Reply With QuoteAny insights on McLaren? Is it true Mercedes and Ferrari have both said no to them for the engines?
Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk
I know you are but what am I?Originally Posted by Andyg
- - - Updated - - -
That was particularly funny. "How DARE YOU race me, in this race we're having."
Any insights on McLaren? Is it true Mercedes and Ferrari have both said no to them for the engines?
Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk
The key to the engine supply situation in 2018 would appear to be Sauber - Honda are believed to be trying to work their way out of the deal apparently agreed by Monisha Kaltenborn before her sudden departure, and it will take her successor as Team Principal and CEO Frederic Vasseur some time to be in a position to renegotiate a deal which, on the face of it, appeared to be a real lifeline for Sauber, as well as an opportunity for Honda to develop their power units without the white-hot spotlight and degree of expectation that came with their McLaren deal. Although according to some sources, Honda might just decide that they've harmed their reputation enough in Formula 1, and it's time for damage limitation and a withdrawal. Again.
Sauber might continue to use Ferrari power units, possibly the 2017 version. Using the 2016 Ferrari engine required significant compromises, as there are much higher loads fed into the engine block and cylinder heads, both of which are stressed, due to the higher cornering forces generated by the 2017 cars, so the engines have had to be strengthened. And Ferrari have made some real power gains with this year's engine, making the 2016 engine even more outdated.
But at this time of year the designs for the 2018 cars are well advanced, and a team can't just "do a Brawn" and re-jig a chassis for a different engine at short notice any more, due to the complexity of the hybrid power units. I suspect that if one were to have access to the McLaren designs for 2018 they might find that there is a degree of duplication - one design for a Honda power unit, one for a Mercedes.
I really can't imagine that there is any possibility of McLaren having Ferrari power for the foreseeable future, even though Ron Dennis no longer has any part to play in the team. There must be enough senior personnel (and shareholders) who remember the pain inflicted as a result of the "Spygate" unpleasantness of a few years ago involving Ferrari which saw McLaren hit with a fine of $100m by the FIA (although a large part of that was attributed to "personal issues" between Ron Dennis and Max Mosley) and the loss of their Constructor's Championship points from the previous season which forced them to spend a year in what Martin Brundle describes as "the Favela end of the paddock".
However, with the countdown for the design and manufacture of the 2018 cars well under way, expect some news sooner rather than later.
Wasn't Ron entirely blameless in the whole 'Spygate' thing, to the point where as soon as he heard about it he went straight to the FIA?
"A man of little significance"
I'm of this mind too.
Wasn't it Alonso threatening to report info he was privy to, along with another team member if McLaren didn't give him no.1 status that brought it to Ron's attention?
As as far as I know as soon as he was aware, Ron reported it direct to the FIA. McLaren got well and truly stiffed through no fault of their own.
I was amazed that McLaren subsequently signed Alonso as a driver, given his previous (devious) behaviour I would have had nothing to do with him ever again.
Last edited by JeremyO; 19th July 2017 at 16:24.
I believe so. Notwithstanding, the other shareholders of the time remain in situ today.
Max Mosley is reported to have taken Ron to one side after judgement had been passed and told him "That's $10m for the offence, and $90m for being a ****.
I think there was some "history".
It also appears that Ron was right when he said that a "customer team" would not be able to beat a manufacturer team whilst using the same engine as the manufacturer teams have an ongoing advantage re development.
No customer team using the manufacturer team engines has finished ahead of the manufacturer recently as far as I can remember. I'm not counting Red Bull and Renault here as the latter has only very recently become a manufacturer team.
I think Ron was right to seek out an independent engine supplier and, given their past track record, Honda seemed to be a great choice. It is a real shame that they have failed to deliver time and again.
It will be interesting to see if Honda persevere in F1 given the rumoured change in engine regs post 2020.
What happens if Honda withdraw? The remaining options are Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault. As Jeremy has pointed out, the "works" teams will almost inevitably have an advantage over their customer teams. Red Bull's travails with Renault are well-documented, and resulted in their involvement with Mario Ilien to produce their own Tag-Heuer badged version of the Renault engine. I'm not sure how the engines differ, but Ilien's background is in internal combustion technology, so it may have the standard Renault energy recovery and storage/deployment hardware and software.
I'm sure I heard on Sky's pre-race buildup on Sunday that Mario Ilien had been seen at Renault recently, although I'm not sure if the comment related to the team's headquarters at Enstone or the engine headquarters at Viry-Chattilon.
I think that Formula 1 needs a competitive Honda engine simply to increase the options available to the independent teams. The current engine regulations and development costs appear to make the sport unattractive to a supplier such as Cosworth, so I hope that the new formula for 2020 onwards will have stricter controls on engine development and have something to attract an independent supplier. Because Formula 1 needs more competitive racing, which means more teams capable of winning.
It would appear the Halo is in for 2018. This despite the team objecting to it again. Tbh it does look crap. I think it is still a bit debatable how often an event happens that it would prevent but for that one time someone would be grateful.
I've just seen this on Pitpass. Nine out of the ten teams were against the introduction of the Halo, but the FIA has agreed to introduce it anyway.
I'm sure that there are instances in which it might prevent death or serious injury. But there are instances like Alonso's crash in Australia last year where the Halo would prevent a driver extracting himself from the cockpit, or interfere with his extraction by marshals.
I see it's there to provide frontal protection. Wasn't this kicked off, at least in part, when a spring struck Massa in 2009? Without the protection of his helmet he wouldn't have had a chance. With the halo, what would have been the chance that it might have been deflected into his unprotected chest?
I'm not convinced that the Halo won't cause more problems than it solves. It could have helped in the case of Maria di Villota, but that was an off-track accident, and it wouldn't have saved Jules Bianchi. As you say, Bob, it might have made Massa's accident worse.
A Halo-type device might have saved Henry Surtees, Justin Wilson or Dan Wheldon, but the formulae that they were racing in aren't looking to introduce any additional cockpit protection, as far as I'm aware.
Anyway. It appears to be a fait accompli, so regardless of what anybody thinks it will be introduced in 2018.
The way that I understood it to be was that it was Sauber that wanted out, not Honda. With ex Renault's Frederic Vasseur now on board and Longbow's relatively recent investment it's thought that the team wishes to guarantee a step up the rankings beyond this season and that using the Honda package is too risky - entirely understandable considering Honda's current woes. On the other hand neither Honda or Sauber are covering themselves in glory this season (2016 spec Ferrari power, granted) so what have either of them to lose? If McLaren stay as they are and if Sauber does stick with Honda - no doubt subsidised by Honda themselves - then it would double the development data for the Japanese giant, or double the embarrassment. They could well fall on their sword, I would imagine that it would feel like the most crushing of blows internally should they opt out.
The cheer that Alonso received at Silverstone shows there is a lot of good will towards the team and driver, they've become the plucky underdog that us Brits would love to see do well, and I for one would hope to see them succeed after so much public humiliation. Both SvD and FA have conducted themselves impeccably despite the latter's occasional race weekend on-air comments, considering their predicament.
There will be some furrowed brows in Hinwall, Woking and Sakura - oh to be a fly on the wall.
Edit - Cosworth to return?
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/c...n-2021-932464/
Last edited by CardShark; 20th July 2017 at 03:13.
Fully agreed on that. I think Alonson and SvD have been superb - its must be shit driving that dog of a car. Stoffel is doing pretty well all things considered and I 'd hate to see his promising career stall before it's really started.
I would love to see the return of independent engine suppliers, fondly remembering the Ford DFV era.
The problem here being that, under current engine regs, it's just too expensive unless they can mitigate the enormous investment by using the technology in road cars.
Should new engine regs be simplified, as suggested in the quoted article, to just ICE and hybrid electric only, this could prove cost effective.
That apporach could also potenitlaly attract more manufacturers - right now there's really not that much in the current regs to put straight in to a road car. It's a good engineering exercise but as Honda have shown pure engineering brilliance doesn't necessarily translate in to creating a good F1 engine.
It's the Japanese that have taken the lead with hybrid technology in road cars, vehicles such as the Insight and Prius have been around for yonks, yet it's the Japanese that have, in recent times, struggled in F1. Both Toyota (pre-hybrid, admittedly) and Honda have had full on assaults yet, so far at least, have zip all to show for it. Toyota have had more success in the hybrid era WEC despite heart-breaking '16 and '17 Le Mans results, much less competition there though.
Given the stereotypical view that it's the Japanese that lead the world in terms of tech and reliability (more so than the Germans, IMO) it's a wonder that they haven't been more successful.
Hungary. When the Hungaroring was first revealed to the Formula 1 community it was considered to be a bit "Mickey Mouse", tight, twisty and with few opportunities to overtake.
Since that time, the track has been subtly altered, but remains essentially the same. Somehow, it doesn't seem to be a bad track these days. In the early days of the Hungarian Grand Prix the cars were fearsome 900+bhp (in qualifying trim) monsters, and there weren't the opportunities to unleash them on the tight, twisty gradients. The circuit is considered similar to Monaco in terms of setup, and qualifying usually settles the race result.
It's given us some memorable moments though - Piquet overtaking Senna in 1986:
On the other hand, Thierry Boutsen won from pole in 1990 by simply keeping everybody else behind him.
The weather tends to vary between scorching hot and miserable, and it seems to be the home race for any Finnish driver on the grid.
Tyre choices won't surprise anybody:
In other news, Sauber will not be using Honda power next year. Whether Mclaren will continue to do so remains unclear, but there are reports that Mario Ilien is now working closely with Honda, and looking specifically at improving the reliability of the internal combustion engine.
More later.
And who can forget our Nigel's overtake of Senna https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qAlULf9EDBw
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
With an "assist" from Stefan Johansson! From the back of my memory, I seem to recall that Mansell won from 12th on the grid one year, but anybody below the second row will need a large slice of luck to win on Sunday.
I'm watching FP1, and all of the discussion this morning on Sky F1 is about the Halo, which the FIA have confirmed will be mandatory from 2018.
Opinion on the appearance of the device is unanimous, in that it's an aesthetic carbuncle. Nobody likes it, but the point that it might save the life of a driver keeps being reiterated.
The FIA have confirmed that the device can be painted in team colours, and have (limited) aerodynamic attachments hasn't deflected the view that it's a step in the wrong direction for Formula 1, and is unlikely to win more fans, or indeed the hearts and minds of existing followers.
On track, it's pretty much business as usual, with the drivers making the most of what is at the moment a slippery track. Mark Hughes reckons that the Ferraris will be closer to Mercedes this weekend as their shorter wheelbase and better handling will help on the twists and turns, and the track temperature is forecast to rise to 50c on Sunday, so tyre management will be critical.
Oh, and Antonio Giovinazzi has crashed, and done considerable damage to the suspension on the left side of Kevin Magnussen's Haas. In the other Haas, Romain Grosjean, with the predictability of night following day, is complaining about the brakes.
following on from the news this week, is Formula1 dead by 2040 and Formula E will be the new top class? or will they just class them as hybrids
I find it a little unfair that we never hear the brakes' side of the story. Maybe Grosjean is an abusive partner, jumping on them all the time. It's all about blame with him, isn't it?
"A man of little significance"
I believe that there has been a meeting with BCAS, the Brake Conciliation Arbitration Service, but the outcome was inconclusive. The FIA felt that as we no longer have the Friday sessions punctuated by Jenson Button complaining about a lack of grip, Grosjean's constant whingeing about his brakes should be allowed to continue.
I'm more interested in seeing what the ACO do. LMP2 cars all look and sound the same. Toyota said they had only committed to Le Mans next year if Porsche were there, so they may well withdraw too, which is going to make it very interesting for the likes of Ginetta and Rebellion, who must be sniffing an opportunity. It's too expensive for manufacturers to build a hybrid LMP1 car for Le Mans (bearing in mind the rest of the WEC series barely interests anyone) but privateer teams can't necessarily do it themselves. The new Corvette is going to be mid-engined, the Ford GT and 911 RSR have already been made specifically for racing and are going to end up being penalised to put them on a par with the 488s. There's a new Aston coming, the DBR9 is on its way out.
This is the perfect time to rearrange the GT classes to have a much faster GT1 class with cars capable of fighting for the win. Cars built for racing like the Ford GT and 911 RSR. Think Le Mans 1995 (although it helped the McLarens that it rained the whole time and Mario Andretti binned his prototype into a wall), when the 962s etc were outlawed and before the manufacturers flooded in, leading to the BMW, Audi, Nissan, Cadillac etc prototypes. LMP1 can be junked and manufacturers can come into an LMP2 class with an obligation to supply privateer teams. There's already a fantastic GT3 series with the likes of McLaren 650S, Audi R8, Mercedes GT, Bentley Continental GT and so on. Manufacturer participation again. There are ways and means of involving some of the best sports car manufacturers in the best sports car race but the ACO have to take the plunge and extract their heads from the sand.
Formula E is the right thing for manufacturers to do right now and it's going to be at the expense of other series, see DTM and Le Mans in the last week alone. Formula 1 and Le Mans need to react to this but costs are astronomical, was it something like £200million to put up a credible challenge to win Le Mans? One race with far less coverage than F1? I haven't a clue of the minimum cost of winning a Grand Prix but from memory only Mercedes, Red Bull and Ferrari have won in years (Kimi in the Lotus in 2013 and the 2012 season was a bit of a mix). Formula E is attractive in so many ways. It's when Ferrari announce they're going to set up an FE team that everyone's going to start worrying about F1.
Incidentally, when I was at the British GP on the Friday I wondered why in this age of manufactured road car exhaust notes we didn't see that in racing. Why doesn't the Mercedes sound like an AMG, or Ferrari like a Ferrari? The Red Bull could sound like the Aston Valkyrie too.
"A man of little significance"
Hamilton spends enough time complaining too.
I wonder if Kimi's one-word replies to journalists over the last few years wasn't as a result of the press's coverage of his drinking and strip club antics but more to do with what actually comes out of his mouth when he does talk (see the Silverstone podium)!
"A man of little significance"
Mercedes have just announced that 2018 will be their last year in the DTM and that these resources will be put into Formula E instead, it does make you wonder how F1 and FE will co-exist in the future - if at all. They both have their USPs as it stands now however I can't see F1 using internal combustion engines forever and that'll be the same for the all the junior series as well. My guess would be that everything goes electric, FE loses its "electric only" USP and is either wiped out or is re-branded and becomes a feeder series for the top flight. Long, long way to go before any of that happens though.
The Halo saga intrigues me. The FIA have full authority to impose (if that's the right word, it certainly feels like it is in the current situation) any safety related protocol they see fit regardless as to the opinion of the teams or anyone else, and that seems fair enough to me given that safety related issues and solutions can't, or at least shouldn't, be ignored. The conflict between the potential safety advantages and the aesthetical popularity of the Halo device is an interesting one, sure it doesn't make the cars look any more attractive(!) but why do we seemingly put that ahead of potentially saving a life? It's become a question of ethics, in my opinion, and a tricky one at that.
Edit - too many distractions meant that it took me some time to write my post, in the mean time Foxy made some great points about the ACO and the need to reshuffle the Sportscar segment. I remember when I was at Le Mans 1998-2001 and the number of manufacturers competing in the top class LMP900 category, the current hybrids are way too costly for a sport that doesn't get the coverage to warrant the expense.
Last edited by CardShark; 28th July 2017 at 11:55.
I'm not aware that Liberty have voiced an opinion on the Halo, but they seem to want to make a real effort to attract more fans to Formula 1, and the FIA have just forced the introduction of something which, although there is an undeniable argument for increasing driver safety, makes the cars look a bit crap, and as a result, unappealing to the casual fan that Liberty are trying to engage.
What I don't understand is why it's being imposed on the one Formula where there hasn't been a wheel-related injury or death for a long time, but not in the lower ones where there have been (cf Henry Surtees). It's impossible to say it would have saved Massa being hit by the spring that came of the car in front & in fact the halo may well have deflected it to hit elsewhere where there was less protection. Would it have saved Bianchi or De Viollota? Maybe the latter but I don't know about the former. Maybe the FIA impact tests have proved it would have, but the VSC system has already gone a long way to reducing the chances of it happening again.
Why don't they just scrap the halo and put a canopy on?
Liberty would do well to keep right out of it, at least in public. They're in it for the commercial interest, they simply couldn't be seen to even hint that a safety device would harm their investment. Sorry, the sport.
F1 is supposed to be the leading single seater category so it's understandable that they'd get the new ideas first, that and F1 has a much higher social/media profile so any on-track injuries and deaths would get greater coverage.
A full canopy would come with its own issues; driver extraction, ventilation in hot weather and visibility when raining just a few of them. Vettel tested the part canopy solution a couple of weeks back and instantly dismissed it as a going concern, that's not to say that the idea has been written off forever though.
Just in case anyone was wondering why Bernie sold the whole shebang to new owners - he's a clever bugger !
Hang on... Are you saying 86 year old BE sold F1 because he knew that legislation was going to be passed making petrol engines obsolete in 23 years?
There's one hell of a long game.
I expect he'll still be around at 109 though!
His body may have given up on him by then though I suspect that he'd do this if it was feasible...
For Williams fans, I saw that the company are releasing a film about their extensive history. It's available in a variety of real and on-line locations and looks very interesting.
http://www.williamsfilm.com/
http://www.roadandtrack.com/motorspo...team-for-2019/
Update: Felipe Massa is unwell, and his place will be taken for Qualifying and the race by the Williams replacement driver Paul di Resta.
Who last raced in 2013, although he undertakes simulator work for the team, and attends engineering meetings. A big ask, nevertheless.
Saw this and now watching - wasn't going to bother [sorry!]
Straight in to qualifyingAlways liked the guy, so hope he can do well.
There's an added bonus for us Sky viewers, in that we won't have to listen to him commentate.
Sadly. Martin Brundle is still unwell.
Hope he is on the mend. Any news?
Does a fantastic job for Sky.
Brundle's Twitter feed says that he's on the mend, nothing to do with "Shooeys", and his oil pump is fine. The summer break follows Hungary, so he has a few weeks to recover.
He also mentions the enormous challenge facing Paul di Resta.
Who says you can't overtake on this track, anyone else watching the F2
The F1 drivers need to have word with them
There was a lot going on, wasn't there? A great race from Charles Leclerc to get fourth (third if Rowland is disqualified) from the back of the grid. He's in with a chance of a Sauber drive next year if stories are true of Ferrari's engine supply being linked to driver development, using Sauber as Ferrari's "B" team, as Red Bull use Toro Rosso. There's a possibility that Sauber may not re-sign Wehrlein although Marcus Ericsson has links with the Rausing family, who are putting some funding behind the team.
Jordan King didn't exactly reinforce his claim for a Formula 1 drive, though. I suspect that even Daddy's money wouldn't get him an F1 seat for 2018.
But today's race showed that you can, even in a fairly even series, have some decent racing on a track not noted for overtaking.
Watching the GP3, a good argument to allow DRS by lap 2, slower cars holding up a pack until it is enabled
Last edited by adrianw; 29th July 2017 at 17:13.
Must admit to being a little surprised by the speed of the Ferraris, especially now that their flexible floor has been banned.
Looking forward to a good race, does anyone know when their engine penalties are likely to kick in?
Ferrari, or everybody?
As I understand it, although Ferrari have "used" all of their turbochargers, for example, all they have done is brought them into a rotation. I think that out of the four turbos allocated to each driver one of Kimi Raikkonen's was damaged beyond re-use in Bahrain, and I think that one of Vettel's has had to be binned, but they just keep rotating the others.
It's worth noting that the FIA banned "stockpiling" (taking multiple replacements at one meeting and just accepting a back row start for one race) as Mercedes did for Hamilton in Belgium last year.
Next year the allocation of power unit elements reduces to three per driver. I don't know if Honda have prepared for this, but assuming they and McLaren remain as an item, they could be looking at penalties before the start of the European races.
I'm watching Ted's Notebook, and apparently Martin Brundle, Felipe Massa and a few other inhabitants of the paddock are suffering from Viral Labyrinthitis, which causes vertigo and nausea.
Who says Vettel isn't dirty, massively over brakes causing the rest of the field to all have to ovoid each other
That's one way to stay in front
Posting Permissions
