2012 Mercedes-benz G-class G 550 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

McLaren, Red Bull and Ferrari call for unfreezing F1 engines

Formula One is a hugely expensive sport. Not only do you have enormous salaries and logistical expenses, as you would in any other sport, but each team also spends huge sums developing their own chassis from the ground up – and so too do the participating automakers in developing the engines. One of the ways the series organizers mitigate those costs is by freezing development. So once the new crop of V6 turbo hybrid powertrains were developed, that was it. But now three of the of the sport's leading teams are calling on the FIA to unfreeze engine development. Their reason? Unfair advantage. There's little question that Mercedes did the best job of developing its "power unit" to meet the new regulations that took effect at the beginning of this past season. That's how the Mercedes team won all but three of the grands prix this season and finished with at least one car on the podium at every single race. It's also a big part of how the teams that bought their engines from Mercedes this season managed to consistently outperform the other non-works-supported teams. That clear advantage is why Red Bull, Ferrari and now McLaren are calling for engine development to be unfrozen. Their argument is that, under the current locked-down status quo, their engine suppliers (Renault, Ferrari and Honda, respectively) cannot possibly catch up. So unless the FIA and Formula One Management want the next few seasons to be the kind of absolute blow-outs that this past season was, these leading teams argue, the powers that be are going to have to make some changes. For its part, Mercedes naturally counters that unfreezing engine development would send costs spiraling out of control. But then of course it stands to lose the most by re-opening engine development. If those three teams, however, closely intertwined as they are with the three other engine suppliers participating in next year's championship, manage to solicit enough support from the other customer teams and bring the matter to a vote, Mercedes may very well find itself out-numbered. News Source: ESPNImage Credit: Patrick Baz/AFP/Getty Motorsports Ferrari McLaren Mercedes-Benz F1 engine

2016 German Grand Prix race recap: so-so racing, great questions

We can summarize the 2016 German Grand Prix in one sentence: Mercedes-AMG Petronas driver Lewis Hamilton started second on the grid, passed pole-sitter and teammate Nico Rosberg before the first corner, and dominate to the finish. In fact, Hamilton turned his engine power output down on Lap 3 and still took the checkered flag seven seconds ahead of Red Bull driver Daniel Ricciardo. Ricciardo's teammate Max Verstappen crossed the line another six seconds back. Rosberg fell to fourth at the first corner and couldn't find the pace to reel in the Red Bulls. His questionable pass on Verstappen didn't help when the stewards penalized Rosberg five seconds; the overtake reminded us of Rosberg's move on teammate Hamilton in Austria. That penalty turned into eight seconds when the Mercedes-AMG Petronas stopwatch didn't work in the pits. Ferrari pilots Sebastian Vettel and Kimi Raikkonen finished fifth and sixth. Those six drivers all started in the top six, too. Behind them, on Lap 28 of the 67-lap race the next four drivers were Valtteri Bottas in the Williams, Nico Hulkenberg in the Force India, and Jenson Button and Fernando Alonso in McLarens. Low fuel and old tires put the kibosh on Alonso's pace just four laps from the finish, allowing Force India's Sergio Perez to pass, rounding out the top ten. The issues up for debate during the four-week break are far more interesting than the weekend's race. As bad as Ferrari's day might have been – and we'll get to that – Rosberg probably took the biggest hit, losing the race before the first corner for the second weekend in a row and falling 19 points behind Hamilton. Rosberg won the first four races of the season, then the teammates tripped over one another in Spain. Hamilton's won six of the seven races since Spain, Rosberg's best result in that time is a second-place in Hungary. Hamilton turned his engine down on Lap 3 (!) because he's used his entire season's allotment of five turbochargers and five MGU-Ks. Those early-season gremlins now have him on edge of grid penalties. Unless Hamilton's momentum cools off in August, however, that reliability danger might be the only dent in his armor. Rosberg, who once led the Championship by 43 points, will surely drown in his thoughts – and maybe schnapps – over the summer break. Whatever the Italian word for "meditation" is, there'll be a lot of it at Ferrari during the F1 summer break.

Why it's difficult to accurately test the efficiency of a plug-in car

When it comes to electric vehicles and plug-ins in general, the Environmental Protection Agency-certified range is a hugely important number. While actual range anxiety is largely psychological, the magic number does provide a point of comparison of buyers considering one EV over another. The driving distance is also often touted by automakers when marketing their models. Unfortunately, as Green Car Reports finds in a recent deep dive, the way the EPA calculates the figure is a convoluted mess, and discovering the reasons why is definitely worth the read. The issue isn't about bad science but instead comes down to vague wording. The EPA's accepted range test is sourced from an evaluation called J-1634 from the Society of Automotive Engineers, and it seems to provide balanced results for vehicles that automatically reach a single state of charge when plugged in. However for models with multiple charge settings, the situation gets complicated very quickly. Of course, these modes are often created in the software, meaning that a car's certified driving distance can change with just a few taps of the keyboard without the real world results owners might experience actually changing. By showing the test's effects on the certified range for the Tesla Model S, Nissan Leaf and Mercedes-Benz B-Class Electric Drive over the last few years, Green Car Reports makes a compelling argument that it's the evaluation that needs to change. Thankfully, it appears that the solution is a very simple one. Get the details here.