3 Engine Regulation

[swarren7]

If all the manufactures/teams are against the new 2018 rule of only 3 engines for the season I propose the following: All the team principals get together and decide on a specific race and every car from each team change all the engine components at the same time after qualifying. In this scenario, all the teams would be penalized the same so the qualifying order wouldn't change and they would all gain an extra engine for the season. Thoughts?

[Jolle]

If all the manufactures/teams are against the new 2018 rule of only 3 engines for the season I propose the following: All the team principals get together and decide on a specific race and every car from each team change all the engine components at the same time after qualifying. In this scenario, all the teams would be penalized the same so the qualifying order wouldn't change and they would all gain an extra engine for the season. Thoughts?

are they?

The rules, especially rules like these come from the meetings that the FIA has with the teams/manufacturers.
Don't make this forum in a "everything is terrible, yesterday was better" grumpy old man style.

[Zynerji]

One has to wonder if the engine rule was just a 'I can do better than you' pissing match that just went too far.

Let's see if anyone makes it to the end on 3. Personally, I'd aim for a penalty late for the fresh engine, as if the championships are close, the team on its third, dialed back engine would be hugely disadvantaged if someone took a new engine in Japan as a surprise, planned upgrade.

[marmer]

If all the manufactures/teams are against the new 2018 rule of only 3 engines for the season I propose the following: All the team principals get together and decide on a specific race and every car from each team change all the engine components at the same time after qualifying. In this scenario, all the teams would be penalized the same so the qualifying order wouldn't change and they would all gain an extra engine for the season. Thoughts?

they are almost all in sync for the first upgrade in Barcelona. but teams are ultimately out for themselves. if you had marginal engine but your upgrade was ready why would you wait just because of a gentleman's agreement.

[J.A.W.]

Seems to me - to be yet another counter-productive effect of the current (ill-considered) 'economy run' formula.

False economy - due to 'unforseen consequences' ( by purblind management-type regulation promulgators),
by which the unit cost of each engine goes up - in proportion to its (unrealistic) power VS longevity requirement.

[Just_a_fan]

One has to wonder if the engine rule was just a 'I can do better than you' pissing match that just went too far.

Motorsport could almost be defined as "I can do better than you". These are competitive people trying to outdo each other. Where's the surprise?

[ENGINE TUNER]

Seems to me - to be yet another counter-productive effect of the current (ill-considered) 'economy run' formula.

False economy - due to 'unforseen consequences' ( by purblind management-type regulation promulgators),
by which the unit cost of each engine goes up - in proportion to its (unrealistic) power VS longevity requirement.

No "false economy" at all, the customer teams wanted cheaper lease rates(and they got it), the manufacturers agreed to do so by lowering the number of PUs for the year, everyone(that matters) is happy, except for some fans.

[zac510]

All the team principals get together and decide

That'd have been a great April Fools joke

[J.A.W.]

Seems to me - to be yet another counter-productive effect of the current (ill-considered) 'economy run' formula.

False economy - due to 'unforseen consequences' ( by purblind management-type regulation promulgators),
by which the unit cost of each engine goes up - in proportion to its (unrealistic) power VS longevity requirement.

No "false economy" at all, the customer teams wanted cheaper lease rates(and they got it), the manufacturers agreed to do so by lowering the number of PUs for the year, everyone(that matters) is happy, except for some fans.

Well, we'll see about that, as things actually pan-out, in competition - over the course of the season, won't we...

[FastFreddy]

So knowing about zero about this three engine rule and F1 rules in general, I need to ask what may be a silly question. Are these three engines sealed, then run them till they fail or performance declines until they are uncompetitive, basically all year, or do these units get maintenance between races?

FastFreddy

[Zynerji]

So knowing about zero about this three engine rule and F1 rules in general, I need to ask what may be a silly question. Are these three engines sealed, then run them till they fail or performance declines until they are uncompetitive, basically all year, or do these units get maintenance between races?

FastFreddy

One would think, since cost cutting was the excuse for these engine rules, that basic rebuilds would be allowed between events, but unfortunately it is not as that would make way too much sense.

[astracrazy]

I personally hate the 3 engine rule. I think 4 was reasonable.

Seems to me - to be yet another counter-productive effect of the current (ill-considered) 'economy run' formula.

False economy - due to 'unforseen consequences' ( by purblind management-type regulation promulgators),
by which the unit cost of each engine goes up - in proportion to its (unrealistic) power VS longevity requirement.

No "false economy" at all, the customer teams wanted cheaper lease rates(and they got it), the manufacturers agreed to do so by lowering the number of PUs for the year, everyone(that matters) is happy, except for some fans.

If F1 thinks that it is 'saving money' by only letting teams replace engines 3 times then they are wrong. Manufactures will still spend the same on improvements for the engine, if not more because the margin for error is smaller and the need improvement for each version is bigger - works teams would be cutting there nose off to spite there face if they didn't.

Personally the rule of 4 and the price customer teams were paying should have stayed as it was, no one was forcing anyone to take a 4th engine if the cost bothered them.

[zac510]

So knowing about zero about this three engine rule and F1 rules in general, I need to ask what may be a silly question. Are these three engines sealed, then run them till they fail or performance declines until they are uncompetitive, basically all year, or do these units get maintenance between races?

FastFreddy

One would think, since cost cutting was the excuse for these engine rules, that basic rebuilds would be allowed between events, but unfortunately it is not as that would make way too much sense.

It doesn't make sense to me. Allowing 'basic rebuilds' would just be another rule ripe for exploitation and stretching of the rules. You can't write an F1 rule with a discretionary term like 'basic'.

[Zynerji]

So knowing about zero about this three engine rule and F1 rules in general, I need to ask what may be a silly question. Are these three engines sealed, then run them till they fail or performance declines until they are uncompetitive, basically all year, or do these units get maintenance between races?

FastFreddy

One would think, since cost cutting was the excuse for these engine rules, that basic rebuilds would be allowed between events, but unfortunately it is not as that would make way too much sense.

It doesn't make sense to me. Allowing 'basic rebuilds' would just be another rule ripe for exploitation and stretching of the rules. You can't write an F1 rule with a discretionary term like 'basic'.

Gaskets, bearings, piston rings and a rehone.

Basic enough to police? They build the entire chassis under FIA supervision, they can rebuild an ICE the same way.

[zac510]

One would think, since cost cutting was the excuse for these engine rules, that basic rebuilds would be allowed between events, but unfortunately it is not as that would make way too much sense.

It doesn't make sense to me. Allowing 'basic rebuilds' would just be another rule ripe for exploitation and stretching of the rules. You can't write an F1 rule with a discretionary term like 'basic'.

Gaskets, bearings, piston rings and a rehone.

Basic enough to police? They build the entire chassis under FIA supervision, they can rebuild an ICE the same way.

But then what's more basic than not having to police it at all?
I know we'd get >7 races per engine and perhaps less power degradation between races, however that doesn't seem to be that much of an attraction to me.