To unfreeze or not to unfreeze? With hybrid turbo engines, that is the question
Innovation
Mercedes and Williams
Posted By: James Allen  |  13 Oct 2014   |  5:08 pm GMT  |  332 comments

There was a lot of discussion about the subject of the engine freeze over the Sochi race weekend, with Mercedes now looking likely to block moves, led by Ferrari’s Marco Mattiacci, to allow an ‘unfreeze’ period during the 2015 season for everyone to do some development. However as the decision at this stage to implement an ‘unfreeze’ window for 2016 requires only a majority vote on the forthcoming F1 Commission meeting, that does look a realistic proposition.

So will this mean Mercedes enjoys another dominant year? It is looking that way.

Mercedes finished 1-2-3-4-5 in both qualifying and the race in Sochi and this has not been an isolated episode, as the Mercedes-powered cars have taken most of the spoils this year. Ferrari hasn’t had a top three qualifying result all season and Fernando Alonso has just two podiums to show for the year. He has slipped to 6th in the drivers championship, while Valtteri Bottas the Williams driver powered by Mercedes, is now 4th in the standings behind the two Mercedes drivers and Red Bull’s Daniel Ricciardo. Williams are comfortably third ahead of Ferrari, with all four Mercedes teams in the Top six of the constructors’ table.

There has been plenty of to-ing and fro-ing on engine freezes in recent months in the F1 Strategy Group, with Christian Horner breaking the omertà of the F1 Strategy Group by revealing details of discussion points; in a Singapore meeting they had had a unanimous vote to introduce one ‘unfreeze’ window on 2015, but that Mercedes had changed its stance at the Sochi meeting. Mercedes argues that the Singapore meeting was an informal discussion on the topic and in principle they were interested, but when the vote came in Sochi, at which the FIA and Bernie Ecclestone voted in favour of the unfreeze, there were details which were not acceptable to Mercedes, such as that the updates in the ‘unfreeze’ window had to be made simultaneously available to all teams and with no additional costs passed on to customers. Mercedes will supply eight cars in 2015, Honda just two.

Now the indications are that Mercedes and its three customer teams will vote against it in the next F1 Commission meeting and that will mean it will not pass for 2015 as unanimity is needed to get something through for next year. But everyone accepts that it will be adopted for 2016 at that same F1 commission meeting.

Mercedes AMG 2014 F1 engine

Why allow an ‘unfreeze’?
Those who favour the unfreeze point to F1 as a pinnacle of innovation and technology in motorsport and say that this does not align with the concept of freezing technology. But it has been F1’s policy for some time in the interest of saving costs, along with restricting the number of engines. These were moves initially proposed by former Jaguar team principal Tony Purnell diubg the Mosley era of the FIA. The V8 engines were frozen after a certain point.

What is unsaid, is that the engine manufacturers have been free to develop flat out in parallel with their 2014 programmes to the extent that the units which will be homologated and used from February 2015 onwards will be quite different from the ones in action currently. Many of Mercedes’ rivals have learned about engine architecture, position of turbos, dimensions of exhaust pipes and such like and will have been working on their 2015 units accordingly. No doubt all will have made gains, but it was interesting to note that recently Red Bull’s Helmut Marko said that the “definitive” Renault engine would not be available to them until July 2015, indicating that they are running late.

Alonso Mattiacci

As a newcomer to the sport, albeit one who represents its most powerful team, Mattiacci has been working hard to get an early ‘win’ on this unfreeze topic, looking to level the playing field a little and he thought he was making progress.

It is noticeable that the volume has been turned up on this debate since rumours began to emerge that Mercedes’ power unit upgrade for 2015 is a significant one, so it looks possible that next season could be as Mercedes-dominated as this year has been.

The new constructors’ champions have an advantage that they are not keen to lose in a hurry, but Mercedes boss Toto Wolff also points out that once rules are made, the sport should avoid changing them at the last minute as this incurs extra costs, which most of the customer teams in F1 are not in a position to pay.

Toto Wolff - XPB

Wolff: Short term changes = cost increases
“Who invented this governance process must have given it a thought, and the reasoning is you don’t want to have regulations changing three months before the start of the season,” said Mercedes boss Toto Wolff at the weekend.

“That translates into escalating costs, out of control costs, and this is why there is a process in place and that it needs to be unanimous after a certain date. For the following year (2016) you need a majority vote and you can decide on technical and sporting regulations based on a majority.

“The earlier the decisions are being made, the better you can prepare and the less you spend. We all have the responsibility to look at costs.”

Lotus F1 team

When the hybrid turbo rules were being drawn up all parties discussed what would happen if one manufacturer got a giant leap and it was agreed by all teams and manufacturers that this would not be in the best interest of the sport. The outcome was the rule we have whereby development is permitted on selected areas of the Power Units at the end of the 2014 and 2015 seasons, then the engines will be locked. In retrospect this was not enough.

The customer question

Next season Mercedes will continue to have three customers as well as the works team; Force India, Lotus and Williams. Renault meanwhile will have only the two Red Bull backed teams plus Caterham if it survives. As the Red Bull is a ‘works’ deal, there is no financial revenue, so they have just one – maybe two – teams paying the $20 million per season, compared to the three sets of revenue for Mercedes. Ferrari has Sauber and Marussia paying them, neither of which is in robust financial shape.

Horner’s Red Bull team won four straight world championships with dominant years in 2011 and 2013, but the ban on various aspects of the exhaust blown diffusers on which those championships were largely won, were sudden and did knock the team back along the way. But they still bounced back to win each time, as Mercedes probably would from an ‘unfreeze’, simply because they do a better job with this technology than the others. The chassis also plays a part, of course.

After Sunday’s race Horner said that the unfreeze is ‘important’ for the sport.

“We saw today Nico’s performance – the true performance is that they can drive through the field, and I think it’s too out of kilter, five Mercedes-powered cars in the top five. The immaturity of this technology is still quite raw, and I think Mercedes shouldn’t be afraid of competition. They are doing a super job but I think it’s healthy for F1 that Ferrari, Honda, Renault should have that ability to close that gap, otherwise we’re going to end up in a very stagnant position.

“I think it’s a bigger issue than just about the teams. It’s about what’s right for the sport, what’s right for the fans. It’s easy to take a self-interest position, but when you look at what is the right thing for F1, I think it’s to have competition. The rules are the rules, which they are at the moment, but I think we need to be big enough to say let’s open a little bit, be responsible on costs so there is no impact for the customer teams, but have that position.”

“You’ve got until February (to develop the 2015 engines), and then you’re locked down again. So it’s a very, very small window in order to achieve that. There was an agreement in Singapore, everybody voted unanimously to have one further step in the season, but that seems to have been reneged on.”

What do you think? Should F1 have found a way to introduce an ‘unfreeze’ window for 2015? Leave your comments below

Featured Innovation
INNOVATION BRIEFING
technical innovation from tata COMMUNICATIONS
Previous
Next
Share This:
Posted by:
Category:

Add comment

E-mail is already registered on the site. Please use the Login form or enter another.

You entered an incorrect username or password

Sorry that something went wrong, repeat again!
1

It’s up to F1 to decide on the rules and up to me to vote with my money and time as a fan. If 2015 turns out to be a one-team show like 2014 then I’ll spend my time and money elsewhere. There are many options for me and maybe I’ll find one or two that I like better than F1.

2

James,

If I understood you correctly during the FP 2 commentary from Austin, all this talk of unfreeze is a waste of space……?

I thought you said something like – 2015 power units will bear little relation to 2014 as development of the 2014 units was banned, however 2015 units will be substantially different as all manufacturers have been steadily working on development for 2015 during 2014. Then you said something like block, heads, exhaust, turbocharger, etc will all be different, all manufacturers have been moving ahead, Mercedes too. Honda coming in as a new manufacturer will be right up there with them, the Mercedes solution will be adopted by all.

Sorry if I haven’t paraphrased correctly but essentially that is what I think I heard.

So back to my opening, all the will they/should they on the unfreeze seems superfluous?

I have had a suspicion all season that 2014 deficiencies will be lost come 2015, with nothing more said….however 2016 development will be heavily truncated?

3

No there is a certain percentage of the PU that can be developed from 2014 to 2015 and that has been going on this year

None of that can be used during 2014, but will lead to substantially different units in 2015

4

Thanks for your reply, cheers.

5

Merc have advantage fine…they have won championships ……for which they have been fairly rewarded!!!

Now this Merc seems to be hungry for more…….soo selfish from them….As a fan i am extremely bored of these rules ….all the GP generally have same results as the 1st three…..We know who’s gonna win no point in watching …..Formula one is the richest sport ….millions of dollars are spent over a year…Now you want to have cost cutting……If you want to save money just SHUTDOWN the sport.

FORMULA ONE for a fan means innovation ,adventure,speed at its limit…..Whats the difference between formula one and other racing series ……..FORMULA ONE IS BEING RUINED by some stupid rules……LET them spent those who have money ….Those who don’t , can just sit and watch …….OR go by some stupid rules and eventually consequences would be seen by Formula one in near future…..IF not this SPORT some other sport will provide us with adventure,innovation,speed and a really supreme machines………..CHANGE THE RULES!!!!!!!!!!!!!

6

hi james,

can we not just simply keep the rules as they have and just add a success weight for now to the likes of mercedes as is used very successfully in other forms of motorsport. of course there would be extra points rewards for finishing 1st, 2nd or 3rd.

performance review every 3 rounds . Very cheap and effective…and common sense….but i guess thats the problem….no common sense.

cheers

rob

7

It’s also not F1 to have success ballast. It undermines the technology and innovation story.

8

its highly frustrating to the sport to have had a freeze like this from the start when the technology is both so new and underdeveloped by all teams except 1 who pushed for this 3 years ago in an ultimatum to bernie that theyd pull out unless changes were made and thus had a massive head start.

id understand a freeze after the 2nd year or 3rd but not from day 1 ….

all they have done is given mercedes there wish on a plate to appease them. as spectators we just want to see good hard close racing. i appalaud mercedes for letting there drivers race as one could imagine the headlines if it wasnt this way…..

the fact nico as in sochi could just drive from last to 2nd quite comfortably is nothing to be smiling about from sponsors and commercial points of view.

9
Pierce Wiederecht

The claim that “other teams have the Merc engine and they’re not dominating” is the biggest load of crap. The customers only get a physically similar engine. The customers don’t get the good programming. Ron Dennis has come out and said they don’t get equal engines because of ecu programming, but they’re also prevented from reprogramming it because Merc won’t let any customers have the source code.

10

F1 is about competition and the “show”. When there is so much dominance, as there was in 2000-2004 Ferrari era, the sport got a bit boring. As the engine tech is new, the rules should allow for, say a 3 year development period so as to level the playing field between manufacturers, before a freeze.

Those with the early advantage will still enjoy success in the first few years but it will become harder as time passes, so there is still a reward for a job well done.

Mercedes have an excellent chassis, engine, driver combo, so should face the competition with confidence and make this a sport worth watching, rather than a sport people switch off.

11

Freeze or no Freeze, i don’t believe that this will going to help at all, even that will create more problem we have seen massa on p1 in qualifying once we would not be able to see that even once as there always will be a chance that manufacturer will keep the advance tech for themselves :D…… i believe that freeze will remain same as merc have done hard work and they should have rewarded for it. one more thing kindly let me know that how can merc amg have more than 1 sec advantage even on williams as they are using the same engine

12

In a recent past, F1 engine development was almost every time: before, during and after the season. Well, I see toto wolff concerns as a kind of fear of competition. Ferrari won 6 consecutive world championship under open development rules, so why mercedes can’t do it too? Simple! they don’t trust their capacity. It’s looks like mercedes staff have “discovered the wheel” and are not welcome to see the others using it, because they fear that someone can do a better job to improve it. It isn’t about costs, but just dominance. Mercedes fear that Ferrari and Renault can improves them unit, even if they’re allowed to develop their too, and all suggests that they’re looking to Honda’s entrance with bad eyes, because they have a good know-how in terms of V6 turbo engines, and I’ll not be surprised if toto wolff be caught in future whining about unfair competition against Honda.

13

The fundamental problem is cost saving and trying to be more efficient at the same time is incompatible with an exciting F1. Forcing engines to be more efficient has made them much more expensive, so an unfreeze while demanding all customers get the latest at the same cost gets very expensive.

If there were no restrictions on cost and no freezes then a full development battle on chassis, engines and tires would be far more exciting and lead to more innovation. The problem is then teams with lower budgets would be left even further behind. I think a much more even spread of the TV money would be a big help. Perhaps teams should get an amount proportional to the points they get divided by their budget or perhaps an equal split between teams that field cars for the race that are capable of qualifying.

14

I don’t think we would be having the discussion if only McLaren and Force India had the Merc engine. FI were often quickest on the straight before the change so nobody would be that surprised by the top speeds, and on race pace they would both be just a tad slower than Ferrari and Red Bull at most tracks so there would be no wingeing and nobody would “know” that the Merc was much more powerful.

Mercedes have made an exceptional car and Williams a very good one, which is really the reason why the Merc is considered to have an “unfair” power advantage.

Leave the freeze, F1 has always been about the cleverest people winning IMHO.

15

Mercedes are going to have to watch exactly what there doing here as we have Honda coming in as an unknown quantity that i think we all expect to be strong, And of course now were a season in lets say Ferrari and or Renault have now got a better grasp on the tech than Mercedes do??? dangerous little game there playing that’s of no real benefit to anyone going forward in the real world other than that team members directly or not!

It’s clear the gap is too big between them as it is and if Merc have the momentum to further increase the gap all nice and good initially but in real danger of damaging the F1 following and even there own brand to a certain extent anybody else get to the point of finding the whole Redbull band edging towards boring come near the end of there tenure of which im certain they will never ever repeat under that brand.

16

I have found cheering for third to be thoroughly unsatisfying. Please unfreeze and make the races more competitive. Not to mention qualifying!

17

It is completely ridiculous to freeze development of anything in year 2 – but these monkeys all signed up for it they can all go down together. Mercedes have every right to veto despite that being stupid.

And anyone still wonders why ex-fans like me don’t watch F1 anymore?

18

So Honda gets to join in year 2 and build an Engine that replicates or is better than Mercedes in design and power and Renault and Ferrari have to sit on their hands cause they are under an Engine Freeze. Plus Mercedes can’t improve on theirs so the advantage goes to Honda since they know what works and what doesn’t while everyone else last year was working blinded by what the other manufacturers were doing.

19

Unfreeze of course or more to the point revise the regulations. F1 introduced the most complex power train developments to the sport this year without making the appropriate allowance in the sporting regulations. Its rather pointless to limit 3 manufacturers (soon to be 4) releasing updates to 11 teams when you have already 11 teams spending coutless sums individually on custom made Aero and other Mechanical components at each race. I really dont see the sporting or cost benefit in this to F1 as a whole. Especially given that the manufacturers, by their own admission as recently as Sochi have stated they are constantly developing the PU behind the scenes and therefore the investment is there regardless- so clearly it has more of a sporting impact than a financial one.

There is no guarantee that Mercedes wont pull further ahead with an unfreeze in any case and all these posturing by them ( & others here) is just fruitless. At least this way their is equity in the sporting codes for the whole car and continual developments on track & its something the fans would prefer to see also. Speaking of which- it was very pleasing to see Mclaren had made a clear step up in Sochi even if the race seemed rather flat. This is the sort of thing we want see. so let it be!

20

Voice from Italy, Ferrari will quit F1 if there are no rule changes to let them close the gap from Mercedes and will attend LeMans WEC. Fiat is American now and Americans are not interested on F1, they can’t tell who is Schumacher or Alonso just like Italians don’t know who is Jeff Gordon or Dale Earnhardt. The historic mark of Fabbriche Italiane Automobili Torino on the gates of Mirafiori factory has been replaced with the FCA logo. Marchionne said he will finish in 2018 and the next manager will probably be American, Marchionne himself is Canadian. No point staying on F1 with the current regulations, Ford retired the Jaguar after some disappointing seasons. Someone could say it’s a bluff like 1986 when Ferrari threatned to quit F1 and attend the CART championship if the turbo engine rules weren’t changed(what a coincidence). They made the Ferrari 637 IndyCar after some collaboration with the Truesports CART team, studying the March 85c chassis and the Cosworth V8 turboee, then F1 aggreed on changing the rules. This time may not be a bluff because FCA has no specific interest on F1 like Enzo Ferrari had.

21

They get $100m a year straight off without turning a wheel just because they are Ferrari, then they get a nice share of the TV pot too

Why would they walk away from that?

22

Fair point… But doesn’t it say something that all F1 can do is buy Ferrari (I won’t say bribe) to keep them? The sport is dying if that is the state of things.

23

So Renault are behind for next year as well? Oh dear.

24

It’s a failure in the rules, I think that the first year should have been open to any development, simply for the fact that they where dealing with a completely new technology base, the V10’s and by extension the V8’s where a known quantity, these new units are not.

25

Jason, I agree. However, where the original/current rules fail, it does not mean that they cannot be altered. The history of Formula 1 is full of examples – some related to safety, some to performance.

The real question is whether changes in terms of power train development that would come into effect next season, would operate so as to give an unfair advantage to Renault and Ferrari. The answer is that they would not – all teams would have the same opportunities in terms of mid-season development and, as has been pointed out, thre is no reason to believe that Merecedes would be less capable of taking advantage of them than the competition. Indeed, if their engineering is indeed superior, there is every reason to believe that they could take advantage of those opportunities to actually increase the performance gap.

These changes in no way guarantee that the other teams will be able to become more competitive; they do, however, at least give them a chance, even if slight, to catch up and therewith, some hope for their sponsors, engineers, drivers and fans.

Brad

26

fact is F1 is an industry. Lots of people turn up for work and work on exciting projects and innovations. The racing comes a distant second.

Due to the cost you would think that rival TV stations that dont want to shell out hundreds of millions each would set up a rival series .

There are so many well know drivers cast aside every year that it could have instant cred. Lots of good unused tracks as well.

The fact gp2 cars are nearly as fast or faster and the budgets a fraction shows what a scam it is for the actual paying puplic.

Would it happen? Probably not as bernie has his finger in pie’s everywhere to ensure it would not work.

27

Mercedes have already reaped the benefits of their superior development program and will likely continue to do so, even if restrictions on future development are lifted or modified – witness RBR’s continued advantage with the blown diffuser, even though there were no restrictions placed on other manufacturers in their efforts to catch up. Yes, Renault and Ferrari can replace 50% of their engine parts before February, 2015, but will that be sufficient if it turns out that the entire design needs to be changed?

I agree, they got it wrong – but does that mean that Renault and Ferrari should be stuck with a fundamental error for the balance of this engine formula? If so and, if they will unable to become competitive under the current development restrictions, why should they remain in Formula 1?

We must remeber that this was a HUGE change in technology from what had been in place before. It is not surprising, therefore, than there would initially be a similarly HUGE gap in performance between the powerplants from various manufacturers. Even with a free hand in future development, an advantage will, as aformentioned, almost assuredly remain with Mercedes. Nevertheless, should not the other manufacturers be allowed to not only learn from their intiial mistakes, but to attempt to correct them? Indeed, isn’t that the very nature of competition? What we have (and did not have in the blown diffuser era) are rules that stifle that competitive process. Full stop.

Yes, to bring back (or to foster) further competition in power plant design will require a change in rules which, while agreed to in advance, have now proven to have created an unlevel playing field. Even if Formula 1 did not have a history of mid-season rule changes (let alone between seasons), such a change should not be surprising to anyone, including Mercedes Benz.

It should also be understood that even the customers for Mercedes powerplants have not been in a position to fully compete with the factory team this season. Chassis/aero design are not done if a vacuum. Prior to this season, Mercedes had a huge advantage over its customers as they had advance knowledge of the packaging and cooling requirements for their new powerplant. Unless the Mercedes engines change dramatically in the off-season, that advatage over their customers will largely dissipate.

Sadly, Mercedes will retain the advantage over its customers with respect to engine mapping – a huge advantage in that they can map the engines so as to best suit the performance characteristics of their chassis/aero package. While this is another area where I believe that F1 should consider mandating a change to enhance competition, at least the other engine manufacturers and their customers will have a chance to get back in the race if the current restrictions are eased. Will it ensure their success? Of course not. But at least it will allow those teams (and their fans) to have the hope, however faint, that they can close the gap.

Brad

28

Some details on the existing engine rules for anyone who’s interested.

The 2015 engines will be homologated and locked down at the end of February next year. Up to that date, the manufacturers are allowed to make various changes compared to their 2014 engines, within certain limits.

The following design parameters are frozen and can’t be changed between 2014 and 2015:

Cylinder bore spacing, deck height and bank stagger.

Crank throw, main bearing journal diameter and rod bearing journal diameter.

Pneumatic valve system including the compressor and air pressure regulation devices.

Any other components can potentially be changed. Each component is assigned a points value. Simple components like the oil pressure pump or inlet trumpets are 1 point. A more critical component like the con rod design or piston specification is 2 points. A few things are 3 points, including the combustion chamber geometry. All the design elements that are not frozen come to a total of 61 points.

For 2015, the manufacturers have a “budget” of 32 points-worth of components that they are allowed to change before the homologation date.

29

@ iceman….yes, the ability to change certain elements will free up some of the current restrictions but the major flaw in this is that with all those changes made the teams will then be once again locked in for a further twelve months. that again restricts any further innovation and we could finish up with mercedes still be totally dominant….and boring.

30

Will they really get a majority for an unfreeze in 2015.

The Merc teams do not have that in their interest, and Honda might not want that either.

Renault is a reducing force and may only have Ferrari on side. And Ferrari is not the most popular team with the struggling low order starters who would love to share the money that Ferrari gets above and beyond the normal share for their performance.

It depends on Merc not seeing an advantage in an unfreeze, which they might. So much is dark, so much is hidden.

31

To unfreeze or not to unfreeze? Unfreeze!

Instead implement a “knowing the target” approach to regulating the costs of engine development.

This works quite simply, by the engine manufacturers agreeing a total bhp output for the ICE and ERS systems, supplemented by the total MJ that can be harvested by the ERS per lap. Simple.

With everyone working to the same targets,

1.) We’ll get more teams fighting up the front, and

2.) manufacturers will be able to delegate their resources more efficiently and therefore cost effectively, instead of essentially, aiming in the dark.

Agree on a bhp limit before the start of the season, and then, to ensure costs stay controlled, allow 1 upgrade of the power unit per season.

Job jobbed.

32

or alternatively go the WEC route and allow manufacturers to decide how much they want to use their ICE and how much they want to use their ERS systems.

There are pro’s and con’s for favouring the ICE route, as there are the ERS route.

This is why we have 3 of the worlds most pre-eminent car manufacturers in Audi, Porsche and Toyota each running different configurations of power unit.

The Toyota is my personal favourite.

3.7l normally aspirated V8, tuned to deliver less than 500hp, but then running ERS front and rear axle to a supercapacitor chucking out over 500hp. So as near as makes no difference 1000hp :D. Shame the F1 boys didn’t go this route, coz that’s impressive whichever way you look at it.

33

@ gooner F1…the WEC cars are the pinnacle of PU innovation and what’s more the racing is so close and exciting that compared to the russian GP there is no contest. WEC is streets ahead.

34

I saw an interview with Ron Dennis in which he was quite critical of mercedes policy of withholding source codes to customers engines, therefore restricting the customer teams from getting 100% from their engines. if this is the case what chance have Williams and those other teams got of realistically competing. Freeze or no freeze mercedes will still have a controlling interest over too many of their competitors allowing them to manipulate the field. Little wonder mcclaren are keen to get this year out of the way and move to the Honda engine.

35

“What is unsaid, is that the engine manufacturers have been free to develop flat out in parallel with their 2014 programmes to the extent that the units which will be homologated and used from February 2015 onwards will be quite different from the ones in action currently.”

This is key, and it’s crafty the way Horner talks about all the negative aspects of a freeze without being clear what this means. I also think the engine story is a nice way for RBR to divert attention away from the fact the whole car isn’t good enough.

If significant changes can be introduced for 2015, then having an engine freeze in place is no different to having one range of tyre compounds in place for a season. Everybody knows the rules, everybody has the same chance to prepare, and it doesn’t appear that any massive loopholes have been exploited. If you were arguing against a freeze last year, in anticipation of this year, then you have the right to continue to argue. But if – as it seems – you are simply unhappy with where your car sits in the competitive order, no sympathy should be afforded to you.

Tyre compounds and regulation changes give better-prepared teams the chance to level the playing field. Think how interesting the 2013 season was before Pirelli were pressured into changing their tyres. Mercedes in with a chance, Force India regularly fighting in the top half and no cake walk for Vettel. RBR take offence, no doubt because they’ve prepared in a way they see fit but doesn’t happen to be compatible with the tyres they already knew a lot about, Dieter applies some pressure in the right places, Horner doesn’t stop moaning and soon enough you have an embarrassing mid-season backtrack and nine consecutive Red Bull wins. Who was that good for?

36

Well said

37

Well said!

38

Two quotes from Horner:

1. Christian Horner: Sebastian Vettel’s ‘boring’ dominance is fine by me

2. Red Bull have declared it is not down to them to bring more excitement to the F1 season, admitting they do not want any late dramas derailing Sebastian Vettel’s predictable march to a fourth successive world title……………….Now he is talking about the importance of F1 fans and wants Merc to unilaterally concede. What a hypocrit.

http://metro.co.uk/2013/10/02/christian-horner-sebastian-vettels-boring-dominance-is-fine-by-me-4132283/

Top Tags
SEARCH Innovation