and stop watching once they're god leaves the series.

That's why the likes of A1GP and Co. won't make it, they don't have a spine, and true spine of this series are the tifosi and techno-fans, never the driver fanatics. When the spine is gone the with superficial and moody the series will crumble like a castle of cards.

[Wez 0]

I miss the old days when Ferrari had their own Flat 12 engine, and everybody else had the same spec V8 Ford Cosworth.

And Senna still finished ahead of the Ferrari's in his Cosworth V8

[goferrarigo 0]

Because they're power and money hungry idiots.

They want to sell driver and B* marketing hype as opposed to true Grand Prix racing.

If a team can't afford something it will go under and that's it. There used to be customer cars and F2 cars to make up the numbers in the 50s and 60s, I don't why we couldn't have that today.

Teams should be allowed to fail and go under like Super Aguri... There are enough people who will open their pockets create an F1 team*. Customer Cars aren't teh solution with the excess of today...

*This point is assuming the engine is not standardised.

[The Rumble Strip 0]

However, if that happens then we are left with no F1 as there will be no teams left.

[goferrarigo 0]

However, if that happens then we are left with no F1 as there will be no teams left.

What if teams which can't manage the budget??

As my asterik says assuming that engine are not standardised, so then teh manufacters will stay and teams backed with money will stay like RBR and FI...

[maure 1]

Spec cars will the death of the series eventually just like IROC because the only loyal fans are the team (tifosi especially) and technology fans, the driver fanboys tend to get bored and stop watching once they're god leaves the series.

That's why the likes of A1GP and Co. won't make it, they don't have a spine, and true spine of this series are the tifosi and techno-fans, never the driver fanatics. When the spine is gone the with superficial and moody the series will crumble like a castle of cards.

Spot on.

[maure 1]

However, if that happens then we are left with no F1 as there will be no teams left.

It has never been about that. After all, have you heard McLaren, Ferrari, BMW, Toyota, Honda, etc, etc, claiming that their budgets are impossible to maintain? Nope.

This is all about penalizing the succesful teams and creating a competition where the Super Aguri's can make it. Interestingly, the elimination of development restrictions would accomplish the very same thing.

Regarding the 'standard engine' proposal, it has been said that it was all a political move on Mosley's part to force _other_ issues down the team's throats. It seems it might have worked (see below)... which only proves the point. The succesful teams are reluctant to agree to this nonsense and only ultimatums/threats like 'engine tenders' get them to strip to FIA's sick tune. Absurd.

http://totalf1.com/full_story/view/283498/...mark_agreement/

[goferrarigo 0]

It has never been about that. After all, have you heard McLaren, Ferrari, BMW, Toyota, Honda, etc, etc, claiming that their budgets are impossible to maintain? Nope.

This is all about penalizing the succesful teams and creating a competition where the Super Aguri's can make it. Interestingly, the elimination of development restrictions would accomplish the very same thing.

Regarding the 'standard engine' proposal, it has been said that it was all a political move on Mosley's part to force _other_ issues down the team's throats. It seems it might have worked (see below)... which only proves the point. The succesful teams are reluctant to agree to this nonsense and only ultimatums/threats like 'engine tenders' get them to strip to FIA's sick tune. Absurd.

http://totalf1.com/full_story/view/283498/...mark_agreement/

Yup. Your probably right that was just an issue to get the FOTA to agree to the smaller stuff...

[aussief1 4]

Yup. Your probably right that was just an issue to get the FOTA to agree to the smaller stuff...

Correct. The plan from the FIA is to shock the teams with a proposal that would most upset them, whilst that softens them up for negotiation in order to pass new measures to cut costs, and help independent teams. If the FIA was straight forward with the new measures that seemed to be agreed upon in Geneva, the teams would most likely not been as willing to cooperate in the way that they have.

The FIA and Max are very very smart in the way that they go about getting exactly what they want.