FORUMula1.com

[stonemonkey]

[
They are actually more likely to have continued with the F1 Kers stuff just to give their young engineers some target practice.

Maybe, maybe with every other part of the PU too, they had made the gearbox and diff much smaller and lighter with some out of the box thinking which might be part of what Ron was alluding to too.
Would there have been anything to stop them from actually building a car to this years specs to track test the PU?

[CookinFlat6]

Unlikely, as they would get more out of bench and sims than building an actual one off car that conforms exactly enough to be worth it. They would have stuck it into mules for sure, but at the end of the day they would have to start from scratch when mating it to the Mclaren chassis. The engine works etc, its just little issues that cannot be foreseen before hooking it up.
For example everyone knows that a V engine is harder than a straight or flat to make stable, because of the gravity working against the cylinder banks, but Renault still completely screwed up the amount of tolerance they allowed in last years engines for RBr resulting in near terminal vibrations within a certain frequency range, and it wasnt apparent on another customer chassis so the scope for fine tuning and 'debugging' the interface has gotta be big enough that no matter what mule the engine ran in theres likely to be a wordl of pain waiting for another fitting.
2 days is a result..as long as they turn up tomorrow and can max the engine on at least a couple of laps ( as long as Button also finds perfect balance)

[CookinFlat6]

Sounds like 6 titles in the bag for Merc.

A radical overhaul of the technical regulations looks certain to be delayed until 2017 following an F1 Commission vote on Tuesday in Geneva.
The commission met to discuss what should be changed and when. Opinion on which year the regulation changes should come into effect was split, with Red Bull and Mercedes known to be on opposing sides.
Whilst Red Bull are keen to see fewer aerodynamic restrictions, wider tyres and wider cars for 2016, Mercedes believes it would be best to delay the proposal until 2017, giving additional time to research exactly what affect the changes will have.
Tuesday's vote went in Mercedes favour and therefore the wholesale changes will likely come into effect at the same time as the proposed increase in engine output to 1000bhp, as well as the tender for a new tyre supplier which happens in 2017.
That means next year will see relatively stable regulations as any changes to the rules after March 1st requires unanimous support.
The next step for the commission is to begin drafting the new technical regulations for 2017. The changes are expected to have a dramatic impact on how the cars look and handle.
Ferrari are keen to see futuristic F1 cars when the rules are drawn up. The team released renders of a concept car on Tuesday which it hopes will influence the regulation makers when it comes to the initial drafting phase.

Ferrari will have to wait for 2017 for a new engine formula that will hopefully bring in V8s with basic Kers and unlimited fuel. But hold on, why would the the engine makers who say they only want kinetic/thermal ERS relevant to road cars collectively decided to keep things exactly as they are suddenly turn around and allow the 2017 regs to go backwards
Not sure Ferrari have thought this through, pretty pictures of their fantasy car tho

Its good we have finally concluded the arguments of the 2014 regs, I am sure even the h8rz and the muppets out there amongst fans and pundits can only marvel at the level of sublime political skills Merc have brought to bear during this victorious campaign. To think they actually offered MORE development tokens to the 2 losers at one point only to be rejected by the same ones having to ration development over 2015/2016 o have a chance in 2017

And the best thing of all is that now the whole ""appeal"" process has been completed, everyone, fans and teams can settle down to Regulations Stability for the next 3 years. And those who are not happy can finally stop boring us with ""what ifs"" and boycott F1 altogether

[racechick]

This is the Ferrari fantasy car.

image.jpg

[CookinFlat6]

They should have made a cartoon series to show how well the car goes on track

[racechick]

Oops. Just seen that you'd already posted the pic in another thread. Sorry about that.

[sagi58]

This was posted waaay back in November, 2014; but, I thought it was still pretty current and therefore relevant:

Why is Formula 1 in crisis?20 November 2014

...The money flowing out

Yet such inequality [in how monies are being paid out to the teams] is nothing new in F1. What has changed is the amount of money teams have to spend, simply to get themselves on the grid.

Under pressure from manufacturers who want racing technology to be relevant to the road cars they build, F1 introduced new hybrid engines this year featuring powerful electric batteries and energy recovery systems.

In technology terms it was a huge leap forward. Grand prix cars now use a third less fuel than they did last year.

But it also pushed up costs dramatically.

Teams that had been paying $10m a year for their engines suddenly had to find up to $25m.

At the same time, F1's smaller teams have been struggling to find money from other sources. While big players such as Ferrari, Red Bull and Mercedes have little trouble raising commercial sponsorship, the minnows of the grid have found life more difficult since the financial crisis.

According to Gerard Lopez, co-founder of investment firm Genii Capital and principal of the Lotus team, introducing the new engines at such a time was a big mistake.

"It was logical at the time to cut costs, and instead we have one of the biggest cost increases in the history of F1," he says. "It was a bit ridiculous in the economic climate."

Christian Sylt, editor of F1 financial research firm Formula Money, agrees: "A lot of people point the finger at the prize money distribution, saying that's the root cause of all F1's problems, but there's no evidence of that.

"It was the same situation last year and no-one went to the wall. What's different now is that teams are suddenly having to pay double for their engines." ...

[myownalias]

I have said for a long time now that the FIA are hypocrites in the way they run the sport, they say one thing about cost cutting, less testing, less engines to use etc, but then go an create a rule that drives cost of engines up 250%, it truly sounds like the FIA are in the pockets of the car makers because forcing this engine formula change is not what was best for the sport!

[sagi58]

The FIA are not the only hypocrits, are they?
Wasn't saving money the reason given for not lifting the engine freeze?
That's like selling someone a house they can't afford and then telling
them they can't do any necessary repairs on the house!

[myownalias]

I don't think it's quite the same thing as teams don't make engine mods themselves, the manufacturer makes the mods to the engine which they then sell to the teams.