Mosley's Engine idea

[Scuderia_Russ]

I'm not going into that again after 9 forum pages about it

viewtopic.php?t=1367

Seems like alot of posters agree with me in the link you posted to that thread Manchild. As for the whining about engines, the manufacturers didn't want to restrict V10's so they brought V8's on themselves. Luca Marmorini of Toyota doesn't seem to think it cost them more to develop V8's than V10's. Maybe you should read the interview with Mosely that I posted that you dismissed.

[monkeyboy1976]

True. V8s were suggested by the TWG (Technical Working Group made up of teams and manufacturers).

[greenpower dude reloaded]

but was it really tht dangerous that such changes need to be made?

[DaveKillens]

We,ve all made our opinions heard, and now Bernie has had his say too....
F1 boss Bernie Ecclestone says the engine rule changes for 2006 which have seen 3-litre V10 engines replaced by 2.4-litre V8s. Ecclestone believes the change has been a costly mistake for the sport but that the teams have only themselves to blame.
http://www.f1racing.net/en/news.php?newsID=109949

[manchild]

Seems like alot of posters agree with me in the link you posted to that thread Manchild.

Opinion of majority isn't what I'm guided by in life. Everyone can have their own viewpoint (even though I think that technocracy is better than democracy ).

As for the whining about engines, the manufacturers didn't want to restrict V10's so they brought V8's on themselves. Luca Marmorini of Toyota doesn't seem to think it cost them more to develop V8's than V10's. Maybe you should read the interview with Mosely that I posted that you dismissed.

Development of V8 engines costs immeasurably more than what evolutional tweaking of V10 would cost if they were allowed for 2006. So, I agree that development of V8's doesn’t cost more than development V10's but development means construction of engine from scratch while V10’s requred no such thing because they were present in F1 for so many years. Therefore, development of V8 did increased costs for sure.

[West]

We,ve all made our opinions heard, and now Bernie has had his say too....
F1 boss Bernie Ecclestone says the engine rule changes for 2006 which have seen 3-litre V10 engines replaced by 2.4-litre V8s. Ecclestone believes the change has been a costly mistake for the sport but that the teams have only themselves to blame.
http://www.f1racing.net/en/news.php?newsID=109949

Bernie must be on some really good crack. How is it the teams' fault? Wasn't it Mosley's idea all along?

[DaveKillens]

I dunno, it appears a lot of passing the blame is being done presently. Politics in F1, don't you just love it.

[uzael]

Development of V8 engines costs immeasurably more than what evolutional tweaking of V10 would cost if they were allowed for 2006. So, I agree that development of V8's doesn’t cost more than development V10's but development means construction of engine from scratch while V10’s requred no such thing because they were present in F1 for so many years. Therefore, development of V8 did increased costs for sure.

They spend their max budgets period. If they weren't using 150M US to design a new block for 8 cylinders instead of 10, they would spend it designing new valves and software for the V10. this idea that it costs the manufacturers more is somewhat contrary to their behvaior so far.

We all know, if they've got it, they'll spend it.

[manchild]

Me again...

I think that term "budget" is misunderstood.

Budget is pre-allowed sum that team can spend per season - not the exact sum team actually spends to the last dime developing just anything without ever getting enough of it.

[Scuderia_Russ]

Seems like alot of posters agree with me in the link you posted to that thread Manchild.

Opinion of majority isn't what I'm guided by in life. Everyone can have their own viewpoint (even though I think that technocracy is better than democracy ).

Now you're just trying to make me look shallow Manchild. I was just replying to the thread you posted about the Michelin's cock up at Indianapolis. Never mind, enough said, back to Mosely's engine ideas. Don't people miss hearing different cylinder configs? Although personally I love a throaty N/A four stoke engine, I'm quite looking forward to how F1 is going to embrace energy saving technology and new fuel ideas. LPG-F1?

[Spencifer_Murphy]

I hope they dont introduce LPG or other methods until they are as powerful (or atleast within 20%) of the current engines.

Otherwise F1 wont be the fastest, the pinacle of motorsprts.

However, I think LPG is great in Le mans

[manchild]

Now you're just trying to make me look shallow Manchild.

I wasn't trying to make you look shallow, although I think you tried to make me look eccentric, which I am and proud of it

[kilcoo316]

how about getting rid of fuel stops?

they are dangerous and, personally, they are boring to watch, I think it would enhance the drama of a pit stop, putting more empahsis on the speed and skill of the mechanics, rather than seeing who has the better fuel strategy.

It also makes the cars faster toward the end of the race, because they are running lighter. there is also the slim chance that someone might run out of fuel on the last lap

Exactly - took 1 1/2 pages for someone to realise it though!!!


This is where they ballsed up before, hopefully they'll fix it shortly.

[greenpower dude reloaded]

I hope they dont introduce LPG or other methods until they are as powerful (or atleast within 20%) of the current engines.

I think Bio-ethanol F1 would be interesting as its more powerful than ordinary racing fuel, problem is its used up quicker tho lol so fuel stops or rather large tanks wld have to be introduce

[Spencifer_Murphy]

That WOULD be interesting.....and for Mosley large fuel tanks = more weight = slower cars.

Max I hope your listening!