Jean Todt: "Top teams in F1 are too reliable"
- Published on 15 Dec 2017 10:25
-
- By: Rob Veenstra
Jean Todt thinks the level of car reliability in formula one is too high. He said the fact cars can often go a full season without a mechanical breakdown in a race shows that too much money is spent.
Referring to Lewis Hamilton, the FIA president told Auto Bild: "He did not make any mistakes, but he also had an incredibly strong car -- strong in terms of performance and reliability. Even if the Mercedes was not always the fastest, Lewis scored points in 20 of the 20 grands prix," said the Frenchman. "The cars are too reliable."
Many think Ferrari lost the title due to poor reliability in the second half of the season, but Todt doesn't agree. "Ferrari impressed me as well," he said. "I stay with what I said: Ferrari and Mercedes were too reliable. That costs money. Tests, simulators, it's all too much. We don't need all of that for a good sport. Actually, the contrary," the FIA president added.
Todt also admitted that talks are currently taking place about a compromise between what existing and potential new manufacturers want from the 2021 engine rules. "The current engines are too expensive, too complicated and too quiet," he admitted. "But we can build on them. We are currently talking to the manufacturers about an evolution of the current engines. The process is not finished yet." (GMM)
1
Replies (10)
Login to replycalle.itw
Posts: 8,527
"Jean Todt thinks the level of car reliability in formula one is too high. He said the fact cars can often go a full season without a mechanical breakdown in a race shows that too much money is spent.".... "Jean Todt thinks the level of car reliability in formula one is too high. He said the fact cars can often go a full season without a mechanical breakdown in a race shows that too much money is spent.".... Is that a bad thing? Really? No, wait, is he seriously saying that as if its a bad thing? Todt, honey, no! No, thats really not how things are. Cars breaking down doesnt help the sport. Not at all, you silly little chungus! And you decreasing the allocations doesnt help the competition at all. Now, can you roll back down to the basement by yourself, or do you need me to kick you down the stairs again?
krommenaas
Posts: 155
He's right. The top teams spend 100s of millions to get this reliability, and what it does is make the difference with the other teams bigger and make races more predictability. One of the main advantages of a cost cap (if it were possible to have one, which I doubt) is that the top teams would suffer reliability problems just like other teams.
calle.itw
Posts: 8,527
Yes, but would them breaking down and retire benefit the show? There is only one way to reliable reduce amount of retirements: allow more allocations. We can survive with 4 for each team, and the cost difference isnt that bad for an expensive sport like this.
Niids
Posts: 43
Ideas like this shows perfectly why F1 is today where it is...
jimac
Posts: 30
McLaren and RedBull, both of whom consider themselves a "Top Team", might disagree with that.
I don't think breakdowns ever added any real sporting element.
f1dave
Posts: 782
If the cars are that reliable why so many grid penalties for mechanical failures? Todt, try to keep up with what's going on in the sport, maybe watch a few races.
f1ski
Posts: 726
A team that has a large performance advantage can run at a level that is less likely to result in failure. When the sanctioning body with the rules extends them a further advantage that is un forgivable (fia oil burn ruling).If the rules get changed mood season the rule change should have been effective immediately. I am not saying ingenuity should not be allowed but by allowing a team to artificially maintain an advantage (tokens) then effecting mid season rule changes to hinder another team seems like collusion.
I am curious. With a conventional internal combustion engine if a team was allowed to rebuild an engine what could be reused. If the technology were simpler would having 8 engines for a season be developmentaly less expensive than developing an engine that lasts half the season. Liberty also needs to look at how this unreliability costs the the sport sponsorship money. If a team wants to develop their own engine that is the cost of that luxury. Perhaps F1
for a short time needs to subsidize the bottom half of the grid 2 extra engines so they can push the envelope to be more competitive without incurring grid penalties.
calle.itw
Posts: 8,527
The last part is something I suggested as a means of Balance of performance. An extra allocation is an extra opportunity to grab an upgrade aswell, making it very useful to potential backmarkers.
kngrthr
Posts: 203
thats the stupidest thing i ever heard.
the rules pushed the teams to develop multi race engines and gearboxes etc and because they got it right they are criticised.
what next , grid penalties for not breaking down in the last five rounds !!
f1ski
Posts: 726
I was reading something to about blown diffusers and the FIA back then gave a reason to ban them was they lead to excessive cost to develop and led to engine unreliability. The real reason was RBR could make it work better than everyone else.