Jolle wrote:
On the engines: if you look at all of the modern performance cars, the past few years they switched from big V8 normally aspirated to turbo engines with 3-4l engines (AMG, BMW, Ferrari, McLaren). F1 missed this, instead they choose to freeze the V8 2.4. If they had introduced, for instance, a V6 twin turbo after the V10, we wouldn't have this discussion now plus it would be quite possible that companies like BMW would still be in F1.
F1 should stay ahead of the curve, especially on tech. The next generation C63, M3, MC12, 488, 911 will have a hybrid engine with a MGU-etc.
I agree that a more decisive action earlier would have been better for the formula. Forgetting relevance and the inevitable pages of discussion that will yield, it is without doubt that technology should be at the forefront of F1.
Freezing engines was a massive own goal that led to frozen in advantages and disadvantages.
Beyond that, it changed the formula to one where some teams felt the engine should not make a difference.
When F1 historically have always had teams win with the best engines....Williams Renault, McLaren Honda, McLaren Mercedes, Williams Honda, McLaren Tag, Brabham BMW, Williams Ford and so on and so forth.
Beyond even that, it seems nonsensical to implement restrictions on the amount of energy that can be recuperated.
A maximum of 4MJ per lap can be transferred from the ES to the MGU-K (and then in turn to the drivetrain).
A maximum of 2MJ per lap can be transferred from the MGU-K to the ES.
The message is contrived.
We want F1 to be green, but only to a maximum of 2MJ per lap.
