F1 »

F1 Brazilian Grand Prix: Opinion divided on commercial F1 engine

F1's engine customers presented a less than unified front when the subject of Jean Todt's commercially-available power unit was raised at Interlagos.
Friday's FIA press conference at the Brazilian Grand Prix underlined the divide between teams that exists over the governing body's proposal to bring a new commercially-available engine into the top flight as a solution to rising costs and tight supply imposed by current manufacturers.

With Ferrari exercising its power of veto over plans to cap the costs of supplying existing V6 turbo power units to customer teams, FIA president Jean Todt has issued a tender in search of an independent alternative with 'no links to a major car manufacturer'. In the Frenchman's eyes, such an engine should be available for between €6-7m, but even the reduced cost has not been enough to sway every potential customer in the paddock.

“We all know that, in the last few years, the engine price has been the major cost trigger, pushing costs tremendously high, and we are a customer for engines, so our prime position is that we want the engine prices to go down – and we believe that there is room to do that,” Sauber's Monisha Kaltenborn explained, “Looking at this alternative, however, we are a bit sceptical because, when you look at other series, you see how difficult it is if you have two different kinds of engines, that it has not worked in the past.

“We are seeing now that there are a lot of issues attached to [the introduction of a commercial engine] so that is one point. The second one is that it is meant to have parity with the current engine and I think that that is a very complex area as it is not easy to achieve that.”

As well as outlining her concerns with the proposed alternative, Kaltenborn also expressed doubts about F1 moving away from the 'green' technology that hastened the introduction of the already contentious V6 turbo era.

“There is a world out there and we have to move with that world,” she insisted, “Hybrid technology, whether you like it personally or not, is the demand of the market today, so we also have to cater to these demands, particularly the engine suppliers. I believe it is not going to be good for the image of F1 if we try to move away from such technologies which are relevant to the business of manufacturers. More importantly, we should try to get the prices down which, in our view, is absolutely do-able.

“You're talking with these [commercial] engines, for example, about refuelling again so, to get that parity in with the hybrid engine, is already an issue in itself. Then of course, if you look at the financial side of it, what savings we had from stopping refuelling, you're again bringing those costs in - which are not small costs - if you have to introduce that.

“So we've also communicated to the FIA that we will watch this tender process. We're not saying we're totally against it, but you really have to be sure what you're doing here, from a commercial perspective, from a technical perspective and for image reasons of F1.”

While Kaltenborn clearly opposed the introduction of a second engine spec, rivals were more amenable to Todt's proposal, with Toro Rosso team boss Franz Tost – a known advocate for reduced costs - definitely in favour.

“I think it is a good idea and Toro Rosso will support it because we want this new engine to at least have the possibility to bring up lower costs,” he stressed, “The current power unit costs are a hell of a lot of money but also [the new engine will allow us] b) to be flexible and c) to have a new sound. I think that most of the fans, and most of the people here, want to have another engine with a better sound. As to the rest, we will see…”

While Lotus team principal Federico Gastaldi found reasons to agree with both his peers, soon-to-depart Manor CEO Graeme Lowdon saw definite benefits to an alternative power source.

“We need to welcome anything that is designed to make the sport more sustainable and hopefully, as well, put back into the hands of the teams a little more of what they can control,” he mused, “None of the teams here [in the press conference] make engines and, therefore, you can see there is frustration where they don't have the ability to fully influence their position in the constructors' championship. There's no championship for an engine manufacturer and yet it has such an enormous influence.

“That said, if there is a dominant engine and you have it in your team, then that's a great position to be in and everyone would be pretty happy with that position but, if there are teams in that position, there are going to be teams in the opposite position and, ideally, what we want to see is teams fighting it out on the race track.”

Related Pictures

Click on relevant pic to enlarge
Mercedes AMG engine
29.10.2015 - Jean Todt (FRA), President FIA
Marcus Ericsson (SWE) Sauber C34 and Carlos Sainz Jr (ESP) Scuderia Toro Rosso STR10. 28.02.2015.
Sebastien Ogier, Red Bull, RB7, F1 test [Credit: Red Bull Content Pool]
Start of the race - Lewis Hamilton (GBR) Mercedes AMG F1 W08 leads
Start of the race - Lewis Hamilton (GBR) Mercedes AMG F1 W08 leads
Start of the race - Lewis Hamilton (GBR) Mercedes AMG F1 W08 leads
Start of the race - Lewis Hamilton (GBR) Mercedes AMG F1 W08 leads
F1 Sparks
Renault F1 40 years demonstration
Renault F1 40 years demonstration
Renault F1 40 years demonstration
Renault F1 40 years demonstration
Renault F1 40 years demonstration
Renault F1 40 years demonstration
Renault F1 40 years demonstration
Sergio Perez (MEX) Sahara Force India F1 VJM10
Sergio Perez (MEX) Sahara Force India F1 VJM10

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.


November 13, 2015 11:37 PM

IMO, F1 is a constructor championship. They have already taken out the ability to innovation per the rules. No real advances in engine and transmission are allowed. If you are going to freeze power train, why not areo too. I think hybrid is only a temp solution. If you want innovation let F1 come up with innovative power options. Hydrogen, Flywheel, Fusion, Warp drives. Then let the tech move to the public. F1 is not a green sport! I fell in love with F1 when I was 12, 1961. I was attracted to the technology. I was racing Karts, there too it was open, we were first to use maverick buttons (ignition advance), adjustable expansion chambers, full lay down (top of my helmet 27" from ground). Must of this stuff banned. My point is let development happen, loosen the rules, you will see small teams able to invent and innovate. Give them a wheelbase, weight, safety, and let them go. Six wheels, Tyrell, It would be fun. Only way this works is equal share of all revenue for all teams. No t


November 13, 2015 7:39 PM

The FIA/Bernie/RBR problem is a power problem, not an engine cost problem. the engine cost problem is just one of the many costs of running an F1 team, these costs problems are born by the secret agreements Bernie entered into with different teams, one of whom is RBR themselves, proper and just distribution of F1 money to teams would as Jean Totd himself said " eliminate this cost problem to teams". and also as Totd recently said " the EU investigation of F1 will be good for F1" the main item of these investigations are exactly the money distribution by Bernie to teams.

© 1999 - 2017 Crash Media Group

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