With so many OEMs in F1 can a new Cosworth like V8 FIA sanctioned supply work?

[John S]

Seems certain that V8s are likely to make a comeback in 2031, see article below, but can an independent engine supply really take on the big boys?

In other series sanctioned independent engine supply, to ensure numbers on grid, falls short in producing winners.

Could it be budget restricted teams just can't match areo development & chassis build of leading manufacturer backed outfits, or do OEMs still manage to produce better PUs?

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/f1-plan-for-new-independent-v8-engine-builder-revealed/

[Dare]

For some of us old guys I wish it was sooner

[Andy B]

For some of old guys I wish it was sooner

I'm with you Dare!

[Jericoke]

I know that Bernie was really big on providing a 'standard engine'.

Certainly there was an era where Cosworth did make the de facto 'standard engine'.  I started watching F1 when Ferrari was the only 'factory' team, although Mercedes/McLaren were tied up pretty close.  Renault was only an engine supplier, and teams would wheel and deal to get engine supply contracts.  Personally, I'd prefer if the engine and chassis weren't from the same company.  Having customer teams just feels like such a huge conflict of interest.

with the modern 'equalization' rules, I'm not sure having multiple engine suppliers makes sense.  Now, i do miss the days where suppliers/teams could bring brand new engines to race weekends, and last race's midfield was suddenly on pole by half a second, and I get why that has been cost capped, but if all the engines are meant to be equal, what's the point?

Long story short:  I think that all F1 engines should be made by not the teams (Ferrari is a ticklish situation).  Whether it's one supplier or many, I don't really care.  As long as they're mandated to be 'same', it doesn't really matter.

[cosworth151]

One thing to keep in mind about the Cosworth DFV days: Yes, Cosworth was an independent, but the only reason they could provide a competitive, reasonably priced F1 engine was the boatloads of Ford cash that funded the whole deal. I doubt a truly "independent" company could have done it.

[Jericoke]

One thing to keep in mind about the Cosworth DFV days: Yes, Cosworth was an independent, but the only reason they could provide a competitive, reasonably priced F1 engine was the boatloads of Ford cash that funded the whole deal. I doubt a truly "independent" company could have done it.

Presumably any 'independent' manufacturer will still have mandated fee structure to ensure profit.  I could certainly see, say Red Bull Power Trains being spun off into an independent company (surely the Red Bull shareholders don't need much convincing that the drink company should unload an engine factory at a substantial profit) It might be tricky convincing Ford to subsidize F1 racing, but the sport has a lot of goodwill at the moment, and based on the F1 grid walk, Jim Farley is personally interested in it, so they'd be a great buyer for RBPT

[John S]

I could certainly see, say Red Bull Power Trains being spun off into an independent company (surely the Red Bull shareholders don't need much convincing that the drink company should unload an engine factory at a substantial profit). 

What?? And lose the competitive advantage they've gained by spending over half a billion (possibly more) on the engine facility to stay a leading contender. 

Red Bull philosophy is more about being a leading team rather than making a profit from it, otherwise how would Dieter have green lit massive cost of engine facility, or even the team in the first place.

Sure the corporate power has changed a bit since Mateschitz senior death, however all motor racing & stunts falls under the marketing of Red Bull rather than profit centres in their own right. Until Red Bull market share, or profits from drinks falls substantially, I'm not sure there will be a deviation for F1 et al as just marketing tools per se. But hey who knows!!!!

[Jericoke]

I could certainly see, say Red Bull Power Trains being spun off into an independent company (surely the Red Bull shareholders don't need much convincing that the drink company should unload an engine factory at a substantial profit). 

What?? And lose the competitive advantage they've gained by spending over half a billion (possibly more) on the engine facility to stay a leading contender. 

Red Bull philosophy is more about being a leading team rather than making a profit from it, otherwise how would Dieter have green lit massive cost of engine facility, or even the team in the first place.

Sure the corporate power has changed a bit since Mateschitz senior death, however all motor racing & stunts falls under the marketing of Red Bull rather than profit centres in their own right. Until Red Bull market share, or profits from drinks falls substantially, I'm not sure there will be a deviation for F1 et al as just marketing tools per se. But hey who knows!!!!

I mean if F1 wants to send the teams to a single, independent supplier.  If things stay as they are now, with most teams in a direct manufacturer relationship, you're right, Red Bull would be crazy to divest of that.

[Alianora La Canta]

There is no chance of it working, because of the experience of 2010. Any "independent" FIA engine comes with the price of having to follow the FIA's voting patterns. That's why the current FIA President wants it.

However, that very action was part of the reason F1 nearly collapsed in 2009. The teams recognised it as part of the excessive power-grab, and thwarted the conditions that would have made it… pretend to work for a few weeks (before the $20 m budget cap broke the entire series).