# 2006 Engine rules approved...



## racerdave (Sep 15, 2003)

New engine format agreed
F1 to use 2.4-litre V8 engines from 2006 in bid to reduce power output

The 3-litre V10 will be a thing of the past in 2006

Autosport can reveal that Formula 1's major engine manufacturers have reached agreement in principle about the future format of the sport's engine regulations.

Subject to ratification, F1 cars will run 2.4-litre V8 engines as from the 2006 season.

Power reduction and cost saving are the key motives behind the change from the current 3-litre V10 engines, which have seen power outputs climb in excess of 900bhp.

More reaction to follow.


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

The more they try to reduce speed and power, the more boring it is getting.  

Look what happened since they banned the slicks and changed the aerodynamics.


----------



## SteveT (Dec 22, 2001)

Alex Baumann said:


> The more they try to reduce speed and power, the more boring it is getting.
> 
> Look what happened since they banned the slicks and changed the aerodynamics.


The thing that gets forgotten is that when they banned the slicks and reduced the size of the tires, the cars went faster in a straight line. It's pretty obvious why, what I don't understand is how the FIA could not understand that it would happen. Mosely's changes are a stretch. It looks like the revolutionary qualifying changes are about gone and not soon enough. I think they can change the formula to 2.5L if they want, but let them make any engine (except turbo) that they like. The FIA wants to fix the engine configuration at V8. Why not leave it open from V8 to V12?


----------



## racerdave (Sep 15, 2003)

BMW's perspective...

http://www.speedtv.com/articles/auto/formulaone/11305/?from=[HOME]


----------



## Pinecone (Apr 3, 2002)

Yeah, and remember they went to the 3.5L formula to slow the cars down.

The cars will be slower for a couple of years, then the speeds will creep up again. Its the way of life in racing. Cars get faster.

I also agree, why fix it to V8s? Set the sdisplacement limit and let the manufacturers figure out what configuration works best. At the start of the 3.5L formula, we had V8s, Vv10s and IIRC even a V12. The V10 worked teh best. In the days of the 3L formula, we had V8s and V12s, and even an H16. In the ays of the 1.5L formula, we had 4s, 6s, 8s (V and flat) and 12s.


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

What happened to the idea of Formula 1 being the top class motorsport event in the world ? Reduce the engine capacity, reduce the number of tests that a team can make, limit the aerodynamics, silly qualifying, parc ferme, ban of slicks etc. It became all about limiting and reducing.

It is obvious (at least for me) that the FIA has no clue what to do next. If they want to bring the fun and excitement back to the field, they should ban the electronics, ban the F1 type gearbox and bring back the manual transmission, bring the slicks back, limit the engine capacity without limiting the number of the cylinders. Simply go back to the '70s. 

If Michael wins the championship this season, he'll probably be winning it without passing anyone on the track. Whose fault is that ? 

Mario Theissen said in an interview that a V8 would be only 5% cheaper to produce than its V10 counterpart. Where is the cost saving in doing that ?


----------



## GimpyMcFarlan (Aug 13, 2002)

How about making in car / remote controlled adjustments to the car illegal? I prefer the idea that the car should be setup / changed only in the pits. I never really liked that the driver could change the following from within the car...
- Changing brake bias. (F1)
- Changing boost amount. (CART)
- Changing fuel mixture. (IRL)\
- What else?

I understand that these make the car perform better, but I think the driver / team should be stuck with the setup of the car while it is on the track. If something about it is bad enough, make them pay the price of coming in for a pit stop to adjust it.


----------



## SteveT (Dec 22, 2001)

I think the electronics could go away and slicks could come back, but the transmissions should remain as they are. Engine size should be fixed but not the configuration. There are advantages and disadvantages to each. Going back to the seventies sounds to me like formula Ford, which it was for the most part...boring technically. I'm not a fan of Ross Brawn, but his statements recently about F1 having technically interesting aspects that are separate from the racing are very true. Despite the on track frustrations, there is a lot of excellent engineering going on in F1.


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

SteveT said:


> I think the electronics could go away and slicks could come back, but the transmissions should remain as they are. Engine size should be fixed but not the configuration. There are advantages and disadvantages to each. Going back to the seventies sounds to me like formula Ford, which it was for the most part...boring technically. I'm not a fan of Ross Brawn, but his statements recently about F1 having technically interesting aspects that are separate from the racing are very true. Despite the on track frustrations, there is a lot of excellent engineering going on in F1.


Steve, I completely agree that there's a lot of engineering going on in F1. But not every team is fortunate enough to raise funds to finance all those research and development. Some of the teams can't even put money in for track tests.

Would you say that late 80s and early 90s were boring too ? To me it was the best era.


----------



## SteveT (Dec 22, 2001)

Alex Baumann said:


> Steve, I completely agree that there's a lot of engineering going on in F1. But not every team is fortunate enough to raise funds to finance all those research and development. Some of the teams can't even put money in for track tests.
> 
> Would you say that late 80s and early 90s were boring too ? To me it was the best era.


The Turbo era was my favorite and it was winding down during the late 80's, but there was a lot of technology in the early 90's. Active suspension and a lot of aerodynamics made that period excellent.

Some of the teams don't really belong in the sport. I wonder sometimes why Eddie Jordan can't find better sponsorship with his personality, etc. I think maybe he wants to be on the down side, so he doesn't have to take it so seriously. It wasn't that long ago that Heinz-Harald was in contention for the WDC in a Jordan. Does it serve anyone to make F1 all that much cheaper, to dumb it down to the mediocre teams?


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

SteveT said:


> Some of the teams don't really belong in the sport. I wonder sometimes why Eddie Jordan can't find better sponsorship with his personality, etc. I think maybe he wants to be on the down side, so he doesn't have to take it so seriously. It wasn't that long ago that Heinz-Harald was in contention for the WDC in a Jordan. Does it serve anyone to make F1 all that much cheaper, to dumb it down to the mediocre teams?


That is exactly what I'm trying to say. Private teams (i.e teams with no manufacturer support in the background) have no chance to survive in the F1. And manufacturers behind the teams are doing it not only to strengthen their brand name, but more importantly to test their latest developments in extreme conditions.


----------



## SteveT (Dec 22, 2001)

Alex Baumann said:


> That is exactly what I'm trying to say. Private teams (i.e teams with no manufacturer support in the background) have no chance to survive in the F1. And manufacturers behind the teams are doing it not only to strengthen their brand name, but more importantly to test their latest developments in extreme conditions.


I understand. Is F1 for the privateer? I don't think so. There is a segment of the population (usually in the UK) who says that the privateer is the foundation of the sport. In the old days that might have been true, but it's been a manufacturers series for a long time.


----------



## The Roadstergal (Sep 7, 2002)

SteveT said:


> Engine size should be fixed but not the configuration.





SteveT said:


> Despite the on track frustrations, there is a lot of excellent engineering going on in F1.


 :thumbup:


----------



## Pinecone (Apr 3, 2002)

Hard to ban electronics, unless you want to go back to carbuerators or constant flow fuel injection. Sorry electronics are here to stay. Also consinderg every street car uses eletronic ignitiaon and feul control.

Even SCCA Club racers use brake bias control. The Spec Racer Ford I raced has it. A knob you turn to move brke bias front to rear. Hard to make a case for this one. Oh, and street cars have it now, as part of modern ABS systems. It also makes the cars safer.

I thought that changes from the pits was already banned. They can now only monitor, not upload.

I do like making the driver upshift rather than auto upshifts at some RPM. Kimi would probably not agree though. 

Boost control is common in every racing sort that uses boosted engines. CART had it for years. It is just now they limit it by time used rather than by the total amount of fuel used for the race.

Every era of F1 has had its good points and its bad points. The no fuel taken on in the race made it a fuel economy run, not a treal race, and F1 had boost control.


----------



## SteveT (Dec 22, 2001)

Pinecone said:


> Hard to ban electronics, unless you want to go back to carbuerators or constant flow fuel injection. Sorry electronics are here to stay. Also consinderg every street car uses eletronic ignitiaon and feul control.


Electronics are here to stay, no doubt about it. I would be more specific and say do away with traction control. And while brake bias might be adjustable, how about the differential adjustment you see them doing in real time? We might find out that what Michael is really good at is all this multitasking and adjustments.

I think the drivers are making the upshifts and downshifts now.


----------



## racerdave (Sep 15, 2003)

Upshift and downshifts are manual now. And, I believe Terry is right on the upload being banned from the pits. I thought that was the case too.

I think standard ECU's are probably the only true way to ban traction control. Remember, it was also banned in CART, but teams had figured out how to beat the rules yet still have TC. That's why CART punted on it as well and allowed it, only to ban it later when Cosworth was the spec engine supplier... because they could effectively eliminate it then with spec ECU's and motors. 

We shall see what shakes out.

The other thing Theissen said was that 2.4 V-8s would not bring enough power disparity between the soon-to-be F2 and F1... 600 hp to 700 hp. Not enough of a jump. I think he's right. Spec ECU's and 3.0 V-10s are fine if they double the life requirement. They'll have to detune and not spin them as hard, meaning that they'll last longer... unless it's a Mercedes.


----------



## Pinecone (Apr 3, 2002)

SteveT said:


> Electronics are here to stay, no doubt about it. I would be more specific and say do away with traction control. And while brake bias might be adjustable, how about the differential adjustment you see them doing in real time? We might find out that what Michael is really good at is all this multitasking and adjustments.
> 
> I think the drivers are making the upshifts and downshifts now.


Yeah, if there are electronis, they can hide the TC code in there.

Btut I am NOT for spec ECUs. Sorry, might was well just run IRL cars and call them F1.


----------



## SteveT (Dec 22, 2001)

I can't imagine the manufacturers will ever agree to spec ECU's. The ECU is part of what they want to do and it's what can migrate into production.


----------



## Patrick (Dec 23, 2001)

Alex Baumann said:


> What happened to the idea of Formula 1 being the top class motorsport event in the world ?


Wow, you have really set yourself up for this one! The answer is simple ...

Just look at the "person" in your avatar! Voila.

:eeps:

-


----------



## Patrick (Dec 23, 2001)

SteveT said:


> I understand. Is F1 for the privateer? I don't think so.


On Monday, I watched a BBC sports special interview with Max Mosely (yawn) about the current "health of Formula One" and where it is going in the future with regards to the EU ban on cigarette advertizing and so on. One of his main points in the interview was that Formula One is all about the privateer teams (yawn) because the automobile manufacturers come and go as they see fit. He thinks that everything is great!

Right.

Watching it left me with the feeling that as long as he continues to get his fat money, he will stay out of touch with a lot of things the FIA does in Formula One and WRC.

There is an "presidential" election for the FIA in October, and apparently, the job will be given to two different people (handling different aspects of the job). Max, naturally wants one of them. Heck, since Luca di Montezemolo is the president of everything else in Italy, maybe he should get the second chair!

Where is that yawn smiley ... :yawn:

-


----------

