- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
Which is why I think it should be in the rules.I highly doubt a team would spread out penalties for the spirit of the rules.
Which is why I think it should be in the rules.I highly doubt a team would spread out penalties for the spirit of the rules.
An unfortunate new development if you're a US fan--for the first time that I know of, NBC has relegated live qualifying to streaming only.
All it's going to take is one team willing to spend enough to run an entirely new power unit at each race, and your system breaks.There shouldn't be any limits on engines. What's needed is a rule that a manufacturer must make its product available to any team that wants it at a price the governing body sets. Be sensible = make a profit. Be silly = take a big loss.
The best solution. Take a 30-odd grid penalty in one go which will only mean a 21 place grid drop and get all the power units he needs to see out the season. If they'd only brought the parts needed to get through this race then he would only have been a few places up the grid in front of cars that aren't going to pose a problem anyway. He'll also have lots of nice new tyres and a choice of what he starts on. Without incident I can easily see a 4th or 5th place and still have a lead in the WDC.And there we have it: Hamilton is taking three brand-new power units and only getting one penalty for it.
I don't think that's the best solution at all. Teams should be limited to one extra change per weekend unless the extra engine fails.The best solution. Take a 30-odd grid penalty in one go which will only mean a no.22 grid position and get all the power units he needs to see out the season.
Except you are completely wrong. I SAID must sell to ANY team that wants it. At a price set by the governing body. Nothing breaks. No one has an advantage.All it's going to take is one team willing to spend enough to run an entirely new power unit at each race, and your system breaks.
Except for the manufacturer, the ones building the engines. It's all well and good to sell to anyone who wants it, but eventually economies of scale kick in - the more units they produce, the cheaper the cost per unit. Under your system, Mercedes could make twenty-one power units for Hamilton and Rosberg regardless of who they supply elsewhere.Except you are completely wrong. I SAID must sell to ANY team that wants it. At a price set by the governing body. Nothing breaks. No one has an advantage.
And? They WON'T have any advantage from that. New engine for one = new engine for everyone.Except for the manufacturer, the ones building the engines. It's all well and good to sell to anyone who wants it, but eventually economies of scale kick in - the more units they produce, the cheaper the cost per unit. Under your system, Mercedes could make twenty-one power units for Hamilton and Rosberg regardless of who they supply elsewhere.
Not all chassis are developed equally.And? They WON'T have any advantage from that. New engine for one = new engine for everyone.
The works teams can build their chassis to work with their engines as they have a total understanding. It's the old argument of works team vs. not works. It's very unlikely you can win in modern F1 as a non-works team.Where do I say chassis? I don't. What has that got to do with engines? NOTHING.
Everything, actually. Your argument is that a manufacturer would not gain an advantage by taking a new engine every race because they would have to supply every client with a new engine. But you're overlooking the way Mercedes currently have a massive performance advantage in the chassis, and so would continue to dominate. The quality of the Mercedes engine would make the other manufacturers unattractive to customer teams, driving them out of the sport unless they wanted to supply a new engine every race - but since they can't match Mercedes on performance, it won't be worth the expense of manufacturing so many engine.Where do I say chassis? I don't. What has that got to do with engines? NOTHING.
They can. That doesn't mean that they will. And that's what you have failed to grasp. Under your system, manufacturers will be obligated to supply to anyone who wants their engine. With Mercedes being the best engine, and the price of engines being fixed, everyone will want a Mercedes engine. Without the threat of component penalties, they could take twenty-one engines in a season, and supply every customer with twenty-one engines. While expensive to begin with, they will be manufacturing on such a scale that the cost per unit will actually start to come down. So teams will be able to get the best-performing engines very cheaply.Every manufacturer can do the same.
The only reason the others can't beat Mercedes is the rules preventing them from development.They can. That doesn't mean that they will. And that's what you have failed to grasp. Under your system, manufacturers will be obligated to supply to anyone who wants their engine. With Mercedes being the best engine, and the price of engines being fixed, everyone will want a Mercedes engine. Without the threat of component penalties, they could take twenty-one engines in a season, and supply every customer with twenty-one engines. While expensive to begin with, they will be manufacturing on such a scale that the cost per unit will actually start to come down. So teams will be able to get the best-performing engines very cheaply.
Why, then, would the likes of Ferrari, Renault and Honda - or anyone else for that matter - want to continue? They can't beat Mercedes in engine development, and with the second-best power unit, no-one will want to use them. There is no further reason for them to be involved in the sport.
That's nonsense, I don't see how Redbull couldn't if they had an engine equal to that of Mercedes.The works teams can build their chassis to work with their engines as they have a total understanding. It's the old argument of works team vs. not works. It's very unlikely you can win in modern F1 as a non-works team.
There shouldn't be any limits on engines. What's needed is a rule that a manufacturer must make its product available to any team that wants it at a price the governing body sets. Be sensible = make a profit. Be silly = take a big loss.
I think @prisonermonkeys is actually bang on with this one.
The old scenario of 4000 place grid penalties and/or those carrying over to following races was ridiculous but now we have the loophole where a team can introduce as many parts as they want at one event, take the 4000 place penalty and then that's it, they can use all of those units for the rest of the season with no more penalties.
Only allowing them to introduce a single new instance of each component per event unless they can demonstrate the new one also failed would close that loophole.
I mean I don't blame Mercedes for what they've done, all teams would do it, but it is a loophole that needs closing because it's going directly against the original measure of cost saving by restricting components.
The only reason the others can't beat Mercedes is the rules preventing them from development.
Why has any team ever stayed in when someone else was on top.
The works teams can build their chassis to work with their engines as they have a total understanding. It's the old argument of works team vs. not works. It's very unlikely you can win in modern F1 as a non-works team.