F1 »

Engine rift continues as F1 Commission readies to meet

Even as the F1 Commission prepares to meet to discuss the issue, teams and manufacturers are no nearer a common engine policy for the sport.
F1 could be facing the loss of one of its more proactive engine suppliers should it decide not to proceed with the proposed switch to 1.6-litre four-cylinder turbocharged units, but would also face unrest from other quarters if the wholesale change is implemented.

That much has been known for some time but, with the F1 Commission - comprising representatives of the teams, the FIA and various stakeholders - scheduled to meet on Wednesday, the divide appears as wide as ever. Renault is the only known supporter of the switch, and has said that it would be willing to supply as many as four other teams when the new formula comes in in 2013, but faces widespread opposition as almost the entire rest of the grid is pushing either for the status quo or a switch to engines it sees as more fitting for the top flight of international motorsport.

Should it not succeed in convincing the paddock that 1.6-litre four-cylinder turbos are the way to go, Renault has said that it would be prepared to walk away from the sport, which could potentially leave the likes of Red Bull, Team Lotus and Lotus Renault - or a quarter of the field - without an engine deal.

“F1 can't become just a show,” Renault team boss Eric Boullier insisted, "We have to be seen as motorsport pioneers, and technology is part of that, but we need to please our fans as well. Renault is pushing to supply maybe four teams, [having] decided to focus on being an engine supplier and, as such, we are pushing to bring new technology to F1.

"This is the only way for Renault to communicate their know-how and make sure they can use the opportunity of being in F1 to promote road car sales. The tendency of the road car market, especially for Renault, is to go to smaller engines with more hybrid technology to make fuel savings. F1 has to move forward. We need new regulations and new technical challenges for our engineers."

With Bernie Ecclestone leading the opposition to the proposed engine switch, the F1 Commission's task on Wednesday will not be any easy one, and it may be that it takes the easy option and put a final decision on the backburner, possibly for a couple of years. That may not please Renault, but should appease the rest, who have said that they would accept a turbocharged V6 powerplant, but would happily continue with what they have already, accepting that the idea of appealing to the major manufacturers was ill thought out. The ultimate decision, meanwhile, rests with the FIA, where president Jean Todt is a known supporter of the small engine concept....

“I think the traditionalist who believes we need large-capacity, normally-aspirated engines has to accept that they may not be attractive to car companies in this day and age,” McLaren team boss, and V6 turbo proponent, Martin Whitmarsh conceded to Motor Sport magazine, “So there was some logic in the thought that we need a solution that is attractive to them. Unfortunately, with hindsight, we got it wrong, because the intention of the 2013 formula was to see if we could attract more manufacturers.

“Plainly we didn't, and we failed to do that because we came in at the end of the largest recession the automotive sector has ever had. We also gave them too short a timeframe to develop a new engine. I don't think it's worth criticising anyone over it. That's how it transpired. The important issue for F1 now is that we find a formula which is attractive to the car industry.

“We have to accept, respect and not despise the fact that the manufacturers are here to sell cars. If F1 is to be the ideal platform for product exposure and differentiation of their brand, we need a formula that is relevant to them and to the needs of society. [But] we've got to ensure that F1 continues as the technical pinnacle of motorsport. It has to be technically advanced, relevant, entertaining and differentiated, [but] we need great-sounding engines [and] we've got to have high revs - it's a core asset of our sport. A vee engine suits the structure of an F1 car and we've got to have that unique sound. There's no reason why you can't have forward-looking technology and a great sound. I personally feel we've got to seek a compromise."

Related Pictures

Click on relevant pic to enlarge
19.05.2011- Scuderia Ferrari, F-150 Italia
08.04.2011- Friday Practice 1, Narain Karthikeyan (IND), Hispania Racing F1 Team, HRT gets engine problem just out of the pits
12.02.2011- Eric Boullier (FRA), Team Manager, Renault F1 Team and Nick Heidfeld (GER), Testing for Lotus Renault GP, R31
28.05.2011- Saturday Practice, Martin Whitmarsh (GBR), Chief Executive Officer Mclaren, Christian Horner (GBR), Red Bull Racing, Sporting Director and Stefano Domenicali (ITA), Team Principal
07.05.2011- Williams FW33
19.05.2011- Atmosphere
28.05.2011- Saturday Practice, Engine Scuderia Ferrari
25.06.2017 - Race, The race stopped, Fernando Alonso (ESP) McLaren MCL32 and the Safety car
25.06.2017 - Race, Carlos Sainz Jr (ESP) Scuderia Toro Rosso STR12 and Fernando Alonso (ESP) McLaren MCL32
25.06.2017 - Race, Fernando Alonso (ESP) McLaren MCL32 and Marcus Ericsson (SUE) Sauber C36
25.06.2017 - Race, Fernando Alonso (ESP) McLaren MCL32 and 3rd place Lance Stroll (CDN) Williams FW40
25.06.2017 - Race, Stoffel Vandoorne (BEL) McLaren MCL32
25.06.2017 - Race, Stoffel Vandoorne (BEL) McLaren MCL32 and Felipe Massa (BRA) Williams FW40
25.06.2017 - Race, Nico Hulkenberg (GER) Renault Sport F1 Team RS17
25.06.2017 - Race, Nico Hulkenberg (GER) Renault Sport F1 Team RS17
25.06.2017 - Race, Stoffel Vandoorne (BEL) McLaren MCL32 leads Valtteri Bottas (FIN) Mercedes AMG F1 W08
25.06.2017 - Race, Stoffel Vandoorne (BEL) McLaren MCL32 and Marcus Ericsson (SUE) Sauber C36
25.06.2017 - Race, Daniel Ricciardo (AUS) Red Bull Racing RB13 leads Fernando Alonso (ESP) McLaren MCL32

Join the conversation - Add your comment

Please login or register before adding your comments.

Although the administrators and moderators of this website will attempt to keep all objectionable comments off these pages, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the poster, and neither Crash Media Group nor Crash.Net will be held responsible for the content of any message. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. If you find a message objectionable, please contact us and inform us of the problem or use the [report] function next to the offending post. Any message that does not conform with the policy of this service can be edited or removed with immediate effect.

Pete - Unregistered

June 21, 2011 1:32 PM

F1 exists because racing cars in fun and people like watching it. the fact that people like watching it makes it attractive for sponsors. It should always be this way around. F1 is NOT just an advertising tool for car manufacturers it is a sport. Yes F1 should be made to appeal to manufacturers but not at the expense of the fans, if fans want to watch something that is relevant to their car then they watch the BTCC, why doesn’t Renault enter that? F1 is great at the moment, why mess it up? The vast majority of fans want big exciting engines like V12s and V10s, it is a nonsense to pretend to be green with KERS and four cylinder engines. Who would want to watch a competition of the finest engineering minds in the world to make the most fuel efficient engine over the fastest most powerful?? Seems absurd that the Formula Renault racing I saw this weekend will have bigger engines that the top category.


June 21, 2011 6:33 PM

I'm probably the only Formula 1 fan in the world that isn't fussed by how many cylinders the engines have. So long as F1 cars remain FAST and I get to see some good racing, I don't give a rats rear end about how large or small the engine is.

© 1999 - 2017 Crash Media Group

The total or partial reproduction of text, photographs or illustrations is not permitted in any form.