planetf1.com

Irbis wrote:link

This year's pace-setters Mercedes considered walking away from F1 before the sport opted to swap to turbo hybrid engines.

During the days of 2.4-litre V8 engines, Mercedes were on the fence about their F1 participation. according to Daimler's Thomas Weber, the man in charge of research and development.

"The key challenge for the future is fuel economy and efficiency and with the change in regulations F1 is the spearhead for development," he told BBC Sport.

Pressed as to whether Mercedes would have walked away had F1 not committed to the efficiency formula, he said: "I think so, yeah because we had the discussion.

"We had at different times the challenge to discuss F1 with the (Daimler) supervisory board.

"We had hard discussions. And it was always - and even more so when it came to the later years - harder to explain why we were using naturally aspirated engines.

"Now with these new regulations I can clearly convince the supervisory board that the (F1 team) are doing exactly what we need - downsizing, direct injection, lightweight construction, fuel efficiency on the highest possible level, new technologies and combining a combustion engine with an e-motor hybrid."

Weber also hit back at claims by Ferrari president Luca Di Montezmolo that fans are not enjoying F1's fuel-flow restriction as they cannot understand it.

The Daimler man said it was a "stupid discussion" and that if fans didn't grasp it that was a "communication issue."

As for the debate over engine noise, he said: "We can demonstrate to the public that it is still emotional, even if the noise level is a little bit quieter.

"Of course we can look if there is a little bit more possible. But in the meantime all the road cars are going for turbos, downsizing, so even a Porsche now sounds similar. So people learn it. That's easy."

I must say, bravo, one little threat and they turned the sport upside down just the way they wanted it. I wonder, will we now stop hearing of how evil Red Bull was for complaining (without threats) about tires when they were exploding left and right? Probably not, seeing the same people now say current Mercedes results is 100% driver skill, and it was previous 5 years that were a fluke, but a man can dream

Laura23 wrote:Both Ferrari and Renault threatened the same a couple of years ago. Nothing new.

Covalent wrote:Refreshing how Mercedes are now The Evil Team® instead of Red Bull.

Zoue wrote:I'm always inclined to take claims after the fact such as these with a pinch of salt. And I don't buy that F1 is the spearhead for development for fuel efficiency and such like: that's more of an area for endurance racing IMO. F1 is a figurehead for prestige and bragging rights: it's never, ever been about economy before

Irbis wrote:link

This year's pace-setters Mercedes considered walking away from F1 before the sport opted to swap to turbo hybrid engines.

During the days of 2.4-litre V8 engines, Mercedes were on the fence about their F1 participation. according to Daimler's Thomas Weber, the man in charge of research and development.

"The key challenge for the future is fuel economy and efficiency and with the change in regulations F1 is the spearhead for development," he told BBC Sport.

Pressed as to whether Mercedes would have walked away had F1 not committed to the efficiency formula, he said: "I think so, yeah because we had the discussion.

"We had at different times the challenge to discuss F1 with the (Daimler) supervisory board.

"We had hard discussions. And it was always - and even more so when it came to the later years - harder to explain why we were using naturally aspirated engines.

"Now with these new regulations I can clearly convince the supervisory board that the (F1 team) are doing exactly what we need - downsizing, direct injection, lightweight construction, fuel efficiency on the highest possible level, new technologies and combining a combustion engine with an e-motor hybrid."

Weber also hit back at claims by Ferrari president Luca Di Montezmolo that fans are not enjoying F1's fuel-flow restriction as they cannot understand it.

The Daimler man said it was a "stupid discussion" and that if fans didn't grasp it that was a "communication issue."

As for the debate over engine noise, he said: "We can demonstrate to the public that it is still emotional, even if the noise level is a little bit quieter.

"Of course we can look if there is a little bit more possible. But in the meantime all the road cars are going for turbos, downsizing, so even a Porsche now sounds similar. So people learn it. That's easy."

I must say, bravo, one little threat and they turned the sport upside down just the way they wanted it. I wonder, will we now stop hearing of how evil Red Bull was for complaining (without threats) about tires when they were exploding left and right? Probably not, seeing the same people now say current Mercedes results is 100% driver skill, and it was previous 5 years that were a fluke, but a man can dream

Covalent wrote:Refreshing how Mercedes are now The Evil Team® instead of Red Bull.

F1yer wrote:Well they should have let them go if thats what they wanted.
They werent even a top 3 team when they started.

Maybe RedBull should so the same and get Exhaust Blowers back.

Pedrosa_4_Ever wrote:

Zoue wrote:I'm always inclined to take claims after the fact such as these with a pinch of salt. And I don't buy that F1 is the spearhead for development for fuel efficiency and such like: that's more of an area for endurance racing IMO. F1 is a figurehead for prestige and bragging rights: it's never, ever been about economy before

I think F1 has always been one of the spearheads for technology to trickle down to road cars. Previously that technology was all about power, now it's about extracting the most power from a smaller package. That's something car companies want developed as that's the direction the industry's moving in.

nixxxon wrote:

Covalent wrote:Refreshing how Mercedes are now The Evil Team® instead of Red Bull.

At least Mercedes haven't "bought" their way to success in the way Red Bull did.
And they dont have a B team which is also good.

Herb wrote:

F1yer wrote:Well they should have let them go if thats what they wanted.
They werent even a top 3 team when they started.

Maybe RedBull should so the same and get Exhaust Blowers back.

IMO - this is more about Mercedes the engine provider than Mercedes the team, if they'd have walked, we'd be stuck with few engine providers - probably down to just Ferrari without the change in regulation.

nixxxon wrote:

Covalent wrote:Refreshing how Mercedes are now The Evil Team® instead of Red Bull.

At least Mercedes haven't "bought" their way to success in the way Red Bull did.
And they dont have a B team which is also good.

Zoue wrote:

Pedrosa_4_Ever wrote:

Zoue wrote:I'm always inclined to take claims after the fact such as these with a pinch of salt. And I don't buy that F1 is the spearhead for development for fuel efficiency and such like: that's more of an area for endurance racing IMO. F1 is a figurehead for prestige and bragging rights: it's never, ever been about economy before

I think F1 has always been one of the spearheads for technology to trickle down to road cars. Previously that technology was all about power, now it's about extracting the most power from a smaller package. That's something car companies want developed as that's the direction the industry's moving in.

I'm struggling to think of technologies that originated in F1 and filtered down to road cars, although I accept there may be many things I'm simply not aware of. I think anything that did make it down was probably more by accident than design. To me there's a difference between finding a use for a technology being used in F1 and making F1 a test bed for technologies in the wider world.

I guess I find the notion that one of F1's raisons d'etre is to reflect or spearhead technologies used in road cars to be a fundamental shift in what F1 represents. When I grew up watching F1 is was all about the glamour, prestige and gladiatorial elements when the best was competing against the best. I don't think Williams, or McLaren, or even Red Bull for that matter, are in it for any real world technology applications. I have my doubts as to whether Ferrari are, too, to be honest. That may be something that Mercedes might be interested in but it's not what F1 is, or has been, all about. It seems though that the powers that be feel that moving the goal posts is the best way to ensure that the manufacturers will be attracted to the sport. If that's the case then so be it but I can't help feeling a little sad about it though.

F1yer wrote:

Herb wrote:

F1yer wrote:Well they should have let them go if thats what they wanted.
They werent even a top 3 team when they started.

Maybe RedBull should so the same and get Exhaust Blowers back.

IMO - this is more about Mercedes the engine provider than Mercedes the team, if they'd have walked, we'd be stuck with few engine providers - probably down to just Ferrari without the change in regulation.

Well - they were exploiting their pull in F1 clearly then.
F1 couldnt ve afforded to let an engine supplier go.

But what I find hard to imagine is why an engine supplier will be so upset by a rule stood for ages that they want out.
Its like Pirelli asking to make rules abt tyres or they quit.

Pedrosa_4_Ever wrote:

Zoue wrote:

Pedrosa_4_Ever wrote:

Zoue wrote:I'm always inclined to take claims after the fact such as these with a pinch of salt. And I don't buy that F1 is the spearhead for development for fuel efficiency and such like: that's more of an area for endurance racing IMO. F1 is a figurehead for prestige and bragging rights: it's never, ever been about economy before

I think F1 has always been one of the spearheads for technology to trickle down to road cars. Previously that technology was all about power, now it's about extracting the most power from a smaller package. That's something car companies want developed as that's the direction the industry's moving in.

I'm struggling to think of technologies that originated in F1 and filtered down to road cars, although I accept there may be many things I'm simply not aware of. I think anything that did make it down was probably more by accident than design. To me there's a difference between finding a use for a technology being used in F1 and making F1 a test bed for technologies in the wider world.

I guess I find the notion that one of F1's raisons d'etre is to reflect or spearhead technologies used in road cars to be a fundamental shift in what F1 represents. When I grew up watching F1 is was all about the glamour, prestige and gladiatorial elements when the best was competing against the best. I don't think Williams, or McLaren, or even Red Bull for that matter, are in it for any real world technology applications. I have my doubts as to whether Ferrari are, too, to be honest. That may be something that Mercedes might be interested in but it's not what F1 is, or has been, all about. It seems though that the powers that be feel that moving the goal posts is the best way to ensure that the manufacturers will be attracted to the sport. If that's the case then so be it but I can't help feeling a little sad about it though.

Maybe technology doesn't originate in F1 but I do think it develops a lot quicker because of it. All the hybrid stuff springs to mind. Electric cars existed previously but I think manufacturers learnt a lot from developing KERS. I guess something that could have really big implications for the car industry as a whole is that, this year, f1 cars have engines half the size and using 2/3 (I think) of the fuel that are pretty much as quick as last year's cars. Imagine if those figures were transferred to every new road car being produced!

I agree that the independent teams probably don't care as much about developing the technology (although McLaren do have a burgeoning road car business which they use a lot of F1 tech on) but for all the engine manufacturers it is very important.

I guess this just comes down to a difference of opinions. I've always thought that the involvement of "big" manufacturers and the development of interesting technologies has formed a part of what F1 is, alongside the glamour and gladiatorial racing. For me, if I just wanted pure gladiatorial racing, I'd just watch go-karts or something. Each to their own.

F1yer wrote: Well - they were exploiting their pull in F1 clearly then.
F1 couldnt ve afforded to let an engine supplier go.

But what I find hard to imagine is why an engine supplier will be so upset by a rule stood for ages that they want out.
Its like Pirelli asking to make rules abt tyres or they quit.

F1yer wrote:

nixxxon wrote:

Covalent wrote:Refreshing how Mercedes are now The Evil Team® instead of Red Bull.

At least Mercedes haven't "bought" their way to success in the way Red Bull did.
And they dont have a B team which is also good.

LOL What do you mean - NOT bought their way back?
Their budget is at least double that of RBR. If you "account" for the fancy accounting they do to separate the engine division and the team.
They are essentially the one and the same as any works team

Irbis wrote:link


I must say, bravo, one little threat and they turned the sport upside down just the way they wanted it. I wonder, will we now stop hearing of how evil Red Bull was for complaining (without threats) about tires when they were exploding left and right? Probably not, seeing the same people now say current Mercedes results is 100% driver skill, and it was previous 5 years that were a fluke, but a man can dream

spronkey wrote:I find it odd that the regulations are so tightly defined.

Why not just say - you have 100KG of fuel for the race, and 6xxKG for the car minus driver, and say 80KG for driver + seat, and leave it up to the teams/engine manufacturers to find the best ways to get the cars around the track.

Whether that's taking a V8 and making it super-economical, or a 4/6cyl engine with a massive turbocharger, or maybe it's even using a hybrid combustion/electric approach as we have now.

Surely that would foster more innovation?

JohnnyGuitar wrote:

spronkey wrote:I find it odd that the regulations are so tightly defined.

Why not just say - you have 100KG of fuel for the race, and 6xxKG for the car minus driver, and say 80KG for driver + seat, and leave it up to the teams/engine manufacturers to find the best ways to get the cars around the track.

Whether that's taking a V8 and making it super-economical, or a 4/6cyl engine with a massive turbocharger, or maybe it's even using a hybrid combustion/electric approach as we have now.

Surely that would foster more innovation?

It may foster more innovation, but it would be far riskier as a manufacturer could develop, at huge expense, a configuration of engine that was way, way off the pace, both in terms of power and fuel consumption. It would then have to bin that engine and spend huge amounts developing another one to get back on par...

Or they could quit.

They would also be spending far more on R&D if they had that free a hand than they would be with a tight framework. And as we saw recently, when the costs spiral out of control and manufacturers don't feel it is worth their while, they quit.

spronkey wrote:I find it odd that the regulations are so tightly defined.

Why not just say - you have 100KG of fuel for the race, and 6xxKG for the car minus driver, and say 80KG for driver + seat, and leave it up to the teams/engine manufacturers to find the best ways to get the cars around the track.

Whether that's taking a V8 and making it super-economical, or a 4/6cyl engine with a massive turbocharger, or maybe it's even using a hybrid combustion/electric approach as we have now.

Surely that would foster more innovation?

stevey wrote:would of been funny with ferrari being the only engine supplier and then newey beating them on aero making RBR the default Ferrari factory team.