Open top menu
21 Nov 2015


The FIA are inviting tender applications for an 'alternative engine' for F1 from 2017.  The specification of which is up to 2500cc with 6 cylinders in a V configuration, supplemented by up to two turbochargers.  The specifics surrounding fuel supply, ie common rail or direct injection, fuel flow and/or fuel weight limits aren't known at this time but it is believed as long as the cost and power objectives (8 million per season and 670kw, roughly 860bhp) are achieved it does not matter how the fuel is delivered.  Furthermore, the engine won't be required to have KERS/ERS.

The FIA are specifically targeting a new 'independant' manufacturer, stating:

"C. The candidate declares to be entirely independent of a major car manufacturer."

This rules out the current crop of engine manufacturers switching, making the likes of Ilmor, Mechachrome, AER and Cosworth the front runners.  (It's believed that Cosworth have ruled themselves out whilst Ilmor and AER have applied)

I do fear for these manufacturers though, as just like the budget cap proposed split regulations of 2009/2010, there is a distinct wiff of foul play.  Firstly, the FIA proposed that the current engine manufacturers reduce their costs, in order to level the playing field.  It was suggested that 12m be a 'fair' maximum figure for the hybrid units which currently run to somewhere in the region of 15-20m, depending on supplier.  However, Ferrari chose to use their veto, blocking any such move, something supported by Mercedes who both know that at the current rate of development and money already invested isn't enough to recoup their costs.  Afterall, why should the manufacturers support the costs of all? when their initial investment plans scheduled til 2019 is a stable model.  Secondly, who is suggesting the powerunits are too expensive? and why are they in F1 in the first place if they can't do simple arithmetic?  They knew what was coming....

I'll agree in comparison to the 7-8m per season the teams paid for the V8's the hybrid units do seem expensive.  However, the same was said when F1 moved from the V10 to the V8 and even then Bernie wasn't happy (This article always springs to mind: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/49650)  Although we are still light on cost information for the V10 (I'll look into that) suffice to say the jump to the V8 was fairly significant but, just like the move to a V6T it was one of necessity in terms of relevance.

Now I do find myself struggling with this one but I do agree, at least on some level, with Bernie that they are a little expensive, especially if we look at it inline with economic increases in our own lives.  Forget the cost of commodity items like that tin of beans down at the supermarket lets use a Volkswagen Golf GTi as our benchmark...

2006 - GTI (3dr) - £20,360

2015 - GTI (3dr) - £27,135

That's a 33.28% increase in 9 years, granted it is in a market that is now flooded with GTi wannabes, which perhaps if it was still the only product in its class would likely have risen a little more, considering the likes of the Focus RS are over 30k.

If we use that calculation the current Powerunits should be somewhere between 10-12m, the kind of figure Jean and Bernie wanted to impose on Ferrari, Mercedes, Renault and Honda.  Now whilst I can agree with JT and BE I also find some further issues. Firstly dictating the cost of something 2 years into its production is preposterous, there needs to be a way for the manufacturers to recoup their costs, especially as the costs at the beginning of the regulations are higher due to the sliding development scale.
Secondly, some of the costs we see banded around aren't just for the powerunits, these are complete package prices, lest we forget if you buy from Ferrari you get their powerunit, gearbox and suspension, a considerable saving on the production of your own.  Williams, Lotus, Red Bull, Toro Rosso and McLaren all buck this trend producing their own components and will sell their products to others.  Manor's move to Mercedes powerunits next season sees them enter a partnership with Williams, with the latter providing their gearbox and suspension.  Whilst in recent seasons Red Bull Technology provided Caterham with theirs and Force India used McLaren gearboxes and suspension.

For the 2016 season it will most likely look like this:

Constructor PU Supply Gearbox



Mercedes AMGF1 Mercedes HPP Mercedes AMGF1
Scuderia Ferrari Ferrari Ferrari
Williams Racing Mercedes HPP Williams Racing
Red Bull Racing Renault (Unbranded) Red Bull Technology
Force India Mercedes HPP Mercedes AMGF1
McLaren Honda McLaren
Toro Rosso Ferrari (2015 PU) Red Bull Technology
Sauber Ferrari Ferrari
Lotus Renault Lotus
Manor F1 Mercedes HPP Williams Racing
Haas F1 Ferrari Ferrari

The question then arises IF we end up with an 'alternative engine' what specification gearbox will they be using? Still an 8 speed? or without ERS will they be allowed to use a 6 or 7 speed?  But the most important question is, who will be building it? Of course the complexities of it are minimised compared with building an engine/powerunit but it still requires R&D, something that has to be paid for in advance of being recouped.  For example the Ilmor/Cheverolet engine that is believed to form a basis for the Ilmor engine that will be presented to the FIA is mated to a 6 speed X-Trac gearbox.

Moving back to my main point, who is going to buy this 'alternative engine'? It may be cheaper but will it be able to hold a candle to the development curve of the hybrid units?  How will it be homologated? Will the new manufacturer be prepared to put their own money on the line to chase performance?

In the case of who will buy it lets take a look at the grid, Mercedes, Ferrari, Renault and Honda will all have 'works' teams going into 2017.  Mercedes HPP currently power Williams Racing, Force India and Manor F1.  Manor F1 a team that really need some financial stability may have enjoyed the cost savings from the 'alternative engine' but have just signed a long term deal with Mercedes.  Force India are another that have hinted for some time now that costs are a sticking point for them, however they won't want to give up performance and are currently in the throes of trying to align themselves with a Mercedes partner: Aston Martin.  Williams are a possibility, they have over the last decade made several engine changes to reposition themselves, however, with Toto Wolff still owning shares in the team (although with Lance Stroll joining Williams as a development driver, talk is his father Lawrence may look at taking those shares) it might be a difficult board meeting.  Furthermore, the team has enjoyed considerable success over the last two seasons and enticed some interesting sponsors along the way, further fortifying the reason to stay put.
Sauber are with Ferrari because they offer a level of stability that they desire, with a switch to the alternative engine requiring them to either purchase or develop their own powertrain.  Haas has entered F1 with the express intention of building the chassis and being supplied the powerunit / powertrain.  Furthermore, they've enjoyed quite a unique relationship with Ferrari on their entrance to the sport and so I cannot see them moving anytime soon.
Lotus will become Renault and as such won't be looking at the alternative engine, just as McLaren are committed to Honda.

This leaves us with the Red Bull teams, out of favour at Renault, Red Bull are tempted to splinter off with their own Renault based hybrid unit, making them the perfect candidate, as they build their own gearboxes in any case.  Furthermore, as they have Toro Rosso it would give the new engine supplier two teams to work with and the opportunity to recoup/help with development costs.  This is a major issue for any none automotive backed supplier, as proved by Cosworth during the latter stages of the V8 era.  Seen as an alternative option they supplied the new teams: Virgin Racing, HRT and Lotus Racing, which as we know, one folded early on and the other two changed names.  Meanwhile as Lotus Racing became Cateram via Team Lotus they also negotiated a deal to use Renault V8's / RBT powertrains leaving just Marussia nee Virgin Racing with the Cosworth.  This put a huge strain on both Cosworth and Marussia who were now left to bear the cost of developing concepts run by the 'big three' Renault, Ferrari and Mercedes, something that put them at a clear disadvantage, as others ran more complex EBD and then 'Coanda exhaust' solutions.

Whilst I don't have a problem with the use of two powerunits in F1 (as it just gives me more to explain ;)) I do foresee plenty of issues in terms of their equivalence.  Firstly, we have a major issue in terms of weight, the hybrids are already 60kg's heavier than their predecessors, which is part of the issue in terms of the racing we are seeing.  Add to that they were also KERS powered, with systems weighing in around 40kg's and you're suddenly looking at a 100kg deficit.   You can argue that these new V6 twin turbos are going to be considerably thirstier than the hybrids which will mean carrying more fuel, but as know that is only a starting target and will burn off during the race.  How about we chuck some ballast on there I can hear you say, that's all well and good but that can be used to improve performance and in that quantity you'd have to get pretty specific in terms of its placement.  On top of this we have the dynamic performance of one of the most critical control elements in any racing series: tyres.  Will Pirelli be asked to supply the teams running the alternative engine a different tyre? I doubt it, which due to the differing loadings could also offer up some intriguing results.

As usual I've circled around the subject and we are back at the start, who is going to buy the 'alternative engine'? There are only a handful of candidates: Red Bull, Toro Rosso, Force India if their Aston Martin deal falls through and they are actually out of contract, Sauber if they fancy a punt at saving money and improving performance, afterall they could always buy a Red Bull powertrain and lastly McLaren, if their 2016 campaign is as poor as this one they may cut their losses, I'd doubt it but it remains a possibility.  The other problem is what happens if the alternative engine proves to offer a substantial gain over the hybrids? You've just alienated the core of Formula One...


As an aside, I want to get this off my chest but it doesn't really fit in with the rest of the article.  The powerunits ARE NOT FROZEN, even though it seems many believe that to be the case.  I'm sick of seeing comments about this, suggesting that no-one can ever catch up to Mercedes when there is actually a way of catching up that the V8 format didn't have.  The V8's were homologated, unable to be changed unless it was deemed to either save money on manufacturing costs or rectify a safety issue, the problem is the V8's were rudimentary in comparison to the V6T's.  As such the scope to create performance comes from various facets, requiring development in every element... 
The homologation matrix employed in F1 since 2014 offers manufacturers the chance to make up ground they have already lost, although it clearly allows Mercedes to make improvements too.  This year the token deployment system also allowed manufacturers to develop their powerunits throughout the season, something that may be allowed during 2016 too and something we haven't seen in F1 for a decade.  The homologation matrix was drawn up in co-operation with the engine manufacturers to allow a sliding scale of development over a 5 year period, with the window to find performance closing year-on-year.  An equitable solution IMO, especially seeing as we have seen how Ferrari have been able to use this to close the gap already.  IF you want to see the gap narrowed Renault and Honda have to deploy more resources and spend more money, put simply that is how Mercedes and Ferrari have found themselves in the position they hold.
Tagged

9 comments:

  1. Cosworth has confirmed that they aren't bidding on the engine contract.

    http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/cosworth-rules-out-applying-for-f1-engine-tender/?v=2&s=1&q=cosworth

    ReplyDelete
  2. I don't know if you're aware of it but NONE of the customer teams are running the upgraded PUs .. only the "factory" teams. So you pays your 20 mil and then get outfoxed by the mfr teams. There is nothing about that that is fair in the least.

    Then take the case of Red Bull .. a team good enough that they make the factory teams fearful.

    This is a step in the right direction. It has become clear that no matter what they say NONE of the factory teams have any interest in the health of F1 .. only winning races. They have far too much control over the sport at the moment.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's a little unfair as the homologation regulations are essentially broken this season, something I've said on several occasions would lead to the situation we are at whereby the works teams get an advantage over the customer teams. In fairness to Merc they originally planned to throw away their 7 tokens at the start of the season and have deployed them to assist with the design of the 2016 PU something that'll be advantageous to the customer teams next year and has actually hindered Merc since their deployment (although they did it to stay within their usage allocation they could have just took a penalty in the last few races).
      In terms of Sauber they had the option but decided not to run the updates as it would have had an impact of some other areas of the chassis, which they couldn't afford. And then we get to Renault and Honda both of which have had a mare this season, with the former planning to spend 11 tokens in Brazil and still only spent 7 as the turbo wasn't ready, compounding Ricciardo's misery as they should be run together..
      Aside from Brawn who's won a title in the last 25 years without full manufacturer support?... It's essential but it just appears moreso now because of how the Powerunits are explained and the amount of laptime from the chassis we are told has lessened, which isn't the case..

      I'll agree that things need to change but ask Williams if they'd rather have this V6T or the V8 Cosworth they doped around with a few years ago... Customer teams can beat the works teams, they just don't have the budget for it.

      Delete
    2. Sorry for replying to my own post but there is no reply button for your reply post. As I understand it the token system is back for 2016 so again the mfr teams will eventually be running revised PUs while their paying customers are left with the initial release. I was not aware that Sauber had a chance to run the new spec and turned it down, but then again, just like Manor landing a Merc PU deal for next year vs RB, Merc are being more generous with the teams it knows won't be at the front of the grid. What about Williams? No upgraded PUs for them. I guess they are just too close to the front.

      The Brawn case is not related to PUs at all .. a simple aero cheat written into the rules by Ross Brawn himself and kept secret for his own team. That is as dirty as it gets in F1.

      I guess you could argue that RB had full mfr support with Renault and certainly in the blown exhaust years they did because Newey led the way. Before that they were just a Renault customer and they have always paid full tilt for their engines/PUs. I would consider them a customer team.

      If you step back past the Schumi/Ferrari years lots of teams won races without mfr engine support .. that is the way F1 should strive for things to be.

      The FIA has made a critical mistake in deciding that F1 needs to be a technological leader for production cars. They need to reverse that error and bring back the racing so that drivers race drivers rather than factories races factories. That's my opinion, and thankfully others recognize that as well.

      Delete
  3. Oh BTW, factory teams are NOT the core of F1. F1 is maintained on the backs of the independent teams that fill the grid year in and year out. Factory teams come and go.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Like it or not they are the core at the moment, granted this ebbs and flows over time but without their support ATM F1 would be a shadow of what it is. It relies on their brands as much as they rely on it, especially as FOM do the bare minimum in terms of marketing they can get away with, leaving it to the broadcasters, sponsors and circuit promoters who actually paying to be there in the first place... The whole economic pyramid of F1 is broken...

      Delete
  4. Horner stated quotes of £30m+ for a year's supply as being ludicrous. This works out to 30/(20x2) = £750K per 'engine weekend' which frankly, at the top level, doesn't seem that much (relative to the sums washing around the sport).

    ReplyDelete
  5. http://www.aerltd.com/aer-registers-interest-with-fia-as-2017-f1-budget-engine-supplier/

    It looks like AER Illien financed by Red Bul have thrown their hats in the ring. So there will be at least two customers for it in 2017

    ReplyDelete
  6. I do not think that there ever was a "pure racing" it always ends up in some kind of "I wish I can place myself in a superior position over the other guys, and will do anything to achieve that" line of thinking. From dads throwing punches at kart races, to biggest teams rigging the sport to suit their philosophy....in any sport, any venue. How does one limits that, simple, eliminate the money....of course, then the big shots walk, and we are left with the guys using hammers, and barn style corrugated sheets of metal to make cars. So the manufacturers will stay, as long as they have interest. We've seen BMW and Toyota come and go, after spending amazing amount of money, and no championship (Toyota in fact was at the center of critic for throwing silly amounts just to win, much like RB, but everyone seems to forget it)....true small teams are the half of the grid, but to be realistic, at least in the last years, not a very interesting half. So will the new engine give them the edge against the Big Teams? Probably not, but it would mean cheaper racing for them, so they might stay, and that is, I think, exactly what Bernie and Todt want, to keep them....they know who will continue to win next 10 years (and I mean championships, not just races), with minor exceptions, manufacturers teams, somehow, I do not think that even McLaren will be serious contender for the title before Honda loses interest (although with Honda you never know, there some face-saving issues there, and not just from the last year), so what FOM and FIA have to worry about is "what happens when Mercedes decides it had enough", as it surely will, because it is in the Sport just for Promotion and Market position, not just for the Sport sake....what will happen when all of them go. That leaves only three truly racing teams, Ferrari, McLaren and Williams....will this be enough....but I digress...bring the separate engine, but I think it is a dead end.....Matt explained it quite nicely...sorry for being a bore...:)

    ReplyDelete

Whilst I'm trying to keep atop of the blog you may have noticed of late that there is less content appearing. For those of you that haven't realised, most of my work has now been moved over to Motorsport.com where I'm working with Giorgio Piola.

I'm still doing the technical image gallery for each GP with the continued support of friend of the site Sutton Images. However, as always my time is limited and so this might not be updated as quickly as it once was, so keep checking back.

As some of you may have found out already I'm also working with the Missed Apex crew on their podcast from time-to-time, either doing race reviews or dedicated 'Tech Time' shows.

I've embedded the latest version of the podcast below and will update this a frequently as I appear. However, please head over to Itunes if you want it to appear in your player when episodes are available. The show is great to work on and has a great lineup of 'regulars' but has also enticed some bigger names recently too, with Will Buxton and Bradley Philpot on shows during the summer break.


Total Pageviews