V10 comeback?

[golic_2004]

Bernie has finally taken his senile medicine and proposed something smart for once.

http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/eccle ... ack-for-f1

[Londoner]

Yeah, this isn't happening, unless Bernie fancies a series where no-one wants to supply engines. There is no way you can justify ditching the V6 turbos after a single season, considering the sheer amount of money that's been invested in them. It's simple economics.

Quite frankly, I'd reconsider my support of this "sport" if Bernie, Horner and the other naysayers get their way and F1 reverts to older engines.

[Klon]

Quite frankly, I'd reconsider my support of this "sport" if Bernie, Horner and the other naysayers get their way and F1 reverts to older engines.

Oh my god, F1 has gone too far. A nerd from London reconsiders whether he likes the sport. This is worst of all timelines.

[Londoner]

Quite frankly, I'd reconsider my support of this "sport" if Bernie, Horner and the other naysayers get their way and F1 reverts to older engines.

Oh my god, F1 has gone too far. A nerd from London reconsiders whether he likes the sport. This is worst of all timelines.

Klon pls.

[SuzukiSwift]

If Bernie really wants this, then perhaps we can propose a 4.5L Atmo formula and 1.6L Turbo one. I hope you Atmo guys enjoy losing, however.....


To be honest I welcomed the return of Turbos and hope they stick around.

[girry]

Never been an advocate of the flashy yellow emoticons - but we *need* a Bernie smiley.

[dr-baker]

If Bernie really wants this, then perhaps we can propose a 4.5L Atmo formula and 1.6L Turbo one. I hope you Atmo guys enjoy losing, however.....

That would be cool, seeing Rejects battling for honours in the Jim Clark Trophy again...

[Bobby Doorknobs]

Bernie has finally taken his senile medicine and proposed something smart for once.

http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/eccle ... ack-for-f1

Except it isn't. As nostalgic as I get when I hear the roar of a V10 it would spark reduced interest from the engine manufacturers. The current engines will look like a complete waste of money.

If Bernie really wants this, then perhaps we can propose a 4.5L Atmo formula and 1.6L Turbo one. I hope you Atmo guys enjoy losing, however.....

That would be cool, seeing Rejects battling for honours in the Jim Clark Trophy again...

But then again...

[takagi_for_the_win]

Oh my god, F1 has gone too far. A nerd from London reconsiders whether he likes the sport. This is worst of all timelines.

Are you on your period or something at the mo Klon?

[Klon]

Oh my god, F1 has gone too far. A nerd from London reconsiders whether he likes the sport. This is worst of all timelines.

Are you on your period or something at the mo Klon?

'tis the Christmas season. I get grumpy around that time.

[mario]

Yeah, this isn't happening, unless Bernie fancies a series where no-one wants to supply engines. There is no way you can justify ditching the V6 turbos after a single season, considering the sheer amount of money that's been invested in them. It's simple economics.

Quite frankly, I'd reconsider my support of this "sport" if Bernie, Horner and the other naysayers get their way and F1 reverts to older engines.

That, I feel, is the real truth of the matter - this is being used as an opportunity to force the regulations back to a formula that would make Ferrari and Red Bull more competitive again.

If you look more closely at what Bernie has said, he isn't actually explicitly asking for V10 engines to be brought back in - what he is actually asking for is for a return to a naturally aspirated, high revving engine format and actively leaves the door open for a return to the old V8 engines (it is the author of that piece who is assuming that refers to a V10 engine).
What would coincidentally fit the bill for the engines that Bernie is asking for? Why, the V8 engines that they have just phased out of use - the fact that such a move would appease Red Bull and Ferrari, both of whom have been calling for the old V8 engines to be brought back in, is purely a coincidence of course...

[UncreativeUsername37]

Let's just say bathplug it and have two F1s in 2016. 4-car Red Bull, Ferrari, Williams, McLaren, and Toro Rosso make up the de jure continuation of the World Championship and 4-car Mercedes, FI, Lotus, Sauber, and Haas make up an equally prestigious rival.

(Sarcasm alert, I don't actually want this)

[DemocalypseNow]

I think Bernie may have forgotten to take his Alzheimers medication again.

[Captain Hammer]

Bernie has been lobbying against hybrids since the idea was first floated. He won't win, though - he will face massive opposition from the engine manufacturers who have sunk hundreds of millions of dollars into the current engines.

[sswishbone]

One reason World Endurance has been ever more tempting to manufacturers has been the trickle down technology and the open nature of the regulations. When you consider the LMP1 class featured a 4.0 litre V6 diesel, a 3.7 litre V8 Petrol and a 2.0 litre V4 and still featured close racing you can see how this idea would be unappealing

[mario]

Bernie has been lobbying against hybrids since the idea was first floated. He won't win, though - he will face massive opposition from the engine manufacturers who have sunk hundreds of millions of dollars into the current engines.

Bernie's actions are, I suspect, somewhat backed up by Red Bull and Ferrari, two outfits who have lost out with the switch from the V8 to the V6 engine format and have both made it clear that they want to revert back to the V8 engines.

The other aspect that plays into his hands is the fact that he only needs a majority vote within the F1 Strategy Commission - as FOM are automatically allocated six votes from the total of 18 voting members, so he only needs to secure four more votes to secure his majority.

Now, there are another six teams who are allocated voting rights on that panel - Red Bull, Ferrari, McLaren, Mercedes and Williams are all automatically allocated rights, whilst the final place goes to the highest ranked outsider in the WCC (which, this year, will be Force India). Out of those teams, Bernie can already count on the support of Red Bull and Ferrari - they've both previously threatened to vote for a change in engine regulations for 2016 and will both be desperate to overturn Mercedes's current advantage, giving Bernie another two votes.
All he would need to do would be to either buy the support of two more teams or to offer Todt a small financial concession to buy his support, and Bernie can secure the majority he needs on the Strategy Commission to change the regulations for 2016.

One reason World Endurance has been ever more tempting to manufacturers has been the trickle down technology and the open nature of the regulations. When you consider the LMP1 class featured a 4.0 litre V6 diesel, a 3.7 litre V8 Petrol and a 2.0 litre V4 and still featured close racing you can see how this idea would be unappealing

Mind you, the head of Aston Martin inadvertently highlighted one of the downsides of the "Balance of Performance" regulations when the ACO recently brought in testing restrictions. His response was to comment that, since the Balance of Performance regulations limits the performance gains any team could make, imposing testing restrictions makes no real difference since their performance would be adjusted back to the mean anyway.

[Captain Hammer]

If he tried that, he'd face an insurrection. He might get the popular support of Ferrari and Renault, but Mercedes and Honda would likely walk away on the spot. And no manufacturer in their right mind would want to join after that. Any such backlash would probably prompt CVC to remove him from his position and try to undo the damage directly.

Besides, it's completely unfeasible. Assuming that it got through, the engine manufacturers would want time to build new engines. The last thing they would want is to jeopardise the state of the sport and then build a dud engine. They would need at least a year in development, and given the time it would take to put out the political fires, V10s would not be possible until 2017 at the earliest. That's two years in which Ferrari and Renault could develop their existing engines.

No, this reads like Bernie trying to satisfy everyone all at once whilst playing his own game. I'm willing to bet he's banking on Honda coming in and being competitive from the outset. That way, he can point to Ferrari and Renault as having done a poor job

[Klon]

All he would need to do would be to either buy the support of two more teams or to offer Todt a small financial concession to buy his support, and Bernie can secure the majority he needs on the Strategy Commission to change the regulations for 2016.

This All needs to be in ludicrously large inverted commas. For one, I do believe the FIA has little interest in going back to V10s. Todt may not have much investment in the day-to-day business of Formula One, but such a huge PR nightmare as the V10 return would be is not something he'd want as his legacy. Not to mention this whole "world engine" business was AFAIR the FIA's idea back then, so they are most likely more pro-turbo than Ecclestone's wallet could change.

Getting teams beyond Ferrari and RBR to agree would also be miserable. Mercedes is out for obvious reasons, which also means that Williams is out, given as Williams are Wolff's Filipino slave boys. Force India could be bought, but odds are Bernie ... not can't, but won't ... pay them enough to account for this mess, since they know a V10 return would cost them another truckload of money. The same applies to McLaren, since going back to the V10s would cost them the Honda support which is bound to also be financially.

The closest thing I could see Bernie getting through if he really wanted would be a solution that would see both turbo engines and V10s allowed, but that would result in me becoming the new boss of F1 since I'd sue the pants off the FIA, FOM and Bernie since my ASMF game did it first.

[Captain Hammer]

I doubt he could even count on Ferrari's support. Marchionne has said that Ferrari need to embrace change if they want to get back on top, so I'd say the days of bullying the FIA into doing their bidding from inside a hollowed-out volcano will be over sooner rather than later.

[Press_Play2002]

In the inconceivable event that the switch might happen, imagine this:

















^That silence represents the outcome of the financial suicide on behalf of the teams, engine suppliers, the F.I.A. AND the F.O.M. for accepting (even if it would involve simply removing the turbos and the hybrid system) such a ludicrous proposal. Then again, all this off-season deprivation may have brushed itself on O'l Bernard (Joint B@$%*** Of The Year 2014 Winner along with a certain group of "Journalists/bloggers" on the internet) too.

[mario]

All he would need to do would be to either buy the support of two more teams or to offer Todt a small financial concession to buy his support, and Bernie can secure the majority he needs on the Strategy Commission to change the regulations for 2016.

This All needs to be in ludicrously large inverted commas. For one, I do believe the FIA has little interest in going back to V10s. Todt may not have much investment in the day-to-day business of Formula One, but such a huge PR nightmare as the V10 return would be is not something he'd want as his legacy. Not to mention this whole "world engine" business was AFAIR the FIA's idea back then, so they are most likely more pro-turbo than Ecclestone's wallet could change.

Getting teams beyond Ferrari and RBR to agree would also be miserable. Mercedes is out for obvious reasons, which also means that Williams is out, given as Williams are Wolff's Filipino slave boys. Force India could be bought, but odds are Bernie ... not can't, but won't ... pay them enough to account for this mess, since they know a V10 return would cost them another truckload of money. The same applies to McLaren, since going back to the V10s would cost them the Honda support which is bound to also be financially.

The closest thing I could see Bernie getting through if he really wanted would be a solution that would see both turbo engines and V10s allowed, but that would result in me becoming the new boss of F1 since I'd sue the pants off the FIA, FOM and Bernie since my ASMF game did it first.

True, I was perhaps being a bit flippant with my comment - mind you, to be honest I really do not have much faith in the FIA actually being prepared to stick its neck out and vote against FOM given that Todt has spent most of his reign at the FIA in a state of complete inaction and unwillingness to actually engage in the process of rulemaking.

Now, as you and Captain Hammer rightly point out, given that the turbo engines was something that Todt was quite proud about, a reversal on that policy would be seen as an embarrassing climb down and damage the reputation of Todt and the FIA.
On the other hand, ever since the turbo engines were brought in, he has generally been the party that has tended to fold first in negotiations - moreover, according to Bernie, Todt has already signed over a large chunk of the FIA's decision making powers to FOM for $40 million a year (and Bernie doesn't even have to pay all of that money - the deal agreed that the FIA could squeeze some of that $40 million from the teams, hence why the licence fees for entering into F1 have risen sharply in the past couple of years). Todt is known to be looking to expand the FIA's activities in the road safety arena, and I am still not entirely convinced that, if Bernie were to offer him more funding for those activities in return for a few favours, that Todt wouldn't accept the deal.

I doubt he could even count on Ferrari's support. Marchionne has said that Ferrari need to embrace change if they want to get back on top, so I'd say the days of bullying the FIA into doing their bidding from inside a hollowed-out volcano will be over sooner rather than later.

On the other hand, he has also publicly advocated returning to the V8 engine format - which is what I believe Bernie is really angling for - on the ground of "cost cutting", using the collapse of Marussia and Caterham as justification for returning to the cheaper V8 engines.

[Captain Hammer]

Cheaper?

Not a chance.

Sure, they cost less - but the manufacturers will jack the price up to recoup some of their losses on the hybrid V6s.

And again, they will face opposition from the likes of Mercedes and Honda. They might argue that it's to cut costs, but Mercedes will take it as an attack on their (legitimate) advantage and Honda will face massive losses because they don't have a V8. The latter will be even more damaging because Honda will be able to frame it as protectionism - that Ferrari and Renault will do whatever they can to prevent anyone from challenging their position, even if it means driving new manufacturers away.

Any change to the regulations that is seen as a reversal of the hybrids damages the credibility of the sport. Ferrari and Renault might like the idea, but nothing will kill the sport faster than bowing to their demands. Renault especially, since they pushed for the hybrid format in the first place.

I think Bernie is going to do what Bernie does best: string them along, but delay any meaningful action until it's too late to introduce for 2016, which will in turn make it inviable.

[DanielPT]

Cheaper?

Not a chance.

Sure, they cost less - but the manufacturers will jack the price up to recoup some of their losses on the hybrid V6s.

And again, they will face opposition from the likes of Mercedes and Honda. They might argue that it's to cut costs, but Mercedes will take it as an attack on their (legitimate) advantage and Honda will face massive losses because they don't have a V8. The latter will be even more damaging because Honda will be able to frame it as protectionism - that Ferrari and Renault will do whatever they can to prevent anyone from challenging their position, even if it means driving new manufacturers away.

Funnily enough, when they changed from V10s to V8s, Renault lagged behind others as well. Only after a few 'reliability' updates were they allowed to catch up. There is absolutely no guarantee, if the V10 or V8 engines are new, that Renault and Ferrari will not stay behind. But I think the idea, which is even worse, is to revert back to one of those old engines but with a twist according Bernie: To keep the hybrid system giving more power to the engine and achieve those 1000bhp he speaks about. Another funny thing: isn't precisely in the way that the combustion engine is coupled with the electrical unit and in the electrical unit itself that Mercedes has its advantage?

Any change to the regulations that is seen as a reversal of the hybrids damages the credibility of the sport. Ferrari and Renault might like the idea, but nothing will kill the sport faster than bowing to their demands. Renault especially, since they pushed for the hybrid format in the first place.

I think Bernie is going to do what Bernie does best: string them along, but delay any meaningful action until it's too late to introduce for 2016, which will in turn make it inviable.

Renault pushed not only for the hybrid format as their idea was to have even smaller power units. This part is a bit odd. How come Bernie has Renault's support to change to a bigger engine? I know Red Bull are all for a new engine or an old engine or whatever change in that department. But do they count with Renault for that? Or Renault's voice is now Red Bull voice? When did that happened? From the moment Lotus left Renault and Caterham went bust leaving Renault with effectively only the Red Bull owned teams to supply?

[Sublime_FA11C]

Makes it a very hollow threat if Renault were to leave F1. Ferrari is more important, but they cannot threaten to pull out without admitting defeat. Meanwhile Mercedes have through Wolff's comments hinted that if their legitimate success and engine advantage is kicked out of their hands, they will leave the sport.

The pinnacle of butthurt millionaires. The sand crab club. This has to be posturing and pouting designed to influence the 2016 and beyond. Each side trying very hard to eke out or preserve as much of an advantage as possible. I don't take seriously the proposals to change engine rules too radically. The fuel efficiency, hybrid research, road car relevance, technological keeping-up-to-date if not evolution and cost of investemnts of the V6s will keep them around for a good time yet. And the fastest cars with fastest drivers will win again. And they will probably not be Ferrari, again.

[mario]

Cheaper?

Not a chance.

Sure, they cost less - but the manufacturers will jack the price up to recoup some of their losses on the hybrid V6s.

Oh, they most certainly would protest about the cost of scrapping the V6 engines - hence why I was treating Ferrari's claims that reverting back to the V8 engine format would help cut costs with more than a little scepticism.

Any change to the regulations that is seen as a reversal of the hybrids damages the credibility of the sport. Ferrari and Renault might like the idea, but nothing will kill the sport faster than bowing to their demands. Renault especially, since they pushed for the hybrid format in the first place.

I think Bernie is going to do what Bernie does best: string them along, but delay any meaningful action until it's too late to introduce for 2016, which will in turn make it inviable.

Renault pushed not only for the hybrid format as their idea was to have even smaller power units. This part is a bit odd. How come Bernie has Renault's support to change to a bigger engine? I know Red Bull are all for a new engine or an old engine or whatever change in that department. But do they count with Renault for that? Or Renault's voice is now Red Bull voice? When did that happened? From the moment Lotus left Renault and Caterham went bust leaving Renault with effectively only the Red Bull owned teams to supply?

Red Bull have been the official factory team for Renault for a few years now - basically, as soon as Renault Sport sold its stake in their old team, they transferred works status over to Red Bull. However, whilst Red Bull has been publicly calling for a change in the engine regulations, Renault Sport themselves have remained completely silent on the matter, so it is not entirely clear where they stand.

OK, it is known that, behind the scenes, they have joined forces with Ferrari to lobby for a relaxation on the engine homologation rules for 2015, but they've not been publicly attacking the FIA in the way that Ferrari has. I would not be surprised if Renault are more ambivalent on the matter than Red Bull are - Renault would be nursing a substantial financial loss, but on the other hand they were more competitive under the old engine format and were prepared to write off some of the losses they incurred then because Red Bull's success proved to be quite effective marketing for them.