2016 F1 Constructor tech info/development thread. (READ 1ST POST)Formula 1 

FutureF1
I think, unless some miracle occurs, Sauber F1 will be dead by 2018.
Click to expand...

Like the recent large-scale investment in them, you mean? I'm not sure what's so bad about the 2016 Ferrari engine either, it could be that with the new tyres the Sauber finds itself quite competitive.

FutureF1
There have been rumours that they'd be interested in Formula E. In my opinion, that's all they can do that will keep them somewhat competitive.
Click to expand...

As we've seen with Jaguar's entry finding success in Formula E seems to be something of a lottery. Worth a punt :)
 
Peter.
Surprised no one has posted this as yet.

http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/sauber-will-run-2016-spec-ferrari-engines-next-year-835714/

Talk about being over before it has even began. Think Torro Rosso have shown everyone already that this is not ideal. At least in the case of Toro Rosso they can make a great chassis rather than the moving ballast chicanes Sauber have been churning out for years now.
Click to expand...

Saw it earlier in the news just didn't care. I think the article I was going to post that was more interesting is Allison not signing back on with Renault because he saw a lack of leadership in their group. Interesting that he may not even join with anyone next year. I'm sure he has plenty in the bank, too bad about his personal life, hope him the best.

Pete05
You're optimistic. I'll be amazed if they're on the grid next year.
Click to expand...

Why they just got a giant cash influx. I mean one of too little too late but they're fine for next year. I think they're still trying to cut financial corners. Monisha is a gambling addict that doesn't know when to leave the table, she's negative xxxx amount of money yet still goes all in with this kind of thing.
 
LMSCorvetteGT2
Saw it earlier in the news just didn't care. I think the article I was going to post that was more interesting is Allison not signing back on with Renault because he saw a lack of leadership in their group. Interesting that he may not even join with anyone next year. I'm sure he has plenty in the bank, too bad about his personal life, hope him the best.



Why they just got a giant cash influx. I mean one of too little too late but they're fine for next year. I think they're still trying to cut financial corners. Monisha is a gambling addict that doesn't know when to leave the table, she's negative xxxx amount of money yet still goes all in with this kind of thing.
Click to expand...
Time will tell I guess.
 
I guess Sauber will be pinning their hopes on the way the 2017 regulations move the championship from an engine-dependent series to an aero-dependent one.
 
prisonermonkeys
I guess Sauber will be pinning their hopes on the way the 2017 regulations move the championship from an engine-dependent series to an aero-dependent one.
Click to expand...

That's the idea, but I don't see how anyone figures there wont be a bigger engine war now that the tokens are gone and free development has been allowed.
 
mustafur
It will still be an Engine dependant formula, but I suspect it won't be as much in the first year.

These engines are no where near as close as the V8s were.
Click to expand...

What do you mean "the V8s", I agree with most of what you've said. Any real gains found happened a year or two ago, now it's just perfecting them or changing to different manufactures for a bit more power here and there. Other than that I still see it as a critical game where many things can happen. It will be bad and the entire idea is silly when cost control is still an echo in the background.
 
mustafur
The previous engine formula obviously, even in 2006 when it was full open formula the difference wasn't large, look at Monza qualifying for example.
Click to expand...

It wasn't obvious other than yeah you're talking about V8s, what about them is what I was obviously getting at.

I'd say 2014 was still the worse with teams actively having massive issues getting the stuff to work and quali differences. I'm not saying that there are going to be big differences in power. My post quite clearly since this one have verified my belief is of increased cost concerns not power difference concerns.
 
There's always cost cutting talk followed by actions that completely go against it. The V8s and the engine freeze was the last thing F1 did with that in mind. Outlawing blown diffusers was an attempt to bring Red Bull down, dressed up as a 'cost cutting' measure.

Forcing every team to develop and implement expensive ERS systems and these new engines was the polar opposite of cost cutting. Turning F1 into an aerodynamic race again to give everyone a chance to topple Mercedes is also not a cost cutting measure, even if most people approve of it for the good of the sport.

Cost cutting talk is brought up just to pretend that they're helping the small teams out, but it's a complete farce.

Ssubers are screwed either way. The gap between a 2016 unit and 2017 might not have been that big considering diminishing returns on the engine upgraded, but that's thrown out the window when you consider the free development next year. Ssubers have also not made a good aero package in about 4 years now. They're lagging behind Force India and Torro Rosso, when it looked like they were getting ahead of then. They could very well be behind Manor next year.
 
Peter.
There's always cost cutting talk followed by actions that completely go against it. The V8s and the engine freeze was the last thing F1 did with that in mind. Outlawing blown diffusers was an attempt to bring Red Bull down, dressed up as a 'cost cutting' measure.
Click to expand...

Not exactly aero took off and there was still a war between tire manufactures that created cost problems.

Forcing every team to develop and implement expensive ERS systems and these new engines was the polar opposite of cost cutting. Turning F1 into an aerodynamic race again to give everyone a chance to topple Mercedes is also not a cost cutting measure, even if most people approve of it for the good of the sport.
Click to expand...

Eh it's a far bigger cost cutting measure then you give it credit as, I don't fully disagree with you, but even less testing times, less CFD and wind tunnel running and data gathering means less money spent. The ERS and KERS systems have made the most efficient GP cars ever and race cars only rivaled by those in LMP. And technology that is usable in the real world that wasn't prior. However, yes if you're a small team with no real obligation to a supply side off the track, why do you care especially when costs go up.

Cost cutting talk is brought up just to pretend that they're helping the small teams out, but it's a complete farce.

Ssubers are screwed either way. The gap between a 2016 unit and 2017 might not have been that big considering diminishing returns on the engine upgraded, but that's thrown out the window when you consider the free development next year. Ssubers have also not made a good aero package in about 4 years now. They're lagging behind Force India and Torro Rosso, when it looked like they were getting ahead of then. They could very well be behind Manor next year.
Click to expand...

They're behind manor this year...that's enough. I don't fully accept the idea that cutting costs is a false pretense, for the good of the sport and future expansion it would have to somewhat exist or F1 will just end up being realistically five teams (six with toro rosso). And may even dwindle further so clearly there are measures, but not very consistent ones.
 
Hopefully when liberty media get to sort the next concorde agreement they can give all teams a Base salary with performance bonus so all teams have enough money to go testing, cost cutting nonsense doesn't work the big teams are hiring more people then they ever have and the smaller teams are just dying off.
 
mustafur
Hopefully when liberty media get to sort the next concorde agreement they can give all teams a Base salary with performance bonus so all teams have enough money to go testing, cost cutting nonsense doesn't work the big teams are hiring more people then they ever have and the smaller teams are just dying off.
Click to expand...
They want to give teams the opportunity to purchase a stake in the sport itself, so they get a cut of all the income it generates.
 
prisonermonkeys
They want to give teams the opportunity to purchase a stake in the sport itself, so they get a cut of all the income it generates.
Click to expand...
It's the same thing as the Premier league, the base salary is the stake they have and the performance bonus goes on top.
 
mustafur
Hopefully when liberty media get to sort the next concorde agreement they can give all teams a Base salary with performance bonus so all teams have enough money to go testing, cost cutting nonsense doesn't work the big teams are hiring more people then they ever have and the smaller teams are just dying off.
Click to expand...

Costs have to be cut otherwise the competition gaps per-dollar-spent remain the same. Sauber+base are going to be the same distance off Mercedes+base unless there's an altogether more equal distribution of revenue along with sensible cost-cutting.

The problem with cost-cutting (or capping) is that it doesn't work in the current F1 environment. The teams with the biggest initial resources are always going to find ways around limitations.
 
TenEightyOne
Costs have to be cut otherwise the competition gaps per-dollar-spent remain the same. Sauber+base are going to be the same distance off Mercedes+base unless there's an altogether more equal distribution of revenue along with sensible cost-cutting.

The problem with cost-cutting (or capping) is that it doesn't work in the current F1 environment. The teams with the biggest initial resources are always going to find ways around limitations.
Click to expand...

Unless the FIA hires IRS auditors?
 
LMSCorvetteGT2
Unless the FIA hires IRS auditors?
Click to expand...

Perhaps... but the more subsidiaries/partners a team is able to use the more difficult it gets to find what money is being spent on what, and where. That's particularly true of ethereal R&D, especially now that 3D data is so easily transported.
 
TenEightyOne
Perhaps... but the more subsidiaries/partners a team is able to use the more difficult it gets to find what money is being spent on what, and where. That's particularly true of ethereal R&D, especially now that 3D data is so easily transported.
Click to expand...

Nah, all you'd have to do is have an inventory of parts used and planned for the car, along with logs for wind tunnel and cfd use. Stamped by the FIA, and thus after this then the auditors would just have to look into the money that funneled into the these logs/inventory. If something seems fishy then a fine or whatever else takes place. That would eliminate setting up companies doing the work. Like preventing a sibling team losing during the season just to support the bigger team is the only part I could see this not working.

If a team can verify the original source being inhouse they're good to use and thus get approved if not then too bad. Problem with actual down and dirty cost control measures is one it's not a spec series which makes it a ton harder, and the measures one would have to go to ensure cost measures is as extreme as I just laid out. The number of people doing this would be vast, and we saw as simple as last year how even messing up air pressures after being approved can go.

I think the biggest obstacle is the FIA, then the teams themselves.
 
Last edited:
The big teams have the power, and they will always want to be able to flex their financial muscles to remain successful. Budget caps and the mid season testing ban never materialize or remain permanent, as most teams don't have an issue with spending half a billion dollars a year. Toyota didn't have a problem spending almost as much as Ferrari and never winning a race in 8 years until 2008 when the whole economy was shaken.

If the FIA try to force feed budget caps and other extreme measures again, the big teams will just threaten to breakaway again and nothing will happen. I think the best case scenario for F1 when it comes to cost cutting will be caps on engine and gearboxes for the non manufacturers, and more balanced prize money payment. And the occasional rule change to ban an innovative and elaborate design to stop spending on it from getting out of control.
 
psychoazubi
Technical director of Audi LMP1 Joerg Zander will become new tech chief for Sauber F1. More people following more than possible after Audi pulled the plug. Could be interesting to see how they do in 2018:

Auto-Motor-Sport Article (in German)
Click to expand...
That could be great news for Sauber! Audi has been the king of Aero in LMP1 so it'll be interesting to see if they can translate that into a good car for Sauber in 2018
 
Interesting (though as yet unconfirmed) reports out of Europe suggest that ExxonMobil will no longer be McLaren's fuel and lubricants supplier. Instead, they'll go to Red Bull (with Total returning to Renault), while McLaren will pick up Castrol/BP.
 
prisonermonkeys
Interesting (though as yet unconfirmed) reports out of Europe suggest that ExxonMobil will no longer be McLaren's fuel and lubricants supplier. Instead, they'll go to Red Bull (with Total returning to Renault), while McLaren will pick up Castrol/BP.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure why I thought it... but I thought it was a done/announced deal?

EDIT: It's in this article, Exxon Mobil are leaving and McLaren have replaced them with BP.
 

Latest Posts

Back