Lewis Hamilton, Mercedes, Hungaroring, 2014

Mercedes won’t be caught for three years – Ecclestone

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

Lewis Hamilton, Mercedes, Hungaroring, 2014In the round-up: Bernie Ecclestone says Formula One “can’t afford” to wait for Mercedes’ rivals to catch up, which he thinks could take up to three years.

F1 Fanatic Calendar

The F1 Fanatic Calendar has been updated to include the times of every session for all 20 rounds of the 2015 season.

Grab it via the link below and share it with your friends so they can watch F1 with you (or so they know not to bother calling when it’s on):

Note that in the list published by the FIA all of the UK start times were shown as Greenwich Mean Time, though the majority of the season takes place when the UK is on British Summer Time, which explains any difference you may notice between the two.


Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

Bernie Ecclestone warns Mercedes' domination could continue for three years (Sky)

"Maybe in three years - we can’t afford to wait three years. Or two years or one year."

Caterham administrators refuse to give up hope (Reuters)

"O'Connell recognised Caterham, founded by Malaysian airline entrepreneur Tony Fernandes, were 'a much more difficult sell' but there was still interest."

Niki Lauda: Formula 1 must go ahead with 1000bhp cars plan (Autosport)

"The hybrid technology should remain, but we need more power. This can be easily achieved if you allow bigger fuel cells and more fuel flow."

F1's new (old) frontier? (ESPN)

"So far, talk of a race in South Africa has come from Formula One, and not from anyone in Cape Town putting their weight behind a bid."


Comment of the day

Is the FIA right to pursue legal action against Philippe Streiff for comments he made over the investigation into Jules Bianchi’s crash?

‘Freedom of speech’ does not give ‘freedom from responsibility’. It means the government can’t stop you from talking – but it doesn’t absolve you of all responsibility for what you’re saying.

Criticism is one thing – accusing a major international organization of criminal behaviour is something else.


Jeff Gordon, Juan Pablo Montoya, Indianapolis 2003

NASCAR’s four-times champion Jeff Gordon has announced he will retire at the end of this season. Here he is in 2003 doing a car-swap at Indianapolis with Williams driver Juan Pablo Montoya.

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Brent Foster!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

On this day last year Williams released renderings of their FW36 which gave us the first impression of how strange the new noses on F1 cars were going to look.

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

Posted on Categories F1 Fanatic round-upTags

Promoted content from around the web | Become a RaceFans Supporter to hide this ad and others

  • 72 comments on “Mercedes won’t be caught for three years – Ecclestone”

    1. I wouldn’t even be surprise if Mercedes dominate this year, however i can see Williams, Red Bull and McLaren winning a few races this year but not so much for Ferrari and the other teams.

      1. What Bernie said is nothing but an opinion. As of late, I don’t really care about his opinion.

      2. What will it mean for Bernie’s bank balance? Remember the man is yet to be born that can make more money than his wife can spend :-)

    2. bored of Mercedes dominance
      23rd January 2015, 0:22

      Guess I wont bother watching this year either then, no point watching the best drivers (Alonso, Ricciardo, Bottas, Vettel) fight it out for 3rd in the WDC. Congratulations again Mercedes (engineering brilliance). Wake me when another team can actually fight Mercedes fairly for a change then it might not be another hollow champion who stands on top because of a 2 second a lap advantage…

      1. Hey, at least the second seat is occupied by a competitive driver so that the WDC won’t be a complete snooze-fest, unlike 2002, 2004, 2011, or 2013.

      2. Wah, Wah, Wah!

        If you don’t like the fact that a team can dominate then maybe F1 isn’t for you?

        Part of the thing which makes F1 as great as it is is the fact each team designs there own cars & when you have that then there is always the chance that 1 team will have an advantage & if that is the case then it should be upto the other teams to do a better job & catch them.

        Plenty of other things such as spec series & other categories like Napcar which prevents teams/manufacturer’s from having any significant advantage which are perhaps better suited to you.

        I also think its premature to believe that Mercedes will dominate again anyway, We haven’t seen most of the cars & none of them have even turned a wheel yet. Just because Bernie says they will dominate doesn’t mean they will.

        1. So Vettel is the best driver now huh? I thought the dury was still out. Anyway you do know that the Formula 1 Championship started in 1950 right? Yes, that’s 65yrs Sir. So I hardly think all that history will suddenly come to a shuddering halt just because you by your lonesome decide to switch off. The sport survived the dominance of McLaren, Williams, Ferrari, Redbull and I’m sure it will survive Mercedes.

          1. The sport survived the dominance of McLaren, Williams, Ferrari, Redbull and I’m sure it will survive Mercedes.

            The real question is, will it survive the dominance of Bernie Ecclestone? ;)

      3. Wake me when another team can actually fight Mercedes fairly for a change then it might not be another hollow champion who stands on top because of a 2 second a lap advantage…

        Why do you think the other teams are not able to fight fairly?

        1. @arijitmaniac – but he has a point. When one team is given an unfair advantage, year after year, we can expect them to be… Ferrari. Oh.

      4. Spare us further moaning and go away already then.

      5. Honestly, I couldn’t care less what positions they fight about. If I get a whole lot of epic racing between the guys you mentioned (and some episodes with them battling Rosberg and Hamilton as well as drivers like Hulkenberg, Kimi, Grosjean, Massa, Ricciardo and some nice drives from guys like Kvyat, surprises and cockups from rookies etc) I am all for it.

        And IF Mercedes are really that much up front, all the more reason for Mercedes to stick with their policy of letting the guys fight it out on track. Hamilton will want to one up Rosberg in qualifying and Rosberg will want to show he is able to fight and win on track.

        All in all, I see no reason to feel let down up front. Sure, it could be another average year, like we have had many, but last year was good enough to be happy to expect something similar.

      6. This Merc. dominance is many times better than 2002, 2004 Ferrari era, where MSC was assured of victory, no race.
        Also better than Red Bull days more because MW not upto that level. If it was Daniel vs Seb, would have been interesting to watch even if they won most races.
        At least Merc. even with dominance we see 2 drivers pushing each other. I am confident Nico will be tougher this year.

    3. F1 survived the Schumacher era and the Red Bull era, why would the Mercedes era be any different?

      1. Indeed. I guess it’s just typical Bernie talk, again.

        1. and the mclaren era, and the lotus era. always is an “era of dominance” get over it! that’s what f1 is (and always has been) about

        2. Exactly. Looks like Bernie just took that line as a que to get onto his subject of changing the engines once again @toiago, @matiascasali

      2. Because Bernie does not want to. It baffles me that the person who talk down the sport the most is the guy who runs it. He must be senile.

        1. Bernie already has more money than he can spend so now it’s more important to him to get his own way than it is to make even more money for his employer(s).

        2. Its because he’s pushing his agenda.

          For the past year all we have heard from Bernie is that F1 is broken, the new power units are awful, Mercedes dominance should be ended, More spectacle, More show, More wow factor & all the other nonsense.

          1. And he is saying this as a smokescreen to cover up the fact that F1 is finally showing signs of terminal illness due to being bled dry for years.

    4. If I understood correctly, the only reason Force India won’t run their new car at the first test, is because their whole launch campaign won’t be over by the start of the test.
      So can someone explain why didn’t they just paint over the old car and parade it around Mexico, while taking the new one to the testing.
      Surely, the testing is invaluable, especially these days when it’s so rare.

      1. From what I understand, it’s because they want extra time to work on the development of their 2015 car, probably so that they can make more use out of the Toyota wind tunnel they recently upgraded to.

        Andrew Green (FI’s Director of Engineering) has stated that a factor in the decision was because there is such a long gap between the first and second tests, they felt that the extra time spent developing the car would be worth more than the extra track time, particularly because Jerez is an unusual circuit with unique asphalt, and the teams don’t actually race there anyway. He also said that they already have data on the tyres Pirelli are bringing to the first Jerez (due to the Abu Dhabi test at the end of last season). Plus they can still go to Jerez with the 2014 car (I guess with the new nose bolted on?) and possibly use the test to give testing time to a reserve driver or young drivers.

        Dates of the tests for reference (note the long gap between Jerez and the first Barcelona test):
        Jerez, Spain – 1-4 February
        Barcelona, Spain – 19-22 February
        Barcelona, Spain – 26 February-1 March

        Most of my information here is from memory, so sorry if misremembered anything.
        If you want clarification, the source for most of my information was this conversation with Andrew Green on TRE (warning, audio is a bit messed up):
        Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqLerIqpouw
        Part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggnWQso_bHU

        1. Probably right, and I am sure they can modify the 14 car to replicate the 15 engine installation for testing purposes. However this is F1, so never assume an announcement from a team is the absolute truth.

        2. And its likely they will use the 2015 engine in their 2014 car for the Jerez test as well

          1. I think it is more likely that the Mercedes Engine isn’t changing for the start of the season so FI don’t need the running to ‘fne tune’ it.

    5. The James Roberts photo is begging for a Caption of the Day contest.

    6. With N.Lauda talking up 1000 + hp, It would seem MB-AMG are confident they can force a lot more air and fuel into their V6 to produce that kind of power, the only alternatives would be ;
      1. He wants to remind everybody how much more talent he needed to become WDC.
      2. He wants to scare the pants off Ferrari and Red Bull to stop them pushing for a change.

      1. He is referencing a plan (initially proposed by Bernie) that was discussed during a meeting by the strategy group earlier this month. Bernie wants a couple of changes to be introduced for 2016-2017, largely aimed at making the cars harder to drive and more spectacular for the fans.

        First of all, he wants to ramp up the engines horsepower to 1000bhp within the next few seasons (most likely 2017). This won’t require a change of engine specification – an increase to the fuel flow rate, higher revs, minor design tweaks such as to crank firing, plus increasing the maximum fuel allowance beyond 100kg would allegedly be enough for the current engines to hit the 1000bhp target.
        They are also discussing making greater engine noise a factor in their modifications of the engines.

        Additionally, there are discussions about introducing bigger wheels/wider tyres, ramping up downforce, and also making the cars look more aggressive (some of these changes could potentially come around as early as 2016 if they are agreed upon).

        1. Personally, I am glad that they are not trying to change the engine formula entirely – the huge research costs were the main driving force behind the high costs of the current engines, they will get cheaper with rules stability (as Renault have pointed out). Changing the engine rules again will just increase costs due to the development required.

          However, I am confused by Bernie’s logic. He wants to make the cars harder to drive, yet he wants to ramp up downforce again? I understand 1000bhp making the cars harder to drive, but having the cars driving like they are on rails won’t help the situation (unless he just means physically harder to drive, like the cars of the 2000s – if so that makes sense). High downforce also has a tendency to produce worse racing due to the greater reliance on clean air and greater disruption of the air flow for the car behind them.

          I’ll admit that some of the changes sound quite exciting… I wonder what the impact on costs will be, though. There has also been some talk about standardising the energy recovery systems in order to reduce costs, but I don’t know if that will actually happen or not.

          1. @polo, very true, but making regulations that have opposite outcomes is not new to F1, for instance reducing the turbulent air flow effect so cars can race closer together and then introducing super fragile tyres that can’t take any sideslip thereby forcing drivers to keep a 2 second gap between cars. As far as I can see these engines provide more power and spectacle than the 2.4L V8s ever did, it is the lack of downforce that is causing the laps to be slower but also more exciting to watch, give them even less downforce and tyres that can take lap after lap of abuse and the racing will be even more entertaining to watch even though lap times may increase.

      2. If they want to free up the engines a bit & see how much more power they can get then fine, But don’t put a figure on it to aim for.

        I also don’t really see the fascination with 1000bhp anyway, Sure its a big number but why does it need to be 1000bhp?
        And why do people seem to think F1 would be better at 1000bhp anyway? Let us not forget that we had 950-1000bhp in the V10 days & for the most part the racing was boring & the cars didn’t look any more spectacular than when they had 800bhp a few years before.

        I also question the wisdom of the extra speed 1000bhp would bring, If there already doing 210-220 at places like Spa/Monza then 1000bhp would see that increase & a crash at those higher speeds is going to be a massive airplane accident where i would fear for the drivers safety.

        Everyone seemed fine with speeds going up prior to 1994 & then 2 drivers were killed, Do we need that to happen again before realizing that there is a thing as the cars been too fast?

        1. That’s very true – safety sounds like it could be a concern. Given that the cars have been slowing down since 2004 in the interests of safety, it seems quite odd to speed the cars up and potentially make them more dangerous – particularly after we have just had a wake-up call in the form of Bianchi’s incident that injuries (and worse) can still happen in F1, no matter how far safety has come in the past couple of decades.

          While the 2014 cars are still regularly 5+ seconds slower around a lap than the 2004 cars were, an important point you bring up is the top speeds. The top speed at Monza in 2004 was 370 km/h, in 2014 it was 360 km/h – only 10 km/h slower. If the current cars are ramped up to 1000 bhp we may see them topping those speeds in the future.

          1. more speed is good. Lauda is correct in every point he makes. Too many open wheel series and even regular hyper cars are stomping on F1’s authority in terms of outright speed and pace. Something has to be done.

        2. @Davey, I would assume that the figure of 1,000bhp is being proposed purely because people have an irrational attraction towards certain figures.

          Bernie knows that the theatricality of such power figures will make people excited – just look at how many posters here have excitedly embraced the idea.
          Similarly, it also plays into those nostalgically harking back to the original turbo era of the 1980’s and the extravagant claims about the power output of some engines from that era (one engineer cynically noted that, even though those engines haven’t been developed for decades, the power output always mysteriously seem to creep up whenever people start waxing lyrical about that era…).

          @polo, with respect to the top speed of the cars, I don’t think that increasing the engine power to 1,000bhp would actually make of a difference in terms of the historical context. The indication is that the 2014 spec Mercedes power unit had a peak power output of 820bhp and, as a rough guide, the top speed of a car is proportional to the cube root of the engine power.

          If we assume that the drag coefficient remained the same (and that the cars were drag limited in terms of top speed), the top speed of the cars would probably only increase by about 7%, or from about 360kph to about 385kph.

          However, that assumes that the drag coefficient didn’t alter significantly – it is plausible that the teams would increase the wing angle slightly, since they could maintain similar straight line performance yet improve their cornering performance, even at a circuit like Monza (given that the middle sector is the one where the most time can be made or lost there).
          In reality, therefore, top speeds would probably only increase to about 375-380kph at Monza, and at most other circuits the increases might be more modest (most observers have cited the increased top speeds this season to cuts in aerodynamics – particularly at the rear of the car – rather than the engines).

      3. I guess its quite possibly a bit of all of those with Niki @hohum

    7. ColdFly F1 (@)
      23rd January 2015, 2:06

      The Mercedes domination is now more likely to continue since Ferrari identified (and all got) the loophole in engine upgrades regulation.

      Tokens used before Barcelona have more performance upside potential than those introduced before Melbourne (more development and testing time). And again tokens used at the end of the season will deliver even more performance upside.

      Mercedes can use less tokens than Ferrari and Renault at the beginning and still be ahead (but maybe just 0.5% rather than 1%).
      They can then introduce those ‘extra’ tokens later in the year giving even more performance upside.

      PS1 – of course none of the manufacturers know what the others will do before Melbourne;
      PS2 – (mentioned earlier) Mercedes can strategically keep a ‘hand full’ of tokens and introduce at end of the season to maximise development, and have a kick start to the 2016 PU;
      PS3 – Honda (I expect) will use 2015 as a testing year, and therefore should fully develop the tokens they get until the very end of the season.

      1. @coldfly about the usage of tokens, it is rumored that Mercedes initially wanted to take their 2014 PU’s to Melbourne, but changed idea when the FIA ruled that Honda would be allocated the average number of unused tokens of the other manufacturers. They would now come with only 5 unused tokens left.

        The lastest numbers I hears were 5 unused for Mercedes, 7 for Renault and 12 for Ferrari, which would allocate 8 to Honda. The change of direction at Mercedes would lose Honda 9 tokens.

        1. ColdFly F1 (@)
          23rd January 2015, 8:14

          thanks @mattds, I missed that rumour.

          Where do you find that information?

          If I were Merc I would not worry too much about Honda; it requires Merc to use 3 ‘tokens’ for Honda to lose 1.

          Also as per PS2 above, and simplifying things immensely, I cannot see a reason for Merc to ‘lead’ the early ‘token’ use race. Unless of course Merc wants Honda to believe that they only have 9 ‘tokens’ left and rush out all development before 28Feb.
          Oh those mind-games!

          1. @coldfly here’s a bit: http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/formel-1/mercedes-faehrt-neuen-motor-nur-8-entwicklungs-token-fuer-honda-9163830.html . This actually mentions 6, 7 and 12 unused for Merc, Renault and Ferrari (instead of what I wrote above 5/7/12) but the end result would still be 8 tokens.

            If I were Mercedes, I think I would wait and see how testing goes. If they go well with their 2015-spec PU and still have a good perceived advantage over Ferrari and Renault, they can deal a good blow to Honda by using most of the tokens by Melbourne:
            – if Honda goes rather well in testing, Mercedes can stop them from becoming the dominant PU by giving them 8 instead of 17 tokens
            – if Honda makes a poor showing, Mercedes can keep them down

    8. Talk about a South Africa/Cape Town Grand Prix is surely only a method for Bernie to pressure on someone else (as he always does, New Jersey anyone?). Our government (and specifically the local government) will not provide funding for F1. Given Bernie’s price tag and the few opportunities for a track/circuit owner or organiser to make money it is unlikely to attract private investors.

      1. Germany is still not signed, and Austin is in limbo. So yeah @synapseza

        1. @bascb Yeah – the German situation is unfortunate. And annoying. It can’t be a true world championship without Germany being represented (both in location and participation).

          I really like COTA – It would be a shame to lose that. It really shows that it is possible to design a good circuit within the FIA restrictions/guidelines. But unfortunately a good circuit is not enough to stay on the calender (Istanbul) :(

    9. I don’t have a problem with dominant teams – however, imo, F1 is headed in the wrong direction, because the cost control in this form basically kills competition, while it also fails to control costs. Dominance in the past, like today, was earned by the teams, but it had to be maintained. Nowadays if a team gets it right I can’t shake the feeling that they have a much easier job to maintain their advantages. And that there is such a broad consensus among fans that Merc will take the WCC again, sort of confirms it for me. So I’m not really surprised that TV ratings go down if the winner is already declared before testing even began.

    10. The cost of Bernies daughters weddings would have saved Caterham 12 times over in their crowd funding initiative and the cost of saving Caterham could have bought hundreds of us fans sports cars and the cost of one of those sports cars could feed thousands in the third world.

      All about perspective really and I won’t cry over wealthy people not getting a share of a pie to go have fun at the weekend in Formula 1.

    11. I’d comment on how foolish the comment of the day is, but I don’t want to be sued for having an opinion the censors want to silence.

      1. Actually he is right in principal.

        Freedom of speech means you can’t be locked up just for speaking, no matter how distasteful. That doesn’t mean you have no consequences.

        I am free to walk into a bar, go up to the captain of the rugby team, and insult his mother to his face. I would fully expect negative consequences, probably in the form of a severe beating.

    12. Interestingly, Hartstein’s tweet has been favorited by Alexander Wurz.

      As for Ecclestone’s comments, they just once prove again that F1’s financial model is flawed. One team is too dominant so we will change regulations to spice up the show and if it does not help, we will change the regulations again.

      Such a logic has nothing to do with sportsmanship. It would make much more sense to give teams more freedom by making the rules less tight so teams could always catch up. But that would make costs go through the roof so rule makers keep tinkering with the rules instead, which also drives up costs. As a result, the goat is dead but the wolf is still hungry, that is, F1 is too expensive and still lacks fairness as successful teams get punished for doing things right.

      1. @girts

        It would make much more sense to give teams more freedom by making the rules less tight so teams could always catch up. But that would make costs go through the roof…

        Actually, restrictive regulations are also proven to drive up costs because money is essentially wasted on iterative design in order to find and exploit microscopic gains in performance – diminishing returns etc.

    13. Niki is surely wrong about 1,000 bhp. The faster the cars are on a given track, the harder it is to overtake, but if you take away downforce the cars are easier to drive. The cars are fine anyway afaic. If only we knew what they’re doing with ERS while we’re watching so we could appreciate that tactical battle they’d be close to perfect.

      Bernie is clearly desperate to stop Mercedes though. Or Lewis should I say, I think Bernie’s discounted Rosberg.

      1. Solution is more power, less aero (or similar to what we have now, certainly much less than DDD freaks of 2010) and wider tires.

      2. @lockup
        “but if you take away downforce the cars are easier to drive”
        That is counter to what anyone in F1 (drivers, engineers, team bosses, etc) says. Where did you get that idea? The downforce makes it like driving a slot car, just ask Vettel. LOL Do you have any links or references to support that statement because I’d like to understand it.

        1. @daved Jenson for example:

          Age is not a factor in this sport. The cars are getting easier to drive, physically.

          “Mentally and technically, probably not. But physically we could all drive with one hand these days. It’s not a challenge.

          I guess the thing is that they drive to the limit, wherever that limit is, so more downforce means more G, and also with going faster the breakaway is more sudden. Plus if they get sideways the downforce starts to disappear so that makes it edgier as well.

          1. @lockup
            Ah, thanks…I see your context now. Yes, the lack of downforce made last years cars slower so there was less physical stress on the drivers and they were “easier to drive”.

            But I’d rather see them be harder to drive all around because they have more power and and wider tires for mechanical grip. That way it wouldn’t stop them from being able to pass. The problem with downforce in the current cars is that a huge chunk comes from the front wings which wash out when they get up behind another car and try to pass. That leaves mostly DRS type passing on straights which is not nearly as interesting. If they let them do ground effects for downforce, it would probably be ok as that is not as sensitive to dirty air from the car in front.

            And if the cars are both faster from more power and have more mechanical grip then they are faster yet always on the edge because the downforce doesn’t allow average drivers to get by. It brings out the best drivers to handle over 1000 HP with limited downforce!

            1. I see what you’re saying @daved, I just think we’re pretty much in a sweet spot at the moment. On the one extreme we could have zero downforce like say TVR Tuscans which is great racing but they don’t have to be LH to do it, and on the other hand we had the 2007/8 F1 cars with all the winglets which were so dramatic on their own but didn’t actually give us great wheel-to-wheel racing.

              Whereas last year we had the most and best wheel-to-wheel racing I can remember in F1.

            2. @lockup
              Totally agree on the great racing last year. Regardless of what caused it, I truly enjoyed the season and not just the racing at the front. I went to the race in Austin and the action in the mid-field was awesome! I’m not an Alonso fan, but I was actually cheering for the guy by the time the race was over. LOL

    14. Are Honda allowing JB to do the London Marathon?

      1. @bullfrog I think its okay as long as he does not use any Yamaha or other Honda rivals bicycle. :)

        1. Don’t use bicycles in a Marathon !

      2. Looking at the stats, Honda’s Le Man veto must be due to the rival manufacturer than on safety grounds*. (* – not saying they dont care for their drivers, however…)

        Le Man 1981-2014: 4x Driver deaths
        London Marathon 1981-2014: 12x participant deaths

        Obviously this is raw figures, not average risk based on participants

      3. Marathon running isn’t a dangerous sport nor does it involve direct competition to Honda’s F1 program.

    15. To use a football analogy (not that I even like football much!!)…

      If you support a team then you always want them to win the league/cup whatever. If they win one year, you want them to win again next year, and the next, and so on… If your team doesn’t win then you want them to buy better players and do their best to knock the current champions off the top spot! I don’t see how that is any different in F1, if Mercedes dominate for a while then they obviously have the best players at the moment, no? It is the other teams jobs to buy better players, build better cars, whatever, and take them down! It may take years but it always happens, that is all part of the fun, surely?

      Also, going back to a few comments about not bothering to watch this year – you’re clearly not a real fan of F1 then!?
      A real football fan will watch games whoever (within reason) is playing and appreciate/enjoy a good goal/tackle/save/bit of good defending when they see it. As an F1 fan, I will always appreciate a good overtake/block/pitstop/start when I see it, whichever team does it and wherever in the field they are!

    16. I don’t understand that what’s the point for “going green” if you want to increase the fuel cap. The sport will contradict itself if it switches to 1000bhp

      1. Yeah exactly @neelv27. But thinking about it I reckon it’s Lauda pointing out that they can easily have the magic 1,000 bhp with the existing engines, so they don’t need an all-new Ferrari-friendly engine formula with standardised difficult bits…

        After all at the moment they only use 2/3 of the revs they have available. The 1,000 bhp is just a smokescreen, is Niki’s point I think.

        1. Niki’s point is confused though because he talks about having a bigger fuel tank which he should no has no bearing on peak power. They don’t even need to use all of the current fuel allowance at many of the tracks so simply increasing the fuel flow limit would allow more power without having to take a backwards step in terms of total fuel use.

          Natural development will add plenty of horsepower over the next few years so even with current flow limits they may not be far off the 1000bhp limit by the time the engines are frozen anyway.

      2. I don’t know why everyone brands the new engines as “going green” or why F1 would even try that smoke screen. It only turns off most traditional fans of motor sport.
        The real reason they did it was to show off their new tech they use in street cars which allows them to meet increasingly restrictive regulations, admittedly put out by greenies in the real world.

        In F1, it was simply an attempt to give manufacturers a platform to show that their technology could be sexy and fast as well as green….since all the tree huggers are forcing it down their throats. Without that platform for marketing, it’s just not good marketing and a good ROI for them to be in the sport.

        I love the new power units because they provide great torque and cool tech that can actually make the car perform better. I couldn’t care less if they let them burn 100kg or 150kg of fuel during a race. Show the stupid tech off and let it use whatever fuel is needed to give us better racing. If I want to save the planet, I’ll walk to work tomorrow. I came here to see some cool tech tear up the track as fast as possible.

        Oh, and get rid of downforce and add huge, wide tyres so we see more passing. The current aero, based so heavily on fancy front wings, washes out the moment they get close to the car in front of them. What a waste. If you HAVE to have more downforce, then use the body and ground effects so they’re not so dang sensitive to the car in front of them.

        /Rambling rant

    17. Most of the time I can disagree with Bernie without even knowing his opinion and be comfortable that I am right. In this case though, he has a point. I don’t mind a team dominating even if it is not my team.(ie: RBR for the last 4-5 years)
      Mercedes domination b/c they did their homework is cool. My problem is having a new technology and not allowing team to develop it. If not for a loophole, we would have zero chance of anyone catching Mercedes and even with it, there is only a slim chance of anyone even getting close. If teams could test like the old days, we could see 4-5 teams fighting for wins every race. Since the whole testing band, whoever has the advantage on day one seems to win in the end. That’s why we see many top drivers and teams muddling around for scraps of points while 1 team owns the front row each week. It just seems to get a bit less exciting each year…. But, I have followed F1 for 30+ yrs, I guess I can wait for things to change… I hope :)

    18. Why is it that every time I read an article on F1 these days, all I can do is wish for Bernie to be gone? I don’t care how: JUST. GO. AWAY. Don’t go away mad, JUST. GO. AWAY.

    19. Re Mercedes ‘Domination’ – let’s not forget now all Mercedes powered teams know the exact dimensions of the engine, so they can make the smaller chassis with the measure ‘bumps’ the same way Mercedes did this year (for those of you who don’t know what i’m talking about, see the Mark Hughes explanation). so i suspect Williams may a slight advantage if the new regs haven’t changed their design too much compared to the Silver Arrows

    20. No Bernie, you cant afford Mercedes dominance for 3 more years. Why? Because their contract with FOM says that if they win three WCC’s they get the right to receive a Constrcutors Champion bonus like Ferrari, Red Bull and McLaren. The new formula is great, the racing is good and Ferrari, Renault and Honda will bridge the gap to Mercedes in time.

    Comments are closed.