The road-car fad F1 must avoid at all costs

The make-up of Formula 1's future engine regulations could be decided by the end of this week during an FIA/Formula One Management summit scheduled for Friday, ominously the 13th of the month.

Delegates from F1's governing body and commercial rights holder are due to meet to discuss various proposals made by current/prospective power unit suppliers, and various stakeholders, about F1's future engine direction.

The meeting has been called to forge a united front ahead of a further meeting convened for interested parties prior to the next Strategy Group session, scheduled immediately after the Mexican Grand Prix. There exists an element of urgency, for already there are widespread calls to scrap the current formula at end-2019 - one year early - leaving just two years, or a maximum of three, before F1 mandates its next-gen power unit.

It is no secret that teams have called for cheaper, simpler engines delivering around the same levels of power as the current hybrid units - 900+ bhp all-in. Logic dictates that the existing 1600cc V6 turbo architecture be retained, albeit with bi-turbo installations replacing the complex (and costly) single turbo exhaust heat energy recovery systems (ERS-H) that lie at the root of current technical and cost issues.

However, F1 and logic are uneasy bedfellows, and the situation is compounded by all four current engine suppliers - Mercedes, Ferrari, Renault and Honda - being off-shoots of motor manufacturers with their own marketing objectives, while it's no secret that the VW Group, probably via its Porsche/Audi brands, is evaluating an F1 project, as engine supplier(s) and/or team owner(s).

According to sources almost 30 delegates attended the last formal meeting of the Power Unit Working Group, held in early July. Apart from Aston Martin, there are said to be further motor manufacturers sniffing about, while independents Ilmor and Cosworth have also expressed interest, although both indicated that going it alone without corporate funding would be extremely challenging.

Forget not the former forged its reputation via Mercedes in F1 (and General Motors in CART) - the original Ilmor F1 operation morphed into Mercedes-AMG High Performance Powertrains - while Blue Oval backing enabled Cosworth to create the legendary DFV, plus Ford's 1994 championship-winning Zetec-R V8 engine. Manufacturer involvement is crucial to F1's future, even where independent suppliers are involved.

In a nutshell, therein lies the challenge for the FIA and FOM, for both are determined to preserve the sporting spectacle that is F1, while manufacturer lobbies consider it imperative that F1 retains an element of road relevance. 'Win on Sunday, sell on Monday' is their doctrine, without which it becomes impossible to justify their multi-hundred-million-dollar campaigns. And, without them, F1 has no engines.

Since the current formula was introduced, hybrid technology has moved up a gear, and systems now readily facilitate all-wheel drive and torque vectoring without the need for additional differentials and driveshafts. Most manufacturers now offer all-wheel-drive models in which primary axles are driven by power units, with hybrid 'boost' (and energy recovery) to secondary axles being provided by motor-generators.

Indeed, Honda's new NSX uses such a system - its mid-ship twin-turbo V6 drives the rear axle, with electric motors powering the front wheels. In a further twist, electric motor torque is variable side-to-side to provide a steering effect based on input provided by brake, throttle, yaw, speed and steering-angle sensors - driver aids the FIA/FOM are determined to eliminate from what is supposed to be the pinnacle of motorsport.

The Mercedes-AMG Project One, launched at the recent Frankfurt Motor Show to much fanfare, is a two-seat road-going hypercar that "transfers the latest and most efficient Formula 1 hybrid technology almost one to one from the track to the street for the first time".

It uses all-wheel drive and much more, and is headed for limited production of 275 units at a cool two million quid a pop. Allegedly, orders are oversubscribed by 400%.

According to the official Mercedes-AMG blurb, Project One's hybrid drive systems are "based directly on Formula 1, and were realised in close collaboration with motorsport experts at Mercedes-AMG High Performance Powertrains".

Now, though, the critical phrase: "[The system] will involve a highly integrated and intelligently networked unit from the 1.6-litre V6 hybrid petrol engine with a total of four electric motors - one has been integrated into the turbocharger [to wit, ERS-H], another has been installed directly on the combustion engine with a link to the crankcase and the two remaining motors drive the front wheels." To wit, all-wheel drive...

For a graphic illustration of how an excess of traction can kill the sporting spectacle, compare YouTube footage of two Peugeots tackling the classic Pikes Peak hillclimb a quarter of a century apart...

Don't dismiss Ferrari's future all-wheel-drive aspirations, either. Already Maranello produces the GTC4 Lusso, itself based on the all-wheel-drive FF that wowed F1 drivers and journalists alike at Wrooom in 2012.

True, the Lusso drivetrain operates to predominantly mechanical principles, but back in 2009 Ferrari filed European patents for an electronic all-wheel-drive system in which a central motor is swapped for individual units mounted in each wheel.

As proof that even Ferrari owners appreciate the everyday (for which read 'road relevant') advantages of all-wheel drive, consider that on average FFs and Lussos clock 30% more annual mileage than do 'normal' Ferraris.

In fact, of the current crop of manufacturers in F1, only Renault does not do performance all-wheel drive, and given that most of its market competitors - crucially, Peugeot - have embraced the concept, it cannot be long before the French company comes in from the cold.

All-wheel drive (or four-wheel drive) was introduced to mainstream motorsport in the early 1980s by Audi, the aim being to improve traction on loose surfaces. At the time rally cars were limited to around 300bhp due to the challenges of transmitting more than 150bhp per (rear) wheel on gravel and ice; Audi's iconic quattro upped the ante to over 400bhp, a figure that computed to 'only' 100bhp per driven wheel.

When Walter Rohrl, considered by many to be rallying's greatest-ever driver, switched from RWD Fiats and Lancias to quattro, he likened the experience to "suddenly driving on rails" despite having 50 per cent more power at his disposal. Only after output was upped to 600bhp (150bhp per driven wheel) during the Group B era did rallying become spectacular again - and downright lethal when things went horribly wrong.

While a case could be made for all-wheel drive under sporting conditions on loose surfaces, particularly in rallying, a category indisputably more suited to road relevance than F1, for a graphic illustration of how an excess of traction can kill the sporting spectacle on asphalt, compare YouTube footage of two Peugeots tackling the classic Pikes Peak hillclimb in Colorado a quarter of a century apart.

The first footage, shot in 1988, shows Finland's Ari Vatanen fighting his 600bhp AWD Peugeot 405 T16 all the way to the summit on gravel; the second, produced in 2013, depicts the 1981 world rally champion's latter-day equivalent Sebastian Loeb in a 875bhp Peugeot 208 smashing the existing record.

The difference between their runs could not be starker: where Ari is all over the place, Loeb's car is solidly planted despite a 50% power advantage.

The difference? The run to the highest peak in the Rocky Mountains had in the interim been asphalted. Now consider that an F1 car has not much more power (and is not a lot lighter than Loeb's LMP1-derived special), then imagine to what degree F1's sporting spectacle would be sacrificed in the name of 'road relevance'.

If anybody knows about the costs, complexities and political implications of all-wheel drive in motorsport it is Jean Todt, former Peugeot sporting director and current FIA president, and likely to be so soon for a third consecutive term.

Under his watch Peugeot created the 205 T16 (later Evo2) that took all-wheel drive to new levels, and absolutely dominated the WRC before the FIA was forced to ban Group B. The 406 T16 followed, and not only dominated Pikes Peak, but the 'real' Dakar, too - so much so that Todt had to flip a coin to decide whether Vatanen or Jackie Ickx would win the 1989 edition. The Finn won the toss...

Todt is ideally placed to enforce a ban on all-wheel drive, but of course he realises that in order for global motorsport to thrive it needs to offer a modicum of road relevance to motor manufacturers. Simply put, without manufacturer support teams such as Williams and Force India would not be on the grid in the first place - and notions that independent engine suppliers will step into the breach are the stuff of pink elephants.

Manufacturers go racing to prove their expertise on a global platform, not for pure sporting reasons

Where is this headed? According to an insider, and since confirmed by a senior FOM source, "a prospective engine supplier has proposed that the post-2020 powertrain regulations incorporate all-wheel drive", and the technology is on the list to be discussed during Friday's summit ahead of presentation to the Power Unit Working Group.

Although the manufacturer was not named, it is believed that a Volkswagen Group brand proposed all-wheel drive for F1, for Porsche's 2017 Le Mans 24 Hours-winning LMP1 design incorporates a hybrid all-wheel-drive system driving the front wheels, as did Audi's successful WEC contenders - so take your choice, although the fingers are pointed squarely at Stuttgart rather than Ingolstadt.

The concept of the Porsche 919, arguably the most complex race car ever built, could easily be scaled to suit F1; although it uses a turbo two-litre V4 with ERS-H rated at 500bhp, ERS-K units operating through the front wheels provide an additional 400bhp - in a specification tuned for 24 hours of non-stop racing. Any wonder Porsche is linked to the proposal?

Regardless of who made it, the all-wheel-drive proposal immediately fell on fertile ground for (road relevant) reasons outlined above, and although none of the current manufacturers would go on record, sources from Mercedes, Ferrari and Honda indicate they are not opposed to all-wheel drive, with only Renault being anti - ostensibly on sporting grounds - but one wonders whether that tune will change in time.

True, among the pro faction there were caveats such as "we need to consider the complexity" and "we need to evaluate the advantages versus heat energy recovery", but the mere fact that they are not downright anti suggests they could put road relevance ahead of sporting spectacle - and, forget not, manufacturers go racing to prove their expertise on a global platform, not for pure sporting reasons.

Safety and technical aspects need to be factored into the equation, too. Accommodating electric front-wheel-drive technology in prototype sportscars is a lot easier than fitting it to monoposto designs due to space availability, plus such systems require heavy, high-voltage cabling that would run directly through the cockpit.

Then there is the question of brake-by-wire with front-driven systems - imagine the radio calls Romain Grosjean could make bitching about the front and rear BBW systems on his car on alternate laps - while a very real consideration is an inevitable increase in weight. Already current cars weigh 120 kilograms more than the V8 equivalents from a decade ago, and all-wheel drive would add at least another 30kg - mostly in the front.

Then there are cost and complexity issues: additional motor-generators and control units and driveshafts and their related homokinetic paraphernalia are likely to massively increase costs, all at a time when the two Cs are the very items the new regulations are intended to reduce. Forget what the engineers promise - given past cost-cutting initiatives, how come F1's budgets are higher than ever before?

The bottom line is that F1 faces a crossroads - its direction post-2020 is very much in the hands of the Power Unit Working Group. All-wheel drive needs to be banned post haste, even before it gets put to the vote at end-October - or F1 will degenerate into a road relevance contest, and will no longer have the right to dub itself 'the pinnacle of motorsport'.