Why Formula One shouldn't be so fast to write off its engines

By Michael Lamonato / Expert

At this weekend’s Bahrain Grand Prix Formula One bosses will reveal to teams and power unit manufacturers its vision for the sport from 2021. But not all those stakeholders will walk away happy.

Like just about everything in Formula One, the post-2020 commercial and regulatory package will be subject to negotiation and threats from Ferrari to quit, particularly given not all the components of the plan will require immediate agreement.

However, one aspect of the regulations has rapidly become an urgent item for consideration, and not just because it has proved a perpetual point of complaint in some quarters since 2014: F1’s engine formula.

The current turbocharged 1.6-litre V6 hybrid power unit is as technologically advanced as motorsport engines come. Thermal efficiency – the percentage of energy derived from fuel that can be used to power the car – exceeded 50 per cent last year and is likely higher this year.

The average road car is only around half as efficient, while the previous generation V8 engine operated at 29 per cent efficiency.

(Photo by Wolfgang Wilhelm/Mercedes AMG Petronas)

But technological innovation hasn’t come cheaply or easily. These are the most expensive Formula One engines ever, a fact not helped by developmental free rein, and the ongoing performance disparity between power unit manufacturers has caused dismay for some of the sport’s big hitters.

Red Bull Racing and McLaren have been most aggrieved given neither builds its own power unit and both have been encumbered with the weakest engines on the grid.

Leaving Honda and its unique problems to one side, lacking for Renault is the peak power mode Mercedes and to a lesser extent Ferrari can deploy in qualifying – ‘party mode’, as coined by Lewis Hamilton – that almost guarantees Saturday’s top spot.

Mercedes’s qualifying advantage over the fastest Renault-powered car in Australia was more than seven-tenths of a second, and the Silver Arrows seized all but four pole positions over 20 races last season.

The relative race pace between the Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault engines are comparable – Red Bull Racing won races on merit last season – but given how difficult overtaking is with the current breed of car, a qualifying disadvantage can throw off the entire weekend.

Christian Horner, impatient that his team’s good work is hamstrung by a third party, suggested in Melbourne the abolition of qualifying modes to level the playing field.

“When the cars leave for qualifying maybe the engine mode should be the same from the moment you leave the garage to the end of the grand prix,” he suggested.

Mercedes would therefore be unable to use its high-power mode in qualifying given it uses more fuel and reduces the life expectancy of its engines, bringing it into Renault’s range.

Renault, keen to emphasise that its power unit isn’t so far behind in racing conditions, has suggested a total engine development freeze, at least to save on costs. If the engines were to change in 2021, Renault argues, developing two power units at once would be prohibitively expensive and therefore potentially advantage a new entrant with just one programme to focus on.

The idea is not so farfetched, with only FIA-approved engine reliability upgrades allowed between 2007 and 2013.

Red Bull motorsport advisor Helmut Marko would prefer an even more dramatic model with which the FIA limits power output so that the fastest engine could produce only three per cent more power than the slowest.

Such a proposal might yet take advantage of almost universal unwillingness for change among the engine manufacturer ranks, as exposed after the FIA released a proposal for less sophisticated power units late last year.

Ferrari is philosophically opposed to regulatory simplification, Mercedes has a vested interest in maintaining the status quo and Renault disputes new changes on cost grounds.

Each position has merit. As Ferrari argues, Formula One should be about technological sophistication. The current engines may be difficult to master, but F1, the pinnacle of motorsport, isn’t supposed to be easy.

(Photo by Pablo Guillen/Action Plus via Getty Images)

Mercedes is right to say that the longer the regulations stay the same, the closer the gaps become. Compared to 2014, when Mercedes lost only three races due to circumstance, last year Ferrari challenged for the championship and this year Red Bull Racing might make it a three-way fight.

Renault’s argument strikes a balance between the two and is therefore perhaps the most important. Rewriting regulations for the engine – the most expensive part of the car – would cost an enormous amount and risk spreading out the field to repair perceived problems minor tweaks could remedy.

The want for new manufacturers and increased sound are primary drivers for change, but performance controls, as suggested by Red Bull Racing and Renault, could achieve the former while alterations to, say, fuel flow rules to raise RPM could ameliorate the latter.

Superficially wholesale engine changes are appealing, but when a redesign risks undoing what will by 2021 be seven years of natural performance convergence and the gamble will cost collectively hundreds of millions of dollars and more, a hasty engine write-off might take the sport only further backwards.

The Crowd Says:

2018-04-03T10:18:58+00:00

anon

Roar Pro


I could not imagine going to an F1 race and watching cars go around making that hissing sound electric cars make. F1 needs to stop justifying itself by claiming that the technology in their series has road relevance. Most of the audience doesn't really care. F1 goes the electric route and someone with big pockets, whether a company like Red Bull or not, will start a series with close racing, fast cars, loud stupid petrol engines. F1 hasn't been compromised enough yet to make a rival "pure" racing series viable, but the all-electric route surely will.

2018-04-03T09:36:01+00:00

Simoc

Guest


That is a massive efficiency improvement to get over 50%. But still way short of optimum. The speed is irrelevant ie Spectators don't know if a car is doing 200kmh or 300kmh so they need slower cars with more efficient motors ie less turbulence so cars can follow closer. It'de be great if other engine makers came into F1. However I think the next change may be the second last before electric motors take over. F1 is about being at the cutting edge with Engine technology and the best drivers on the planet. Otherwise watching any tin can race or Karts is just as much fun. So the decision is vital for the sport.

AUTHOR

2018-04-03T09:12:10+00:00

Michael Lamonato

Expert


I like the sound of the current engine. It's obviously not the same scream of the old naturally aspirated blocks, but I think these engines sound more interesting. You can hear how they're working. Whether or not on balance that adds to the spectacle is subjective, though, I suppose. You can't pin the competitiveness solely down to the Mercedes power unit, though. Certainly at the beginning of the era it counted for a lot, but the regulations change last season proved that Mercedes is operating well on all levels; it wasn't shown up as successful off the back of the power unit alone. Technology counts for a lot in F1, it's what makes it what it is. Sure, it's not the road proving ground it once was, but mastering the tech has always been part of the game. I don't think that's negotiable.

2018-04-03T09:10:16+00:00

marfu

Guest


Hear hear !

2018-04-03T08:38:24+00:00

anon

Roar Pro


During the V8 era of 2006-13 (which were effectively homologated engines), we had the championship go down to the last race in 2007 (three drivers fighting for title in final race), 2008, 2010 (three drivers fighting for title in final race and five with 2 or 3 races remaining), 2012 (7 winners first 7 races too). Since 2014 it's been an utter farce. A Mercedes procession for the most part. Yes, 2014 and 16 went to the wire but it was a contrived title fight between two teammates. Really, Hamilton should have beaten Rosberg like he beat Bottas but Hamilton was too inconsistent. Plus the engines still sound horrible compared to the naturally aspirated ones. I don't care about the technology under the engine cover when I'm watching a race. Same way I don't care about the technology going into tyre durability. I don't want 1 stop races.

2018-04-03T00:12:30+00:00

marfu

Guest


Thanks for the read.

Read more at The Roar