- Jenson Button driving the McLaren-Honda MP4/6. [Takayuki Suzuki]

The Major Problem with F1: Is it a Philosophical One?

The author tries to identify whether the philosophy behind road relevancy is a contributing factor to some of the principal issues in Formula 1.

3y ago
3.6K

With attempts to reconstruct the motorsport for the 2021 season, FIA, the governing body, and Formula 1 are set to face a dilemma: Should F1 decide to go forward with sustainable alternatives to petrol powered engines, or should it carve its own path and possibly go against the grain?

The automotive world is going off on a different direction now, with fuel cell cars, electric cars, autonomous driving -- and that's not F1. How do we find the relevant path for the future?

Ross Brawn

Crossroads

Choosing the former might be of interest to car manufacturers at the cost of the spectacle. This has the potential to kill off the sport. Evidently any form of sport, being a a mean of entertainment, is nothing without its spectators. On the other hand, deciding to take the alternative route will likely result in the sport being short of engine suppliers due to the lack of return on investment which as a consequence will result in the same fate.

The Argument

Having a possibly similar negative outcome from both paths seems like F1 is in a critical situation where the wrong decision could make the pinnacle of motorsports a relic of the past. Is there anything that can be done to prevent such a gloom-ridden fate?

Contrary to what Formula 1 thinks, road relevancy is relative and subjective to the manufacturer's preferences and visions. Every manufacturer has a different vision and it is completely within their creative hands to push the brand forward.

F1 should take a page from WEC's book on how to properly construct engine regulations. Mechanical engineering is a form of art, it is hard to be innovative with tied hands. LMP1 cars have much less restricted engine rules and as a result there is not only more diversity on the grid, but new technologies are constantly emerging from the series and pushed down to our production cars. This is what F1 should be about. The sport should embrace change by allowing the manufacturers to paint their own picture and be on the forefront of groundbreaking automotive technology.

Supporting Argument

Ferrari, the most iconic brand in F1, currently produces 2 engine families for its latest models. These engines are made up of the twin-turbo V8 F154, and the F140 NA V12. The F154 is used in entry-level Ferraris such as the 488 GTB whilst the F140 is used for more higher-end models including the remarkable La Ferrari, 2017 812 Superfast, and the GTC4Lusso. In the near future one could see the V8s be replaced by smaller V6s, however, it is unlikely that the sought-out V12s will be succeeded by a more compact engine anytime soon.

Looking at Mercedes-AMG, the pioneer behind the new era in F1, currently makes a twin-turbo M178 fitted in the GT. The upcoming F1 inspired Project One has a straight out of F1 engine, a hybrid turbocharged V6. This portrays how much F1 could be road relevant. Mercedes were flexible enough to adapt to the new regulations, and are expected to bring racing technology to the road.

Renault currently are not seeking a high performance market. As a result, most of the vehicles produced by Renault are fitted with a 4-cylinder engine. Honda, the latest addition to the current manufacturers, has the 2016 NSX with a hybrid twin-turbo V6 setup, developed prior to their entry in Formula 1, where the concept vehicle was showcased in 2012. Both manufacturers primarily focus on inline 4-cylinder engines.

Formula 1 is so expensive. If you look at every series we are in right now there is a relevance to all the goals and objectives we have, in developing our tools, technology and people and translating that into road cars.

Dave Pericak

Aston Martin is a car manufacturer that has recently made the headlines due to its collaboration with Red Bull Racing and its intention to become a manufacturer. The popular British brand currently produces V12-powered vehicles, with the exception of one variant of the DB11 which has a Mercedes-Benz V8 twin-turbo engine. The Valkyrie, Aston Martin's upcoming super car, designed under the guide of Red Bull Racing scores a powerful V12 Cosworth. This shows that the company's motivations are primarily focused on V12s. Having very open engine rules will be beneficial to such a brand.

Ford, popular in F1 for its successful collaboration with Cosworth is currently not interested in F1. According to Dave Pericak, the former director of Ford Performance, Formula 1 is not only expensive, but the technology acquired from F1 will likely not contribute to any of its production vehicles, as opposed to other series the American brand competes in including WEC and WRX.

Conclusion

Different brands and manufacturers have different goals. Some suppliers would rather build turbocharged I4s whilst others tend to stick to NA V12s. Strict engine rules contribute to limiting factors for potential new engine suppliers. The philosophy behind Formula 1 needs to change. F1 shouldn't abide by road standards but instead it should pave the way and set those road standards. After all Formula 1 has been labelled several times as the pinnacle of motorsports.

Join In

Comments (9)

  • It has been labeled 'the pinnacle' but it isn't that. Lmp1 has been for a lot longer. Sadly the Audi scandal brought a halt to that. But lmp1 rules have been what I want from f1 for quite a while. Restrict the output in mega joules and let them free in choosing how to get there. Brilliant. F1 would be much better, and the nerds amongst us would've a lot more to talk about. 😉 bumped this to best of f1, btw

      3 years ago
    • lmp1 style rules for f1 would be great, but i fear it would kill the sport. a team like mercedes with 2 factor,s and more than 1000 people working there would likely kill any competition if the regulations would be opened up. the reason it...

      Read more
        3 years ago
    • I disagree. Audi ruled le mans, certainly when Peugeot dropped out. The regulations made it possible for Porsche to. Compete with Audi, on their own terms. Even Toyota came closer. I agree that the big teams would still be the big teams, but...

      Read more
        3 years ago
  • "P" Great Article Isaac!

      3 years ago
  • There are three issues. The first two cause the third, therefore only two issues need to be solved.

    1. Anemia. For decades the F1-FIA tandem has been all about preventing other series to become more popular than F1 by hindering their growth. BPR, Group C, WRC, ITC. There needs to be an autosport mindset in the population for that population to even care about the pinnacle of that sport. So that strategy needs to be reversed.

    2. Relevance. Simplify the rules to the basics and focus on using stock parts. For example engine rules becomes one rule: only engine units used in 5000 produced cars can be used, only alteration allowed is pistons, injection, software and hybrid modules. All the rest is open. That means we can all buy cars with an F1 engine. Should reduce costs also.

    3. Competition. Currently there are 3 brands in F1. Solving the first 2 issues creates interest in the sport that will bring more competitors, REAL ones, and there will be more competition.

      3 years ago
9