Porsche to return?

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

VAG-TAG badged engine?

Who hasn't been involved in the discussion then, it sounds like the rooms have been quite busy?

Me, at least not for a while. I read the Autosport article and at this juncture it's just speculation at the moment but I will continue to follow this with interest.

[F1Guy]

Originally Posted by ScotsBrutesFan

Interestingly, in a Sky interview, Christian Horner mentioned that Lamborghini (also part of VAG with Porsche), had been in presumably the same or similar meetings..

Yes that's correct. It was some guy named Stefano Domenicali.

Other's representing Audi, Aston Martin, Porsche and Cosworth have at some stage attended the future engine discussions. Rumour has it Ford and Toyota have expressed their interest with Ross Brawn, but have never attended the meetings, or said much more than that they could be interested.

[crmalcolm]

Zytek and magneti marelli have also attended talks.

[gert]

Maybe the question should be: who has not attended those meetings or made clear they are not interested

[F1Guy]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Zytek and magneti marelli have also attended talks.

Yes. But I thought we were discussing possible F1 engine manufacturers for 2021? Not current component suppliers??

Unless this is inside information - and Zytek and Magneti Marelli are planning to build F1 engines for 2021?

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by F1Guy

Yes. But I thought we were discussing possible F1 engine manufacturers for 2021? Not current component suppliers??

Unless this is inside information - and Zytek and Magneti Marelli are planning to build F1 engines for 2021?

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/F1-aston-martin-cosworth-engine-meeting-926708/

' formal meeting [of the F1 power unit working group] was held on Monday, with Aston Martin, Cosworth, Zytek and Magneti Marelli attending for the first time.'

I guess I missed the part that explained which elements of the PU this thread was restricted to?

[Richard C]

Some suppliers are major partners with the manufacturers. It makes sense for them to be involved. However, when it comes time for F1 to accumulate and rank the feedback, clearly some voices will be heard louder than others.

Richard

[crmalcolm]

An 'insider'* viewpoint:

This might be posturing to strengthen its hand in ongoing negotiations over the type of engine, of which it is integral (along with current suppliers Ferrari, Honda, Mercedes and Renault, and other outliers like Alfa Romeo, Aston Martin, Audi, Cosworth, Ilmor and Zytek).















* the motorsport.com insider newsletter

[knighty]

I was just thinking which F1 team has the best relations with Porsche?.......I heard they used Williams wind-tunnel extensively to develop their LMP1 car.....and they used Williams Engineering flywheel-hybrid KERS system in the Porsche GT3 car as a demonstrator, then later in the Audi LMP1 for a few seasons.......so I'd put a bet on Williams getting a Porsche F1 motor deal

Failing that it would be very easy for Porsche to buy the whole Sauber outfit and turn it into a complete Porsche F1 factory effort

will be interesting to see what happens.....

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by knighty

I was just thinking which F1 team has the best relations with Porsche?.......I heard they used Williams wind-tunnel extensively to develop their LMP1 car.....and they used Williams Engineering flywheel-hybrid KERS system in the Porsche GT3 car as a demonstrator, then later in the Audi LMP1 for a few seasons.......so I'd put a bet on Williams getting a Porsche F1 motor deal

Failing that it would be very easy for Porsche to buy the whole Sauber outfit and turn it into a complete Porsche F1 factory effort

will be interesting to see what happens.....

Joe Saward suggested Williams was the ideal place for Porsche back in August too, adding that Porsche also have links with Martini.... https://www.motorsportweek.com/news/id/15647

[GTRMagic]

Porsche To Buy Red Bull Racing??

The concept seems sound.. some of the details perhaps not..

Potsie makes a comeback to F1 proper with his old team?

[S griffin]

With McLaren now also getting Renault, I wouldn't rule it out

[chunder]

I think this is not likely.

My feeling is either a AMR funded Prodrive effort, unlikely

Or a Aston branded Merc, seeing as they now provide AM engines for some models.

[Articus]

Mercedes will not be supplying engines to Red Bull ever! Mercedes is happy to supply Force India and Williams which are second tier teams which pose no threat.

[coppice]

I can't get over excited as the rules are so prescriptive that essentially the same engine is being made by all F1 suppliers. Yes , Honda didn't read the instructions properly but there is little room for genuine innovation. And if we are going to be dropping some of the heavy , expensive and complex energy recovery nonsense we should have a more laissez faire approach - so if Porsche want to do a Flat 4 1.6 turbo and Merc a V8 one they should be allowed to do so.

[hondafan37]

Originally Posted by coppice

I can't get over excited as the rules are so prescriptive that essentially the same engine is being made by all F1 suppliers. Yes , Honda didn't read the instructions properly but there is little room for genuine innovation. And if we are going to be dropping some of the heavy , expensive and complex energy recovery nonsense we should have a more laissez faire approach - so if Porsche want to do a Flat 4 1.6 turbo and Merc a V8 one they should be allowed to do so.

I think like you, a more free regulation would be better.
Even today with a freer regulation we could have the Porsche V4 of LMP1 in the McLaren or the Red Bull.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by coppice

I can't get over excited as the rules are so prescriptive that essentially the same engine is being made by all F1 suppliers. Yes , Honda didn't read the instructions properly but there is little room for genuine innovation. And if we are going to be dropping some of the heavy , expensive and complex energy recovery nonsense we should have a more laissez faire approach - so if Porsche want to do a Flat 4 1.6 turbo and Merc a V8 one they should be allowed to do so.

Long gone are the days when engines had different configurations. It woukd be great if they did but I don't see it ever happening again. The argument for having a 'spec' engine is to keep costs down.

[hondafan37]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Long gone are the days when engines had different configurations. It woukd be great if they did but I don't see it ever happening again. The argument for having a 'spec' engine is to keep costs down.

And we all know that this is not true. Rules are more and more limitid over the time, but budgets are getting higher every year.
This is happening because the best teams spend huge amounts of money in small pieces and details imperceptible to most of us and are what make the difference.
Thus, no matter how much you limit the rules budgets are always going to increase, and the bad thing about all this is that we lose of the technical variety and the different solutions that the engineers could bring with more open rules.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by coppice

I can't get over excited as the rules are so prescriptive that essentially the same engine is being made by all F1 suppliers. Yes , Honda didn't read the instructions properly but there is little room for genuine innovation. And if we are going to be dropping some of the heavy , expensive and complex energy recovery nonsense we should have a more laissez faire approach - so if Porsche want to do a Flat 4 1.6 turbo and Merc a V8 one they should be allowed to do so.

I have to say, I can't disagree with this more. Particularly using the current Honda situation to make your point.

HUGE chunks of the current F1 power units are extremely prescriptive and prevent creativity and innovation. But in other areas (particularly with respect to the combustion process and more specifically lean burn efficiency) is pretty much open (some restrictions still exist). Honda's problem isn't that they "didn't read the instructions property", rather their failure is in an area of innovation and pure "secret sauce" closely held secrets. Honda (and to a degree until recently Ferrari and still Renault) lost the innovation race to Mercedes and are still trying to figure it out.

I have to get a bit of a chuckle around the "allowing people to innovate" will be the solution to F1's problems. The fact that Mercedes innovations have been so good that nobody else can really figure it out is a large part (other issues exist as well) of why we are where we are today (domination and lack of good racing).

What I think people like is innovation that is something they can touch and feel. Mid-engine cars, ground effects, wings, etc. Those are things that are visually different and people can wrap their mind around them and say "clever, I can see how that might work". But stuff like lean burn pre combustion chambers, flame jet ignition, and now the potential for burning the vapors from special oil additives in the engines to aid in combustion are just... too deep and technical for people to appreciate the cleverness, ingenuity and innovation it represents. It is just a black box that looks just like that other black box the other guy uses.

That is not saying I like the current situation or think we should have a spec solution for everything. I am just saying what you wish for is already here... to a degree.

Note: I feel anymore that all I do is post contrary opinions to other people's posts. I am feeling like I need to take a break from this forum as I don't want to just be "negative" all the time.

Richard

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by hondafan37

And we all know that this is not true. Rules are more and more limitid over the time, but budgets are getting higher every year.
This is happening because the best teams spend huge amounts of money in small pieces and details imperceptible to most of us and are what make the difference.
Thus, no matter how much you limit the rules budgets are always going to increase, and the bad thing about all this is that we lose of the technical variety and the different solutions that the engineers could bring with more open rules.

If that's not true, why did Max Mosely, when head of the FIA say this?

http://autoweek.com/article/car-news...ependent-teams

Also, earlier this year, why were cost cutting regulations approved, which included cost reduction for customer teams, who had complained the engines are too expensive?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/36172295

[hondafan37]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

If that's not true, why did Max Mosely, when head of the FIA say this?

http://autoweek.com/article/car-news...ependent-teams

Also, earlier this year, why were cost cutting regulations approved, which included cost reduction for customer teams, who had complained the engines are too expensive?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/36172295

Those are just statements for the press, there are lots of examples of those and in all categories but it never happens in reality.

[hondafan37]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

I have to say, I can't disagree with this more. Particularly using the current Honda situation to make your point.

HUGE chunks of the current F1 power units are extremely prescriptive and prevent creativity and innovation. But in other areas (particularly with respect to the combustion process and more specifically lean burn efficiency) is pretty much open (some restrictions still exist). Honda's problem isn't that they "didn't read the instructions property", rather their failure is in an area of innovation and pure "secret sauce" closely held secrets. Honda (and to a degree until recently Ferrari and still Renault) lost the innovation race to Mercedes and are still trying to figure it out.

I have to get a bit of a chuckle around the "allowing people to innovate" will be the solution to F1's problems. The fact that Mercedes innovations have been so good that nobody else can really figure it out is a large part (other issues exist as well) of why we are where we are today (domination and lack of good racing).

What I think people like is innovation that is something they can touch and feel. Mid-engine cars, ground effects, wings, etc. Those are things that are visually different and people can wrap their mind around them and say "clever, I can see how that might work". But stuff like lean burn pre combustion chambers, flame jet ignition, and now the potential for burning the vapors from special oil additives in the engines to aid in combustion are just... too deep and technical for people to appreciate the cleverness, ingenuity and innovation it represents. It is just a black box that looks just like that other black box the other guy uses.

That is not saying I like the current situation or think we should have a spec solution for everything. I am just saying what you wish for is already here... to a degree.

Note: I feel anymore that all I do is post contrary opinions to other people's posts. I am feeling like I need to take a break from this forum as I don't want to just be "negative" all the time.

Richard

If the innovations of Mercedes were so good why they were so afraid to lift the token system that did not allow the other brands to develop to catch up?

According to Lauda declarations Mercedes has been developing this engine since 2007.

Even if they really have so much advantage in the engine, what did they need to use the fourth engine in Spa with the controversial oil consumption limit of 1.2 liters when the rest of the grid can only use 0.9 in its fourth engine?

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by hondafan37

Those are just statements for the press, there are lots of examples of those and in all categories but it never happens in reality.

Indeed....

[coppice]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

I have to say, I can't disagree with this more. Particularly using the current Honda situation to make your point.

HUGE chunks of the current F1 power units are extremely prescriptive and prevent creativity and innovation. But in other areas (particularly with respect to the combustion process and more specifically lean burn efficiency) is pretty much open (some restrictions still exist). Honda's problem isn't that they "didn't read the instructions property", rather their failure is in an area of innovation and pure "secret sauce" closely held secrets. Honda (and to a degree until recently Ferrari and still Renault) lost the innovation race to Mercedes and are still trying to figure it out.

I have to get a bit of a chuckle around the "allowing people to innovate" will be the solution to F1's problems. The fact that Mercedes innovations have been so good that nobody else can really figure it out is a large part (other issues exist as well) of why we are where we are today (domination and lack of good racing).

What I think people like is innovation that is something they can touch and feel. Mid-engine cars, ground effects, wings, etc. Those are things that are visually different and people can wrap their mind around them and say "clever, I can see how that might work". But stuff like lean burn pre combustion chambers, flame jet ignition, and now the potential for burning the vapors from special oil additives in the engines to aid in combustion are just... too deep and technical for people to appreciate the cleverness, ingenuity and innovation it represents. It is just a black box that looks just like that other black box the other guy uses.

That is not saying I like the current situation or think we should have a spec solution for everything. I am just saying what you wish for is already here... to a degree.

Note: I feel anymore that all I do is post contrary opinions to other people's posts. I am feeling like I need to take a break from this forum as I don't want to just be "negative" all the time.

Richard

But the differences are tiny and unnoticeable to anybody watching or listening to a car go round the track . Having attended Grands Prix with V8s , V10s running together - and others with straight 4s, v6s and v8s - I find the one size fits all uniformity very dull .

Umm ...I was being tongue in cheek about Honda.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by hondafan37

If the innovations of Mercedes were so good why they were so afraid to lift the token system that did not allow the other brands to develop to catch up?

It's a competition. The simple answer is why should they help? Plus good innovation and the ability to keep that innovation a secret are two different things. Imagine if Mercedes had an extremely novel aero approach that produced a significant advantage. It might be very innovative, but at the same time potentially very visible and relatively easy to replicate. The Brawn double diffuser sort of fits that scenario.

The more complex answer is that at some point (after they have dominated for a period of time) they have to protect their investment by keeping the series viable by helping their competitors move forward. Mercedes has publicly said as much.

Originally Posted by hondafan37

According to Lauda declarations Mercedes has been developing this engine since 2007.

Not sure of the relevance to the discussion, but I would say this is just and example of someone out spending and getting ahead of the competition. It obviously worked for them. Mercedes could have equally dumped a ton of money on the project and not come up with a winning solution (ala Toyota F1).

Originally Posted by hondafan37

Even if they really have so much advantage in the engine, what did they need to use the fourth engine in Spa with the controversial oil consumption limit of 1.2 liters when the rest of the grid can only use 0.9 in its fourth engine?

I am aware of the oil burn issue. I am only slightly aware of the Spa issue you are talking about. My understanding is that "any" team that brought a new engine to Spa could use the higher burn rate for the duration of that engines life. Others just plan to introduce engines after Spa and will have to use the lower rate. If Mercedes was to have a rash of failures and would need to use a new engine, it would need to meet the new specs. Customer teams who planned to get engines after Spa are a bit screwed, but such is life as a customer team. It's not like they ever had equal equipment to begin with. I am not sure what point you are trying to make.

Again, I am not saying I like the current situation. Just saying that it is all examples of successful innovation by one team and the resulting impact on the other teams and the sport.

Richard