Honda withdrawing from F1
- Thread starter Ed
- Start date
Antony
Ex. Club Member
its been done before, but with 2010 rules being "no customer engines" the cars have to be from the manufacturers coming in, its going to be a very small grid if it apears at all..
i mean lola and lotus, brabham, judd, have all had chassis and engines in F1 in the past, when costs were being cut in the late eaighties early nineties williams had a car that had more technology than even todays cars, but they had to downsize. more and more teams buying in Cosworth engines, Orange arrows buying in engines, minardi, jordan, benaton..... all of these teams have disapeared.
and if toyota, the worlds largest vehicle manufacturer, cant afford to do F1, nobody can. they have more money than any other team.
but what his royal gayness bernie "i am god" ecclestone has done with next year will see the death of formula 1 for good, i mean electric motors??? push to pass??? its not formula palmer audi for gods sake.
they should go back to basics, keep the safety standards, keep the tyres, keep the aero but restric the cars to 1300cc, maximum of 8 cylinders and allow a turbocharger but no more than 700bhp and 15,000rpm.
throw the rule book away and start again, ive read the rules and there are rules ontop of rules and loopholes between loopholes.... its mind numbing and beaurocratic.....
thats why i usualy stick to MOTO GP, much less serious, the whole bike costs £2m and less than £1m for the year to race, the riders have a sence of humour and there arent these corporate fatcat "INSANE" people like ecklestone in that sport.... that and it has Valentino Rossi..:laugh:
Antony
Ex. Club Member
yep, whilst the lower teams were running 3500cc DFV cosworth v8's, renault, mclaren honda, ferrari etc were all running inline 4 1500cc turbo engines or in the renaults case, a small 1500cc V6 turbo with 1500bhp in qualifying trim or just under 1000bhp in race trim, add to this very ligh weight, huge spoilers, massive slick tyres (twice as wide as todays) no traction control, titanium skid plates (as apposed to wooden ones on modern cars) ground effect skirts and very little safety, the rules outlawed turbo cars much like the group B era in rallying, they were just too fast to race.
the ground effect has been continued in lemans racing up till 1997, in 1998 alex wurtz famously flipped a mercedes CLK-GTR on the mulsanne straight and landed in the trees at over 200mph, they are thinking of bringing ground effect back to imsca and lm GT and prototype cars for 2012.
sorry motorsport is my thing..lol
the ground effect has been continued in lemans racing up till 1997, in 1998 alex wurtz famously flipped a mercedes CLK-GTR on the mulsanne straight and landed in the trees at over 200mph, they are thinking of bringing ground effect back to imsca and lm GT and prototype cars for 2012.
sorry motorsport is my thing..lol
Antony
Ex. Club Member
that and the medical advances, tyre technology, engine technology (like titanium pistons and sodium filled valves, sequential electronic fuel injection, electronic differentials, traction control) crumple zones, suspension technology, etc etc
they have done it before though. and they will probebly do it again. but with the sponsorship that mclaren and ferrari have plus bmw, renault etc (3 of those are major banks or investment companies) raking in millions in revenue. the car sales are beggar all to do with the finances of the teams... i mean minardi. could you buy a minardi? benaton, could you buy a benaton? could you buy a jordan? or a prost, arrows, super aguri, williams, brabham, sauber, petronas, mentverdi, eurobrun, forti, AGS, simtec, pacific, osella etc etc etc... its all about corporate sponsorship. nothing about cars.
they have done it before though. and they will probebly do it again. but with the sponsorship that mclaren and ferrari have plus bmw, renault etc (3 of those are major banks or investment companies) raking in millions in revenue. the car sales are beggar all to do with the finances of the teams... i mean minardi. could you buy a minardi? benaton, could you buy a benaton? could you buy a jordan? or a prost, arrows, super aguri, williams, brabham, sauber, petronas, mentverdi, eurobrun, forti, AGS, simtec, pacific, osella etc etc etc... its all about corporate sponsorship. nothing about cars.
Micra 110
Site Supporter
i doubt it,s the cost factor, more likely the embarrasing 1 win in 3yrs.
and bear in mind, but for f1 we would probably be still be making cars with pushrod engines equipped with carburettors
antony said:
So that wouldn't have been done if the F1 didn't exist?
I'm sure that most Car makers spend a lovely sum of money on designing and testing a vehicle. Maybe the things you spoke of would've been on the road sooner rather than 5 or even 10 years later if they hadn't spent so much time and effort going round in circles.
Sodium filled Valves - er, nope you lost me on that one
Titanium pistons - Nice touch but not really necessary in an everyday vehicle.
I think these advances in technology or whatever would've turned up without the F1 imo.
Antony
Ex. Club Member
as in the early red top SR20DE engine from the primera EGT....fwn to reduce weight and prevent expansion at high temperatures.
its also the advances in manufacturing techniques, such as dry carbon weaving, aluminium casting, the advances in throttle bodies, seamless shift gearchanges, electronics (such as the early fw14 williams renault that could be setup including engine performance and suspension settings from the pits as its racing around the track) satelite tracking and naivigation (as in data logging and telemetry)
F1 is the pinacle of motorsport and as such should be the very top of the spending tree.
Micra 110
Site Supporter
...IIRC that was first seen in a f1 Ferrari in 1989, so 20 years later and where are we in relation to the 'flappy Paddle'...Rally Cars and Motor racing and a few johnny come lately car makers and that's about it. why do we still have a gearstick?
Antony
Ex. Club Member
yes but you will strugle with a 4 cylinder. the more cylinders you have, the more surface area you can have acting on the crank at any one time... thus why a 4l v12 will produce more power and usualy more torque than a 4l v6.
if you want to get realy silly with bhp per cc. one of my RC cars produces 1.1bhp per cc (3.3bhp from 3cc) @ 42,000rpm.:laugh::laugh:
and top fuel dragsters. 7000bhp from 7000cc. so about the same level, but running on nitromethane should be more like 1500bhp per l.
and if we realy want to get silly, a Ceramic 4cylinder 1000cc engine with spherical valves in the mid 80's ran at 20,000rpm+ at over 1000deg-c and produced 0% emisions and 1300bhp. no oil, no water, no valvetrain and at that temperature you could see through the block!
