The 2021 Silly Engine Season thread

The place for speaking your mind on current goings-on in F1
Post Reply
IceG
Posts: 681
Joined: 06 Oct 2011, 17:24
Location: London (the one in England)

The 2021 Silly Engine Season thread

Post by IceG »

Liberty have published their proposals for the 2021 engine formula https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/form ... an-973420/

Things I like are:
- more revs, IIRC the extra 3,000rpm will allow a maximum of 18,000rpm
- no MGU-H, I don't understand how they work, they seem to be very expensive and fragile, and I am unaware of any commercial application of the technology (but stand to be corrected)
- give drivers the option to save up energy over several laps, and manual driver deployment of the additional MGU-K power

I would like to hope that automatic deployment of the MGU-K (and MGU-H should it remain) would be outlawed. Computers making decisions just annoys me (and, it seems, Lewis Hamilton who keeps complaining about the lack of consistency in the power delivery) and it smacks, to a degree, of traction control.

But in four years time, the majority of new road cars will be substantially or totally dependent on electrical power and energy recovery systems. Does the proposed formula look almost obsolete already in the context of manufacturers wanting to research, test and showcase road-relevant engine technology.
Fetzie
Posts: 548
Joined: 03 Nov 2012, 18:01

Re: The 2021 Silly Engine Season thread

Post by Fetzie »

- more revs, IIRC the extra 3,000rpm will allow a maximum of 18,000rpm


Don't they currently rev to 12k?
IceG
Posts: 681
Joined: 06 Oct 2011, 17:24
Location: London (the one in England)

Re: The 2021 Silly Engine Season thread

Post by IceG »

No it is 15,000:

https://www.formula1.com/en/championshi ... d_ERS.html

but thanks for making me check.
Fetzie
Posts: 548
Joined: 03 Nov 2012, 18:01

Re: The 2021 Silly Engine Season thread

Post by Fetzie »

Ah ok, my bad.

Apparently Mercedes and the other manufacturers aren't that impressed by the changes:

http://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/41833948
User avatar
mario
Posts: 8091
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 17:13

Re: The 2021 Silly Engine Season thread

Post by mario »

Fetzie wrote:Ah ok, my bad.

Apparently Mercedes and the other manufacturers aren't that impressed by the changes:

http://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/41833948

Both yourself and IceG are correct in different ways on that topic. IceG is right that the regulations currently limit the engines to 15,000rpm, but at the same time you are right that, due to the fuel flow rate cap, in reality the engines are being designed to a limit of about 12,000-13,000rpm as revving higher is simply not worth it due to increased frictional losses.

I have to say that I am not surprised that Renault and Mercedes are not happy about the proposals, and there are some rumours that, whilst Ferrari have not yet spoken out publicly, they are also not happy with the suggested changes.

I have to admit that in some ways I am perhaps not quite so keen on the proposed changes and view them as something of a step backwards in some areas. The talk of heavy standardisation of parts (standardised energy storage systems and control electronics units, along with fixed dimensions and positions for the turbochargers and some other ancillary components), with the express aim of a "plug-and-play engine/chassis/transmission swap capability", does sound like a move designed to heavily undercut the importance of the engine manufacturers by making their components close to a spec part that can be easily switched in and out.

Whilst there had been talk about the FIA wanting to draw in new manufacturers, the initial response seems to have been rather negative - those that were interested were put off by the fact that they would be heavily restricted in the areas they want to develop in, whilst the existing manufacturers seem to be unhappy that technology they have already developed (such as the advanced fuel injection systems) will potentially be scrapped.

Incidentally, since you were commenting about the application of that technology, it has helped accelerate development work on electric turbochargers by suppliers such as Honeywell which are expected to hit the market in the near future - so there is likely to be a direct impact on commercial vehicles soon.
Martin Brundle, on watching a replay of Grosjean spinning:
"The problem with Grosjean is that he want to take a look back at the corner he's just exited"
User avatar
AndreaModa
Posts: 5806
Joined: 30 Mar 2009, 17:51
Location: Bristol, UK

Re: The 2021 Silly Engine Season thread

Post by AndreaModa »

This whole thing about "road relevancy" - what a load of rubbish.

Pick a formula, set the rules and if none of the manufacturers want to play, then f*** them and let Cosworth, Illmor and others do it. They'll all come back eventually because they all know that no motorsport category can rank with F1 for exposure. Because underneath all of this bullsh*t about road relevancy, that's the real reason they're all here. Maybe these rules are Liberty growing a pair of balls and doing exactly that. We'll see. I don't like the amount of standardisation though, but perhaps that's the price to pay. I see Red Bull and Aston Martin are delighted with these new regs. I wonder why...

If the manufacturers really wanted to go and test out MGU-H elements for 'road relevancy' or whatever they'd go and build test rigs on a Frankfurt industrial estate and run the things until they go bang. Not spend 20 weekends flying round the world trying to get them to work and then coax primadonna F1 drivers to not criticise them too much in the press conferences. It's probably one of the most inefficient ways of going testing in the world! Maybe not in the 1950s it wasn't, but not any more!
I want my MTV...Simtek Ford

My Motorsport Photos

@DNPQ_
User avatar
AdrianBelmonte_
Posts: 804
Joined: 30 Nov 2014, 12:53
Location: Moderdonia (google it)
Contact:

Re: The 2021 Silly Engine Season thread

Post by AdrianBelmonte_ »

I don't care about fuel economy, power management and all that stuff

If a CERTAIN SMALL ITALIAN MANUFACTURER doesn't come up with their first engine since 1990, this whole "new engine" thing will be TOTALLY POINTLESS
#FoxesFansHooligans

#HaasShouldBeSoLucky
User avatar
mario
Posts: 8091
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 17:13

Re: The 2021 Silly Engine Season thread

Post by mario »

AndreaModa wrote:This whole thing about "road relevancy" - what a load of rubbish.

Pick a formula, set the rules and if none of the manufacturers want to play, then f*** them and let Cosworth, Illmor and others do it. They'll all come back eventually because they all know that no motorsport category can rank with F1 for exposure. Because underneath all of this bullsh*t about road relevancy, that's the real reason they're all here. Maybe these rules are Liberty growing a pair of balls and doing exactly that. We'll see. I don't like the amount of standardisation though, but perhaps that's the price to pay. I see Red Bull and Aston Martin are delighted with these new regs. I wonder why...

If the manufacturers really wanted to go and test out MGU-H elements for 'road relevancy' or whatever they'd go and build test rigs on a Frankfurt industrial estate and run the things until they go bang. Not spend 20 weekends flying round the world trying to get them to work and then coax primadonna F1 drivers to not criticise them too much in the press conferences. It's probably one of the most inefficient ways of going testing in the world! Maybe not in the 1950s it wasn't, but not any more!

It's not a great situation when every single current engine manufacturer is unhappy with the proposals - even Honda, a manufacturer that has found it difficult to master the MGU-H, still doesn't want it to be dropped.

On the opposite side, Aston Martin, who would basically be rebadging an engine made by somebody else, are only saying they are "encouraged" by the new regulations and want tighter cost restrictions (which will potentially have to come at the expense of even further standardisation).

Meanwhile, so far it seems that the independents that were part of the negotiations are, right now, staying pretty quiet, which makes me wonder if they are not entirely happy with the proposals either. Besides, in the case of Ilmor it's probably more profitable for them to do what they are doing now, which is selling their expertise to the manufacturers who make those engines (being external consultants for the likes of Red Bull, Renault and Honda).

Overall, I wouldn't be surprised if we see some changes being made over the coming months to the proposed rules, because right now the initial proposals seem to be something of a failure - not having the support of the current manufacturers and seemingly falling flat with most new manufacturers, whilst at the same time seemingly not winning round any independent manufacturers who could step into the breach if the larger manufacturers were to drop out.
Martin Brundle, on watching a replay of Grosjean spinning:
"The problem with Grosjean is that he want to take a look back at the corner he's just exited"
User avatar
Wallio
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 2624
Joined: 22 Feb 2012, 22:54
Location: The Wyoming Valley, PA

Re: The 2021 Silly Engine Season thread

Post by Wallio »

I;m honestly not worried, this is the opening round of negotiations. Your first proposal is supposed to be insane. Besides we are following the script nicely, Ferrari has issued a quit threat (reassuring, as its been awhile) and the parties will no doubt have to go to the drawing board.

Don't expect much change in 2021. More revs, more fuel, and perhaps one more engine per year. Same manufacturers, plus maybe Cosworth....errr Aston Martin. I do like the standardized dimensions, but i doubt there's a way to do it without spec'ing a bunch of parts, so no way it gets passed.
Professional Historian/Retired Drag Racer/Whiskey Enthusiast

"He makes the move on the outside, and knowing George as we do, he's probably on the radio right now telling the team how great he is." - James Hinchcliffe on George Russell
User avatar
mario
Posts: 8091
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 17:13

Re: The 2021 Silly Engine Season thread

Post by mario »

Wallio wrote:I;m honestly not worried, this is the opening round of negotiations. Your first proposal is supposed to be insane. Besides we are following the script nicely, Ferrari has issued a quit threat (reassuring, as its been awhile) and the parties will no doubt have to go to the drawing board.

Don't expect much change in 2021. More revs, more fuel, and perhaps one more engine per year. Same manufacturers, plus maybe Cosworth....errr Aston Martin. I do like the standardized dimensions, but i doubt there's a way to do it without spec'ing a bunch of parts, so no way it gets passed.

If it is meant to be an opening gambit in negotiations that is meant to be outlandish, it's still falling some way short of the mark there - it feels more like a muddled halfway house than anything else.

It doesn't really hit the sort of outlandish realms that the likes of Horner want - his response was to say that he wanted a standard spec V12 engine instead (a rather obvious attempt to make the sport into a purely chassis focussed series that would play to Red Bull's strengths) - whilst, at the same time, being far enough removed from what the current manufacturers want so as to not placate them either.

I mean, I can see what they are trying to do and agree that the changes are likely to be more towards what you suggest, but it feels like the FIA's played a bit of a weak opening hand in the upcoming negotiations.
Martin Brundle, on watching a replay of Grosjean spinning:
"The problem with Grosjean is that he want to take a look back at the corner he's just exited"
User avatar
Wallio
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 2624
Joined: 22 Feb 2012, 22:54
Location: The Wyoming Valley, PA

Re: The 2021 Silly Engine Season thread

Post by Wallio »

mario wrote:It doesn't really hit the sort of outlandish realms that the likes of Horner want - his response was to say that he wanted a standard spec V12 engine instead (a rather obvious attempt to make the sport into a purely chassis focussed series that would play to Red Bull's strengths) - whilst, at the same time, being far enough removed from what the current manufacturers want so as to not placate them either.


Wasn't that Superleague Formula's engine spec? I forget.

Liberty is trying to play both sides, they want to seem like they are cutting costs, but as much as teams complain about engine leases, the engine manufacturers want more engines per year, and unlimited R&D (or at the very least no tokens) all of which will drive up costs.

I do feel Ferrari's "NASCARization" comment is kind of spot on. The US has no non-spec series outside of the Tudor series, which absolutely no one watches, so Liberty is just playing to what it knows.
Professional Historian/Retired Drag Racer/Whiskey Enthusiast

"He makes the move on the outside, and knowing George as we do, he's probably on the radio right now telling the team how great he is." - James Hinchcliffe on George Russell
User avatar
AndreaModa
Posts: 5806
Joined: 30 Mar 2009, 17:51
Location: Bristol, UK

Re: The 2021 Silly Engine Season thread

Post by AndreaModa »

I don't know why the FIA, the engine manufacturers and the teams all sit round the table and land on a cost per engine figure which is then fixed for a set period (5 years?).

Then put together a loose set of regulations - engine capacity, cylinders, fuel flow rate, whatever, and let the engine manufacturers do what they want. They can spend as much money as they want on development but in the knowledge that they will get a fixed amount from each customer they supply. Loose regulations promote innovation, the controlled customer payments serve to curb an arms race (unless the manufacturers are happy to just burn cash, in which case, that's on them!)

Have similar regulations around capping the number of engines per season as we have now, but without the daft grid penalties. Instead, if a team is forced to go over their allocated number of engines, the manufacturer must refund the team a percentage of the engine costs, or perhaps the price of those manufacturer's engines would be reduced by a percentage for the following season. The idea being to punish the manufacturer for building crap engines by limiting their cash flow. You want consistent, predictable payments? Make good engines! And the teams would then be expected to pay a premium for those.

Get me a seat at the table already.
I want my MTV...Simtek Ford

My Motorsport Photos

@DNPQ_
User avatar
mario
Posts: 8091
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 17:13

Re: The 2021 Silly Engine Season thread

Post by mario »

AndreaModa wrote:I don't know why the FIA, the engine manufacturers and the teams all sit round the table and land on a cost per engine figure which is then fixed for a set period (5 years?).

Then put together a loose set of regulations - engine capacity, cylinders, fuel flow rate, whatever, and let the engine manufacturers do what they want. They can spend as much money as they want on development but in the knowledge that they will get a fixed amount from each customer they supply. Loose regulations promote innovation, the controlled customer payments serve to curb an arms race (unless the manufacturers are happy to just burn cash, in which case, that's on them!)

Have similar regulations around capping the number of engines per season as we have now, but without the daft grid penalties. Instead, if a team is forced to go over their allocated number of engines, the manufacturer must refund the team a percentage of the engine costs, or perhaps the price of those manufacturer's engines would be reduced by a percentage for the following season. The idea being to punish the manufacturer for building crap engines by limiting their cash flow. You want consistent, predictable payments? Make good engines! And the teams would then be expected to pay a premium for those.

Get me a seat at the table already.

What happens when you have an engine supplier that has an exclusive arrangement with a team?

Take, for example, the deal Renault did with Red Bull when they were designated the Renault works team and were effectively being given free engines through the cross subsidy that they received from their sponsorship from Infiniti. Alternatively, you could also take the case of Honda and McLaren, with Honda paying into McLaren with sponsorship and free engines.

In that instance, they're already refunding the cost of the engines through sponsorship, and there is no engine fee that you can take money off from given they're already being supplied for free, so there isn't an effective penalty to that engine supplier.

Equally, those regulations sound like they'd be far better for a major manufacturer than an independent company, effectively killing off any prospect of trying to lure an independent supplier into the sport. If you were Cosworth, those sorts of financial liabilities if something went wrong could potentially bankrupt you: it sounds like a lot of negative options with relatively few upsides for a smaller entity.
Martin Brundle, on watching a replay of Grosjean spinning:
"The problem with Grosjean is that he want to take a look back at the corner he's just exited"
User avatar
AndreaModa
Posts: 5806
Joined: 30 Mar 2009, 17:51
Location: Bristol, UK

Re: The 2021 Silly Engine Season thread

Post by AndreaModa »

Simple: ban those sort of arrangements! ;)

No, in seriousness, those instances sort of manage themselves. If an engine manufacturer has an exclusive agreement with another team or runs its own team itself, then the manufacturer is clearly under no pressure to base the economics of their engine programme around customer supply deals. My proposal above came about to address two issues - the cost of engines to customer teams, and the restrictions on development which currently exist ostensibly to reduce the cost of engines.

The problem comes with the penalisation for engine replacements, which I'll admit I haven't thought through very much! In terms of the economics though...

In the Honda/McLaren example you suggest, the manufacturer is free to spend as much as they want and have whatever arrangement they like with the team using the engines. If the engine manufacturer is comfortable spending obscene amounts with little or no actual revenue in return then fair enough. F1 says "thanks for your generosity engine manufacturer!"

In the Renault/Infinit/Red Bull deal where you've got a manufacturer supplying multiple teams but a factory or preferential deal with a single team, I don't think there's really an issue. Again, if they're happy to spend without getting as much return as they could in that scenario, then fair enough.

There needs to be some sort of legislation to prevent these sort of arrangements leading to teams going through loads of engines each season while at the same time removing the daft engine penalties rules we have now. That one needs more thought.
I want my MTV...Simtek Ford

My Motorsport Photos

@DNPQ_
User avatar
Wallio
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 2624
Joined: 22 Feb 2012, 22:54
Location: The Wyoming Valley, PA

Re: The 2021 Silly Engine Season thread

Post by Wallio »

Steiner has come out in favor of the new engine arrangements, and while he admits details will change, his comments about the overall design can basically be summed up as "They are what they are, deal with it".

Tinfoil hat time: Could Liberty, an American company, be pulling a Bernie, and offering Haas, an American team, a special deal to defect?
Professional Historian/Retired Drag Racer/Whiskey Enthusiast

"He makes the move on the outside, and knowing George as we do, he's probably on the radio right now telling the team how great he is." - James Hinchcliffe on George Russell
User avatar
mario
Posts: 8091
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 17:13

Re: The 2021 Silly Engine Season thread

Post by mario »

Wallio wrote:Steiner has come out in favor of the new engine arrangements, and while he admits details will change, his comments about the overall design can basically be summed up as "They are what they are, deal with it".

Tinfoil hat time: Could Liberty, an American company, be pulling a Bernie, and offering Haas, an American team, a special deal to defect?

I suspect it is more of a case that the increased standardisation of design that would come with this move is more favourable for their finances, given that their business model is dependent on subcontracting work out to external partners as much as possible.
Martin Brundle, on watching a replay of Grosjean spinning:
"The problem with Grosjean is that he want to take a look back at the corner he's just exited"
User avatar
Salamander
Posts: 9570
Joined: 29 Mar 2009, 20:59
Location: trapped on some prison island

Re: The 2021 Silly Engine Season thread

Post by Salamander »

Niki Lauda's now come out doubting the direction Liberty is taking F1.
You are a fool if you think that to make grands prix more attractive you need to have a different winner every weekend. F1 is about competition.


Now, I might be just misinterpreting this or taking it out of context, but I'm pretty sure those statements contradict each other. Here's hoping Liberty tells him to stuff it, because I'm done watching a series where only at most 3 or 4 people have a realistic chance to win a race every year.
Sebastian Vettel wrote:If I was good at losing I wouldn't be in Formula 1.
Everything's great.
I'm not surprised about anything.
User avatar
mario
Posts: 8091
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 17:13

Re: The 2021 Silly Engine Season thread

Post by mario »

Salamander wrote:Niki Lauda's now come out doubting the direction Liberty is taking F1.
You are a fool if you think that to make grands prix more attractive you need to have a different winner every weekend. F1 is about competition.


Now, I might be just misinterpreting this or taking it out of context, but I'm pretty sure those statements contradict each other. Here's hoping Liberty tells him to stuff it, because I'm done watching a series where only at most 3 or 4 people have a realistic chance to win a race every year.

From the reports that I have seen and the copy of the original article on the Gazetta dello Sport, that comment is a bit out of context.

Lauda's criticism was that Liberty were approaching the sport from wanting to level the performance of the cars in a way that he felt went against the tradition of the sport to encourage teams to develop cars in their own right and to diversify, rather than standardise, the field. In effect, the two parts of that statement are two different points that he was making.

The first was a criticism of the approach that Liberty were taking and the feeling that they wanted to inject a bit too much randomisation of performance into the sport to artificially spice things up (the comment about not needing new winners each weekend).

The second comment was about the teams being free to develop their cars in order to forge their own identity, and the importance of the teams being able to conduct their own battle of wits at the same time as their drivers fight out on track. It was an implicit rebuke against Liberty and the perception that they wanted to sterilise the competition between designers and effectively diminish the teams - not helped by the fact that, in the background, Liberty Media have also been taking about introducing budget caps, which some cynically note was set at a level which would allow them to increase their overall take of the revenues from the sport.
Martin Brundle, on watching a replay of Grosjean spinning:
"The problem with Grosjean is that he want to take a look back at the corner he's just exited"
Faustus
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 2073
Joined: 30 Mar 2009, 20:23
Location: UK

Re: The 2021 Silly Engine Season thread

Post by Faustus »

The 2021 engine regulations will not be very different from the current ones. It would be unthinkable to force the current manufacturers to design completely different engines. We will have roughly the same engines.

What I would like to see is a 'rapprochement' (sorry, I've been writing in French a lot lately and I can't think of the correct term) between Formula 1 and IndyCars.
Following Formula 1 since 1984.
Avid collector of Formula 1 season guides and reviews.
Collector of reject merchandise and 1/43rd scale reject model cars.
User avatar
dr-baker
Posts: 15427
Joined: 29 Mar 2009, 17:30
Location: Here and there.

Re: The 2021 Silly Engine Season thread

Post by dr-baker »

Faustus wrote:What I would like to see is a 'rapprochement' (sorry, I've been writing in French a lot lately and I can't think of the correct term) between Formula 1 and IndyCars.

I think you mean an intertwining of regulations, a commonality between rules.
watka wrote:I find it amusing that whilst you're one of the more openly Christian guys here, you are still first and foremost associated with an eye for the ladies!
dinizintheoven wrote:GOOD CHRISTIANS do not go to jail. EVERYONE ON FORMULA ONE REJECTS should be in jail.
MCard LOLA
Faustus
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 2073
Joined: 30 Mar 2009, 20:23
Location: UK

Re: The 2021 Silly Engine Season thread

Post by Faustus »

Precisely, good sir.
Following Formula 1 since 1984.
Avid collector of Formula 1 season guides and reviews.
Collector of reject merchandise and 1/43rd scale reject model cars.
User avatar
Mister-T-Head
Posts: 8
Joined: 05 May 2014, 05:37

Re: The 2021 Silly Engine Season thread

Post by Mister-T-Head »

There are a lot of lose ends* to the new engine rules. The best thing is dat the MGU-H will be gone. It made the engines way to complex.

*The big unknown is the fuel flow. That has to be higher for the engines to have higher RPM.
Post Reply