Bring back V10 engines, says Verstappen

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Max Verstappen wants F1 to bring back V10 engines, which were last seen in the sport 12 years ago.

Social media

Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:

Comment of the day

Last weekend’s Caption Competition was won by @RBAlonso:

After the Australia 2015 debacle, Ericsson was determined to give himself the best possible chance at the Sauber drive.

Thanks to everyone who joined in this weekend and special mentions to Roth Man, Pinak Ghosh, Stan, Hahostolze, Colinf, JackySteeg and BrianW who also came up with very funny captions.

Enjoy the best of last year’s Caption Competition winners here:

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Jt19, Shreyas Mohanty, William and William Olive!

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

Mario Andretti made it four different winners from the first four races in 1977 on this day 40 years ago at Long Beach.

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.

109 comments on “Bring back V10 engines, says Verstappen”

  1. I can’t stand anymore this nonsense of bringing V10’s back.
    And by the way, i think Verstappen doesn’t even remember how they sounded..

    1. @edmarques ?? Why wouldn’t he remember?

      Firstly, he watched it in person when his dad was still racing. Secondly, they ran a 2 seater V10 Minardi at Australia. I’m not sure but I’m guessing there are a lot of exibitions like that at every GP. So plenty of chance to hear old cars… last year Stoffel drove Ayrton’s McLaren, so…

      And lastly, even if he forgets, he can always watch videos on youtube. Like we all do.

      1. Wow! Wathcing on youtube? Great!
        It was a jab at his age and to the fact that since he is feeling that he is not going to be a factor in the races (which is quite ridiculous hence we had one race, and he was a factor on it) he started to complaint a lot.
        But he is MAX! i guess i have to agree to everything that he says.

        1. Dear Ed,

          You said he never heard the sound of the V10 but he did growup in the pit while the V10 were operating.
          And no you don’t have too agree what he says.

          Watching on youtube isn’t the same as standing next to the track believe me my ears are still damaged and youtube can’t reproduce that effect.

        2. Everything alright ed?
          You sounded a bit frustrated..

        3. @edmarques no, not on Youtube. In person. His dad raced in the V12 and V10 eras as well, and he was in the pitlane constantly.

        4. @edmarques i just answered your ridiculous complain about how Verstappen doesn’t remember how the V10 sounded.

          You don’t have to agree with him, but at least give a valid reason!

          1. Ridiculous is this moaning about v10’s engines.
            The complaint itself is ridiculous.

      2. how many people goes to an f1 track each year a million? how many watch it on tv? hundreds of millions? is it such a big deal a sound that most of the fans will never hear on site? i’m sure you’ve went to a TC or TC2000 race. is the same the sound on site that on TV? Nope. the problem with the sound for the most of F1 fans is because the TV! Bernie wanted them to sound quiet on tv and liberty haven’t bothered to correct it yet.

        1. It has nothing to do with how LOUD they are, the fact is they sound TERRIBLE!! Make them as quiet as possible. A Formula E car sounds far more interesting, and is actually more pleasant to the ear.

          1. I went to track and the cars sound GREAT live. What we got on television has nothing to do with it.
            Hhahaha Formula E has no sound

          2. I saw a race at a track last year and had no problem with sound whatsoever. I can’t believe these sound talks just wont go away. There’s so much stuff to fix in F1, and the issue with sound should be a very distant priority. But no, it is always there as a distraction.

        2. @matiascasali

          Bernie was strongly against these engines and fought hard against therm.

          1. Mr Ecclestone took great pleasure in blaming the decline in viewers upon the sound of the engine exhaust. I am sure, given time, he would blame the decline of viewers to almost anything other than the elephant in the room.

          2. Mr Crowsen is ( @drycrust ) is absolutely correct. He was the dinosaurs dinosaur.
            Constantly trying to revive an era which had long passed. In today’s economic
            environment, if you want to use high technology to attract an audience then you
            must use a system relevant to the future of car design for the masses. Anyone
            can go to a drag racing track and watch monstrous machines deliver staggering
            acceleration. But those machines are dinosaurs. Having no relevance whatsoever
            beyond their short-lived spectacle. And, very gradually, the racing environment in
            saloon ( sedan) car racing, rally and rallycross racing, endurance racing and virtually
            all motor sport will be forced to follow the technical lead that F1 is blazing.

            It’s the future of the internal combustion engine. It’s evolution via supreme
            racing vehicles. Better get used to the idea.

        3. Also @matiascasali, let’s not forget that there are actual limits to the volume a TV station can put on your TV screens, to protect peoples ears!

          But you are certainly not wrong that if fans are underwhelmed by the sound they get, it is more up to the TV stations and FOG to work with the teams towards microphone placement and tuning the sound that comes out to get over well, than it is about the sound of the cars on track.

          Last year I found the F1 cars to be just about perfect in real life. The GP2 cars made me put in ear plugs when I was seated near the track, but then we couldn’t talk, so we just moved further back instead.

        4. @matiascasali on TV the STC2000 cars sound great. The F1s? not so much. The recording could be improved, also the camera angles. But the inherent sound of the cars is very different. The V10s were music. The V8s, not as good… these V6s sound very bad IMO.

          Is the the most important thing ever? no, far from it. But it does give you some sensations that cannot be described. Isn’t what we all want anyway?

    2. I wouldn’t want V8’s but v10 would be great. The caption I think the reference is a little outdated and there were funnier one liners.

      1. Peppermint-Lemon (@)
        3rd April 2017, 7:30

        Agreed on both of your points

    3. I’m dying here :)), nonsense bringing back the good old V10’s? :)))
      That’s what formula 1 is all about, remember that when you get in your electrical car :))

      1. Another pathetic kid that thinks this is about environmental issues.

        1. Well…..some of us kids are in our seventies…….but we’ll let your
          words blow away on the wind….kiddo !

    4. I can’t stand the yes/no discussions on engine sounds; both camps shouting louder than a V10 F1 engine ;)

      And having my reply way down the endless comments queue :(

    5. @edmarques And I can’t stand this nonsense of calling another’s opinions that disagree with yours nonsense.

      And by the way, Verstappen was 8 years old in 2005. He was present in the paddock and on track at those times(obviously he was 6 during his father’s last season in 2003, but it is known that he visited in 2004 and 2005 as well). So why wouldn’t he remember?

    6. Misleading headline. Max didn’t say he wanted V10s back, just that “it would be very nice to have a V10 engine or something, with the lovely sound.” It’s pure nostalgia and not really a desire to return to the past. And, apparently, anything would do, as long as it makes that “lovely sound”. I’m sure someone could invent something like the playing card we used to add to our bikes to hit the spokes as we rode…

      1. Excellent correction @clive-allen. To read that Verstappen ( or any other F1 Driver for that
        matter ) said something specific about F1….but we later discover that in reality he was
        being far less precise is, I suppose, par for the course in F1 publicity.

        I’ve said what I think about the sounds F1 cars make, above, but if I was an F1 driver
        I’d not enjoy being liberally misquoted. Still……I suppose it goes with the territory !

    7. Hug?

    8. Sure, who wants to hear a more pleasurable racing engine noise when thy can listen to a turbo charged vacuum cleaner…right? They wont be coming back anyway so enjoy watching/listening to F1 racing with one of the key ingredients removed.

    9. Errr…..yes he does…..there was a two seater V10 doing demo laps at this Australian GP.

  2. I wish Daniil Kvyat all the best this season. I really think he has something special in him and I hope he kind find a way to unlock it this season. In that magnificent-looking car!

  3. I say it is time we do away with these silly helmets. It is destroying the DNA of Grand Prix Racing! Imagine the true greats like Carraciola wearing one of these atrocious helmets! You can’t even properly see the drivers anymore. It completely ruins the show. Part of the awe of grand prix racing is seeing the best drivers risk everything. I remember my first race, one of the newbies crashed near where we were standing. I will never forget the thrill of flying car and bodyparts around us. Went to the season opener in buenos aires last week and it just wasn’t the same. Its like the sport is completely sanatized by now.
    And where is the challenge for the driver if there is no risk whatsoever? Noone will have to think about risk anymore as errors will no longer be punished. That wimp Ascari surely would be rubbish in a proper race in the olden days!
    Whats next, lock spectators away behind fences?

    1. @mrboerns – nicely done :-)

    2. first seat-belts, and now this!

      weakness disgusts me!

  4. and real men to F1…

    1. Chris (@tophercheese21)
      3rd April 2017, 2:12

      Yeah, I’m so sick of all these FAKE men! SAD! #MF1GA

  5. While I would agree that the V10’s sounded fantastic I still don’t think that the sound/volume alone is a reason to go back to them.

    While quieter the current power units are producing similar performance to the V10’s all while been significantly more efficient. Rather than constantly putting them down & moaning about noise I think that everyone in F1, the fans & especially those in the media should be applauding that fact rather than looking for every & any opportunity to put them down & go on about how the less efficient, less technically interesting engines of yesteryear were better just because they were louder.

    Whatever engine format they come up with next should be decided upon based solely on performance, technical relevance & yes efficiency. They should not pick the next formula based purely on what is louder, Nor should they pick it based on what fans want.

    The world is moving on & F1 must do the same. Sticking with outdated ideas & constantly looking backwards is going to do nothing but see it stay in the past when it needs to be moving forward.

    1. I don’t think it makes any sense to be on some cutting edge of technology just because you want to look like you are on the cutting edge. There is more to the engine than just the perceived technical level of engineering. A v10 engineered and built in 2017 is a different beast than a v10 from 2005. Even the rules don’t have to be the same.

      What we know for a fact is that hybrid engines have been a failure. The costs are insane which is hurting all teams. The sound is just poor. If fuel saving is the thing to have then we have the best engines. Yay, the litres per 100km has never been this low, isn’t it amazing? Is it? In reality the engines are heavy, complicated and expensive. For racing engine they suck if you look at all the zeros you need to add to the price number if you compare them to a v10. And without the rules setting a minimum fuel limit the v8 or the v10 would still do a race quicker without refueling than these hybrids. So the engines are slow as well.

      I think the issue with focusing only on the engines in f1 is going to hurt it. Bowing down to car manufacturers will not make f1 last because the manufacturers come and go. With v10 engines the development would be cheaper which would not only allow teams like mclaren and red bull to build their engines but it would also guarantee cheaper engines for the rear end of the grid when someone like cosworth could provide 98% of the same power with fraction of the cost of a mercedes or ferrari. Moving to v10s that could be something like a 90% price decrease for someone like sauber, haas or force india. All that money could then be used to get rid of pay drivers and invest more into car development = better racing and more teams.

      With a v10 we could then turn the technology development towards other parts of the car. There are so many things f1 can be on the forefront of the technology in racing. It doesn’t have to be expensive and dull engines.

      V10 or V12 is a possible choise. You just need to be willing to look at what it beings to the table. There are many more things than just the sound that would make it an improvement. At this point we are looking at three possible options for the next engine. V10 or V12. Hybrid engine with small 1.2 litre or 1 litre petrol engine with bigger electric motor. Or full electric. I think it is almost a no-brainer. The v10/v12 wins on all areas except fuel efficiency.

      1. Meant to say “And without the rules setting a minimum weight limit the v8 or the v10 would still do a full distance race quicker without refueling than these hybrids.”

        1. The V10/V12 PU’s were able to do 2 GP-weekends at a decent performance. That would mean teams the likes of Sauber would have to buy 20+ engines just to race, and a few more for testing purposes. Compare this to the 10 units needed now, for races AND testing. Yes the current PU’s are expensive but you only need half as much of them.
          The V10’s weren’t cheap, but money wasn’t a problem then, since Tobacco advertising footed the whole circus.
          Add to that the inflation figures and you’ll get a V10-engine that is @ 70% of the current PU.

          1. The engines will do as many weekends are the rules require. There is no reason to bring back qualifying engines if we put v10s or v12s into the cars. The rules can easily dictate the engine must be last say 5 race weekends for example. That being said I don’t know what kind of rpms could we expect from a 3 litre v12 that needs to last 5 race weekends for example.

      2. @socksolid

        I agree with all of this 100%

        The current cars are not in real terms very efficient, carrying around as they do an extra 100 kilos. It really is not very ‘F1’. Imagine what a lightweight 2021 V10 or V12 would be like, it would be a thing of magnificence!

        1. @paulguitar well point Is, they are still *more* Efficient than Those v10s you are so fixated on *while* carrying 100kgs of fuel. Also they will Beat the v10s if run on equal fuel regulations, refuelling or not.

          1. I can actually do the calculation. And I have.

            I don’t think the hybrids could beat v10s. No way. This is assuming that the v10 can take more fuel onboard than the 105kg. Obviously it is pointless to have a 105kg limit on the v10s. Just like it is pointless to enforce the 728kg minimum weight limit for the v10 because the hybrid engine is the reaso why the weight limit is so high.

            A v10 engine and ancillaries weight about 112kg. Hybrid engine weighs 200kg (ice, batteries, turbos, intercoolers…). That’s already 88kg benefit for the v10. The hybrid takes 105kg fuel to run the race. The v10 takes 172,2kg fuel to finish the race. That’s 67,2kg more fuel in the v10.

            This means the empty car weight for the hybrid is 728kg as it is on this season (empty car). However the v10 with its much much lighter engine goes down to 640kg. Remember the only difference here is the engine weight. Both cars have the same tires, chassis and safety features. It is 2017 car just with different (and better!) engine.

            This means that on one qualifying lap the v10 will easily beat the heavier hybrid under the same rules regarding drs and aero and tires.

            In the race it is the same thing. The v10 starts the race at 812,2kg. The hybrid starts at 833kg. It is a no contest. The v10 is much quicker because it is not so incredibly heavy. And the weight difference only grows bigger as the race progresses!

            Assuming one kilogram of extra fuel costs about 0.025s per lap we can then calculate how long it would take for both cars to finish the melbourne gp. The hybrid according to my calculation can do the gp in 1 hour 25 minutes and 32 seconds. The v10 can do it 2 minutes and 24 seconds faster. Both cars fuel save as much in this example. Even if we bump the time per kilogram to 0.1s per kg per lap the v10 is still slightly faster. But the 0.025 is pretty close to the truth if we assume the relation with more fuel and laptime increase is linear.

            The hard cold fact is that extra weight of the hybrid doesn’t even earn its own weight back compared to the 2005 v10s. If the teams could choose everyone would be running v10s because it costs less and gives much better performance in race car. v10 is faster engine period.

            2013 racecar engineering engines special edition

      3. @socksolid, why would the V10’s be any cheaper than the current hybrid engines? During the previous V10 formula, an engine supply from a manufacturer team was, inflation adjusted, more expensive than the current engines are now. Cosworth were there at the time to supply engines, but Cosworth today is a pale shadow of what it once was about 15 years ago and has pretty much abandoned motorsport now (about 90% of their turnover now comes from the energy sector, and in particular wind turbines).

        It feels an awful lot like you are creating a scenario of what you want to see happen (i.e. a return to V10’s or V12’s) and then twisting a narrative around it to try and rationalise your position.

        1. Good point Anon, those V10 engines were at an age when F1 was still swimming in money from Tobacco with manufacturers also putting in incredible amounts of money. They were certainly not cheap.

          And given that engine manufacturers would be less likely to want to put their own money behind developping them now, it could well be that they would be more expensive to buy right now.

          1. @bascb It would be interesting to see how actual customer costs have changed in F1 over the years (based on cost per season). A very quick google search showed a claimed cost by Cosworth in 2003 of a $17m per year cost (this seems to be talking about a theoretical position based on two spec engines only and a target of $10m per season – so presumably the actual cost to customer teams in 2003 was well above $17m per season).

            In 2016 reports were of a reduced fixed customer cost of €12m down from €20m. Not sure if this has been implemented yet.

            Depending on the €/$ exchange rate used the 2003 cost is in the region of €12m-€16m, in other words around the same range as teams are currently paying. As mentioned by anon add inflation into it and it seems like the cost today isn’t so bad after all. The main costs then are the development costs of the manufacturers but ultimately they will decide on the development budget they have and will spend it regardless of the engine format in place. This doesn’t seem to be an actual issue affecting the lower end of the grid in terms of keeping the business afloat, it seems that it’s income (or lack of it) rather than costs which are currently the issue.

    2. It might just be that RBR (again, sigh) is pushing to get rid of engines that actually bring in manufacturers. RBR would probably be happy to see the likes of Renault and Mercedes (well and Honda, but yeah) lose interest, so that they would be the only one to fight with over the title with Ferrari.

      1. It might also just be that some so called journalist thought up an outrageous title to a not at all interesting excuse for an article (again, sigh) trying to bait people into nonsensical discussions about nothing the interviewee said, for the fun of it, just to see who believes a crap headline and who actually reads said ‘article’

        1. Sadly that happens only all too often too, yes.

  6. Disappointed in this young genuis. I say bring back V12’s The banshee.

    1. pastaman (@)
      3rd April 2017, 12:45

      Sorry, have to disagree with you. V10s sounded better to my ear! V12s a close second :)

  7. @stefmeister – Totally agree, well said. The sound should be a byproduct of the engine, not the other way around.

    In my over 50 years of following F1 I marvel at the progression of the overall technology, including the engines. Each formula has been somewhat the same and somewhat different, almost a continuum of sorts. Some formulas have been more successful than others and obviously some people favor some more than others. But, just going back to the V-10 for the sake of sound seems like a regression. The current formula is technologically advanced and worthy of F1. The next formula should be a progression of this one. Not just one that “sounds” good.

    1. Yes, well said!

    2. Yeah but ‘technology’ ain’t geting people turning up to races is it?

  8. Why this fascination with V10s? Why not W12s, H16s, X24s, R28s…? I mean, since we’re being made to believe more cylinders are somehow always better?

    Here’s one humble I4 for you all to ponder:

    1. W24!!!! POWEEEEEEER!

    2. I’m all for keeping the high tech modern engines, but having seen that video it does make me think that a 28l 4cylinder fire breathing beast format might draw the crowds. Not sure it would run so well with a 100kg/h fuel flow limit though and interaction with modern aero would be interesting!

      1. You can’t deny it is spectacular, can you? Yet, it has 2 cylinders less than the current F1 engine, which is being considered inferior to the V8s and V10s on the basis it has less cylinders, as if that’s the only relevant criteria. Bonkers!

    3. pastaman (@)
      3rd April 2017, 12:46

      Because V10s gave one an eargasm

      1. Whereas a V12 or a flat-12 didn’t?

  9. Keep the V6 ICE but Bi Turbo instead of Turbo take out all the Hybrid Parts and allow 120-150 Kg of Fuel limit and no fuel flow limit and let them develop as much as they can also set per season ICE limit in between 6-8 . You get the car around 600 kg in Q simulation and 750Kg or so in Race start. That way they go on diet after every year increasing the weight in one way or another allow Indy car Style Ground effect so that cars can follow closely. You get incredible lap times and noise and closer racing importantly.
    The Hybrid’s are the reason these cars are wicked fast in qualification but not to so much in race, so taking them out to normal way will reduce the difference between Q and R

    1. and let them rev up to 20,000 rpm!

  10. The same people who are complaining about ‘better sounding engines/V10s’ are also the ones who say that music died 1979.
    I attended my first Grand Prix 2 years ago at age 28, and I thought that the engine sounds would be unberable if they would be louder than they were then.

    1. @dam00r

      Well, you really missed out. The N/A engines used to make grown men jump on the spot like 5 year olds, such was the level of visceral excitement.

      If you are UK based, take a trip to the Goodwood Festival of Speed and see/hear what you missed!

      1. used to make grown men jump

        And all these grown men were wearing yellow ear protectors :p

        1. Well, I wasn’t!…..:)

      2. @paulguitar Goodwood Festival of Speed is a good point actually. Not being in the UK, I haven’t been able to attend, but from the photos and stories of people who did it sounds awesome. Including feeling those great classic cars and engines from the past, while I walk around with earplugs in. But I don’t agree F1 needs to be like that.

        Just like I love the sight and smell of a steamtrain – such an impressive, almost living beast, smelly, hot, smokey, much more interesting to experience than a modern German ICE train, where only the wheels rattle, and the breaks as it enters a station. Still, I much prefer the latter as a means of transportation, and I also have to echo what @bascb said above about liking the sound and volume the cars produced in 2016.

        1. @bosyber

          I take your point about the steam train, but to me there is a really big difference. A train is something we use to get around on, and whilst we can look back on the amazing engineering of a stream train and still really appreciate it, clearly a modern train fulfills the role of getting us around much better, however it is not there to entertain us.

          An F1 car is really primarily there for entertainment, isn’t it? The rules can be put together in such a way that we can have something truly spectacular to go and marvel at in the flesh. The current cars are technical marvels, certainly, but if one has attended races in the era of the V10’s and V12’s, they are almost comically underwhelming in comparison. It does not matter much on TV, but at the track, the difference is really shocking.

          We have Formula E for the ‘green’ research. I think we all can understand, wherever we stand on the efficiency of F1 engines, that the fuel itself used to go F1 racing is effectively irrelevant, on the basis that flying one large jet across the Atlantic or Pacific uses more than all of the F1 cars use in the course of a full season’s racing. I understand the need to research ways to use less fuel, I suppose I just can’t understand what the hell it has to do with Grand Prix racing.

          1. I was too late to see full time V12 racing @paulguitar, but I did get the last of the V10s, and though I agree they were much better than the V8’s, I think the current engines are both technically more interesting, and provide a better at-the-track experience for me.

            In that sense I compare it to that steam engine, or going to Goodwood: overhwelming experience, great, but I do not need to feel my teeth rattle throughout a whole race, let alone the weekend, I’d prefer to be able to follow the race and discuss it. It’s a different sort of entertainment, a race really/hopefully.

            I can live with you seeing that different, as long as it doesn’t mean we loose what I find interesting and special about F1 for something that feels backwards to me to be loudly entertaining.

  11. Each time someone says “bring back” something in F1, I wanna put my fist through a wall. Or better yet, put the guy’s head who said it through the wall.

    1. My Bonnie (to me)

    2. Sounds like you need some help!

    3. Yea! Shame on all of you for having memories! Cut it out and go to your room!

    4. Might I suggest you start with the ‘journalist’ who made up the click bait title… and next yourself for not reading the original ‘article’

    5. What about knockout qualy??? Short memory eh?

  12. I’m quite happy with the current engines thanks Max. No V10 required, simply better racing.

  13. Michael Brown (@)
    3rd April 2017, 3:54

    Can’t go back to V10s without the green bullies screeching that you don’t care about the planet.

    1. @mbr-9, who says it is anything to do with your supposed “green bullies”? Sounds like you are creating a straw man to vent your frustrations out upon.

    2. Although I usually nod in agreement with comments that F1 isn’t directly road relevant, there’s no doubt in my mind that some of the R&D that’s contributed to the remarkable efficiency of these cars will make it to the road. As far as the green thing goes: if you don’t get it… after all this time… then perhaps you need screaming at.

      1. I read the comment as not so much about green theory, more about green bullies. And that’s a point that hasn’t been refuted, only ridiculed. Typical.

        Straw man? For real?

        I think green bullies is a great way to describe the way these guys advance their own agendas. Its not just about “save the planet”. If you don’t get that, after all this time, perhaps you need screaming at.

  14. I think a multi engine formula would be cool:
    2L Twin Turbo 5 Cylinder with nitrous oxide, nitromethane fuel
    3L V10 with nitrous oxide, nitromethane fuel
    1.6L V6 turbo hybrid
    I bet few teams would go with the hybrid, due to weight, complexity, cost and general all round gayness.

    But yeah could you imagine a developed 2021 version of a V10 like someone else previously said. That would be mint.

  15. Everyone that claims ‘efficiency’ about the benefits of the new engines over the v10’s citing fuel consumption as evidence yet ignores the fact that direct injection (much more efficient than regular injection in the plenium/runners) was always banned in F1 even when being used on road cars etc and as such we haven’t even seen what sort of efficiency a new direct injection 3.0 V10 would be able to achieve, as we were stuck with regulations written by dinosaurs at the time (poor effort at cost cutting allowed this to happen).

  16. The future is electric, so everyone better start getting used to quiet engines.

    That being said, I’ve said it a hundred times: I believe that F1 should relax its rules a lot. Give the manufacturers a very broad formula and let them decide how many cylinders they want and in what configuration, whether they want turbo or not, KERS or not, and whatever. Let the teams use tyres made by whichever company is willing to provide them, whatever compound, whatever size, as many or as few pitstops as they want. All within safety and common sense rules, of course, but with absolute freedom within those limits.

    I really don’t understand why they insist on regulating everything down to the millimeter. It certainly hasn’t improved the show, it hasn’t improved parity, and it hasn’t brought the costs down. All it’s done is stifle innovation.

    1. Bah, electric, that’s yesterday’s news. Hydrogen’s where the party’s at at – bring on Formula H!

      It’s like Ross Brawn said: if they can first identify all the common parts that have no real effect on performance and standardise them, that would bring down costs and allow them free up the regs on the rest.

    2. The problem with this is that most teams are not manufacturers. So opening up engine regulations we’d have Ferrari, Mercedes, Renault and Honda creating new engines. These teams would create engines far superior engines than ones that are available to buy – in terms of fuel efficiency, speed…etc leaving the teams like Red Bull, Sauber..etc to basically only be able to buy there ones if they wanted to compete. Now Ferrari, Mercedes and Renault will all basically copy each other as it will be fairly obvious, once the rules are analysed, which type of engine is best and so the whole grid will have the same engine. Now as all the companies have recently invested a ridiculous quantity of money into the current engines and whether people like it or not the move towards smaller hybrid engines is what is happening in the real world, it is almost certain they’d stick with hybrid technology. Yes they’d probably change them a bit but all this would cause is that when they turned up at preseason testing there’d be more difference between engines than there is now. This would effectively turn F1 into a 3 tier sport for a couple of seasons – which would cause so much controversy that somebody would suggest tighter engines regulations to bunch them back up. I exclude Honda from all this as judging by their current engine disaster god knows what they’d do if they were allowed to do anything.

      1. Maybe the first year or two would be chaos, given the sudden freedom, but eventually things would settle down and, as you say, designs would tend to convege. Maybe they could proggressively relax the regulations over a few seasons, not all at once. There have been considerably different cars with different engines racing together in the past.

  17. What does Ver know about v10 engine???? another game/level?

  18. What Max is really saying is that he thinks the V10’s would eliminate power gradient among manufacturers and his RB chassis would win him the WDC.

    1. @blik, you know, I wouldn’t be surprised if that is very much the crux of the matter and, with Red Bull being the masters of playing the fans like a fiddle, they have worked the sound aspect to make them all sing along to their tune.

  19. These things are messing with my head, what day is it? Are we really talking about the sound again or I have woken up in the same day?

    I saw the very entertaining Formula E Mexico ePrix this weekend, I couldn’t care less about the sound, it would be great if F1 and its drivers focused on real problems. What next? Ban the McLaren because of that mess of a livery or Renault because they forgot to finish it? Please…

    1. @johnmilk, well, when people keep living in the past, it is no wonder that it feels like you are always waking up in the past too. As for other excuses to ban things, don’t start giving people ideas…

    2. @johnmilk Exactly. Of course the Formula E cars sounded rubbish but we had a great race and that’s all that matters. This was mainly due to the lack of aero causing less turbulent air and allowing cars to follow very closely aswell as their budget cap which means a very close field of racing. Those are my two major gripes, I’d like re-fuelling to be elemented back into the sport too, which creates a stategic dynamic.

      1. @lolzerbob the budget cap won’t ever work in F1. It will be better to put efforts on increasing the budget of smaller teams, either by better redistributing money or by making the sport attractive for sponsors to come in and help those guys, or both of course.

        I would like to see re-fuelling only if we have proper tyres, because tyres should be just tyres, as good as possible. Re-fuelling in my opinion is the only tactical factor that could be implemented without the look and feel of a gimmick. And let them have the chance of do a full race or not.

        I have been watching a series of videos in the Formula 1’s youtube channel, where people voted for their best GPs (by country, i.e, best Australian GP), and most of them had re-fuelling, surely that isn’t a coincidence.

        Also, my dream is to see a certain Mexican go from beginning to end without stopping, hopefully in Monaco, and make those guys fight him like animals.

      2. oh, and of course, it cannot be a problem safety wise.

        Maybe mandate a fixed pit-stop time? If it sounds stupid but it works, it isn’t stupid

  20. Who even makes V10 these days for the road or racing?

    Granted V10 is the best layout for making awesome sound, way better than V12, V8… But for making a car go fast… No point in turbocharging more than a V8… Even more than V6 if limited to 1.6l displacement.

    And since we dont have twin turbos .. I4 makes sense… Overall rules are veriety unfriendly. That is their ultimate downfall.

  21. You know, for every problem people have with F1, there’s a different series you can watch instead/as well. I wish we could stop expecting F1 to change to our individual taste, as if no-one else matters. F1 is getting stuck in a fan-war. We should all be thinking “I can’t wait to see what’s next”.

  22. Whenever I see any comment such as the one Verstappen has made, I always reply with this question: “well who is going to supply them?”

    Because I cannot think of too many names off the top of my head.

    1. @craig-o Tag heuer is gonna supply them ;)

  23. I think it would be very nice to have a V10 engine or something, with the lovely sound.

    Again we have the idea that sound levels that are in the threshold of pain aren’t harmful. If Max Verstappen wants to inflict such pain and the long term effects of this on himself that he is welcome to do so, but there are a lot of people that don’t want his desire for poorly regulated sound levels to be inflicted on themselves. Everyone employed at a race should be issued with proper sound protection equipment regardless of whether they are within earshot of the cars or not. The reason being is I suspect some staff have to work within earshot but are deemed “out of earshot” because of their status or some feeble excuse that, upon investigation, comes down to “we didn’t want to spend the money to protect your hearing”. The only way around this problem is to insist all staff have the right equipment issued to them.
    Even so, I don’t see how track marshalls can attend to an emergency without being able to communicate, which requires hearing, and the easiest way is to have engines that emit sounds that don’t hinder communication unnecessarily.

  24. So Max wants to go back to the olden days and resurrect an engine & cars he has never driven….. ok then.

    Sounds to me like he’s just going along with what’s being said by everyone.

    V10’s are old and the scope for development had run its course, this is what we’ve got now, embrace it. Fix the real problems and stop trying to fix something that’s not broken.

    1. No he does not. Don’t buy the ridiculous headline. ‘Journalist’ should be ashamed. Read the ‘article’

  25. Pay Fans!” by @cliffery didn’t make it?
    Maybe @anon was correct ;)

  26. Neil (@neilosjames)
    3rd April 2017, 10:31

    Sat on the general admission area at Copse one year, very close to the track. The V10s were special, hair-raising and exciting for about 15 minutes. Once I got used to them, they were a little bit irritating.

    Not heard the V6 turbos ‘in person’ yet, but I think I’d probably prefer them to the V10s. They sound a little more interesting on TV, rather than just producing an ear-splitting screech.

  27. I can’t tell from the article whether Max is yearning after the V10s’ noise (as the majority of fans who complain about the engine noise), tonal qualities (as people like me complain about the engine noise) or both.

    I am worried about the amount of talking Max is doing, as it is already more than last year, and drivers who do that are usually either not confident in their teams’ ability to improve their car to their desired level or about to head off into celebrity culture. Both of them can be reasonable responses, but neither augers well for short-term performance.

    1. @alianora-la-canta, I suspect that both Red Bull and Liberty Media want Max to start talking to the public even more as, given the number of people jumping on the bandwagon, they want him to become a global star of the sport (Brawn, for example, has said that he wants “more Verstappens in Formula One”). Combine that with a click bait style headline, and you get just the sort of media storms that they want to generate – so I think it is a rather unsubtle way of keeping the sport in the headlines between races.

  28. I highly doubt return to the naturally aspirated 3.0L V10s will ever happen. Some type of V10, for example, a turbo hybrid like what we have now, but just with ten cylinders instead of six, possibly, but I just can’t see the old type of V10s coming back to F1.

  29. Can’t wait to see a boxer 4 in an F1 car!

    Woo Hoooo!!

    (changes channel)

Comments are closed.