Why do ferraris burn

New workplaces, new food sources, new medicine--even an entirely new economic system. Ferrari has one of the most recognizable logos in the world, a mark that today would proceed from endless market research and hundreds of iterations dreamed up by some savvy corporate-branding agency. And this is what he had to say:. Evidence erased.

He said:. It is one of those things — my neighbour once told me if you put your time in early with your child, once they are an adult you are done. Even so, assume you could prove it, how would you quantify the gains and what penalties would be made?

Would you punish the manufacturer or the purchasing team, or both? Stripping titles, changing positions. There would be huge and complicated legal and financial implications when dealing with this in retrospect. Easiest thing is to change the regulations for next year and reiterate the regulations to all teams this year.

Which is what they did on 23 rd June when the FIA sent a reminder to teams ahead of the Azerbaijan Grand Prix about potentially burning oil to provide a pace boost, especially in qualifying.

If TJ13 was a F1 team , it might decide to avoid any further unwanted FIA investigations or penalties and launch a preemptive strike. An interesting article and an interesting subject. It would be interesting to know the trade-off you get by injecting oil which allows you to burn the fuel more efficiently while at the same time lowering the octane which will cause the fuel to burn earlier and increase knock. It depends on what additives are used when such additives are not able to be used in fuels…..

However these polymerized additives — the ones we are hearing about — do, when included on their own or in tandem with others there are 20 I know of not only raise the Octane not a very scientific term to be honest rating but increase the ignition point significantly — ie, they increase the temperature at which fuel the mixture ignites. This means MUCH higher compression ratios can be used before pre-ignition occurs…ie explosive detonation. I can hardly contain my anger at the way this guy is filling readers minds with tripe.

Volumetric Efficience increased by adding an effective amount of a high-molecular weight polymer to the fuel. This has the same effect as a larger capacity engine. The effectiveness of the present invention is believed to be related to a suppression in the formation of submicron diameter droplets as the fuel is sprayed.

Standard research octane number tests have shown an increase in octane number with a low concentration of high molecular weight Polymers such as polyisobutylene. Also believed to be in road issue oil by these companies. Steve, this is such utter rubbish you should wash your mouth out. Volumetric Efficiency has nothing to do with this! Why not randomly confiscate new engines with mapping software and measure fuel and oil usage. Compare customer to works. Of course teams would need to be compensated.

All engines, parts and mapping data has to be submitted to the FIA anyway. Maps I think before each event. I wont show anything. We are talking mechanical tolerances here. Steve: are you suggesting that the difference in power levels between the works and customer teams comes down to their respective maps?

Still, if we compared it to old days, it would be like handing over a carbureted engine to your customer without a set of appropriate jets to tune it with. Certainly the different maps between Q3 and race mode would show this. The Aventador is one of the best performing and best looking supercars ever made.

Unfortunately, one high-profile fire this spring made headlines here and elsewhere. The Aventador melted into a steaming pile of metal, and Schultz's posing for the camera after the fire catapulted him into meme-status. Thankfully, no one was hurt. At the time of Schultz's drive, Lamborghini said they were working to determine the cause of the fire.

I found no other examples of Aventador fires in my research, so maybe it won't become a persistent problem. Until the Ferrari Italia came around, the Lamborghini Gallardo was the undisputed king of supercar fires. Search Google or Jalopnik and you'll be truly shocked at the number of Gallardo conflagrations that have occurred over the years.

I'm fairly sure they're actually made of gasoline-soaked wood, not metal. Yeah, the Gallardo is almost 10 years old. I've never driven one of these -— is there a self-destruct switch? Photo credit Wrecked Exotics. The V12 Murcielago isn't quite as prolific as its little brother the Gallardo when it comes to fires, but there have been a few noteworthy ones over its lifespan.

Aside from the normal fire risk that comes with owning an Italian exotic, it may be best to avoid aftermarket DVD players. Advert Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free. For its part it is likely that Ferrari insisted on confidentiality and non-disclosure of its technology in order to protect its intellectual property — or that of its suppliers — which could have commercial applications.

During the Russian Grand Prix a source suggested that Ferrari was unique in running oil-based intercooler fluids, which seep into the fuel mixture under pressure, thus boosting engine power. None of this will appease the critics, as confidentiality clauses never do. However, without that settlement the monitoring of future fuel systems may well prove impossible, and Ferrari and its suppliers are open to monetise whatever technology they developed.

Was the cause a reduction in engine power, and if so was that due to the rules changes or simply the team using less potent engine modes to guarantee reliability and maximise engine mileages? Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here. Chaitanya 2nd March , When the dust settles….

So pardon my english but is this not Ferrari admitting to cheating? And striking a deal with FIA to reveal that cheat without consequences? Patrick paeschli 2nd March , Nunof 2nd March , Haters will always be haters.

People rather have their feelings validated that accept facts. Ferrari outsmarted their rivals and the FIA! Instead of praise, you get trolls and conspiracy theorists!! Foggy 3rd March , Valinor 2nd March , Actually, they could have just given a statement about Ferrari being guilty or not. Tech secrets have nothing do with it. They could have said, Ferrari is not guilty but due to confidentiality and tech secrets we wont release the report. And if Ferrari wasnt guilty they would have happily made a non-guilty statement to boost their image and counter the cheating accussations from last season.

Non of that happened and combined with the settlement and the drop of Ferrari performance at the end of last season its clear what they did was illegal. Lee1 2nd March , This is what makes me suspicious.

This is not what is being said though, which suggests that something illegal was going on. Dave 2nd March , The FIA says the rules mean one thing, Ferrari say they mean another, and they agree to compromise on a medium penalty — but crucially, without ever ruling one is right and the other wrong. Mal Ross malross 2nd March , Perfect summary. If Ferrari committed no crime, then say that. Otherwise, we have no reasonable option but to assume guilt. Alternatively, using your phraseology: if Ferrari committed a crime, then say that.

Otherwise, we have no reasonable option but to assume innocence. Dane 2nd March , Ferrari found a clever loophole in the regulations and the FIA wanted to make sure no one else copied it.

Not cheating, just clever innovation. Ipsom 3rd March , KGN11 3rd March , They arnt paying for anything. Dr Skywalker 3rd September , James R Sperry 30th August , Just a classic bit of ingenuous thinking they want to close off. I hope. If it wasnt cheating they should have a statement about it.

Something like: Ferrari were within the limit of the rules and the car has been cleared. But the report stays confidential due to tech secrets. It would have also boosted Ferraris image and countered the cheating accussations. What this article sums up might be true in some cases but it doesnt make sense in this specific case. Quite simply, like the article says, this is probably more nuanced. We will never know whether they did.

Matt Stragisher 9th August , The writer feebly attempts to explain how a 2 stroke engine works by injecting oil into the fuel, Come on????. As others have noted, the FIA could have quite easily released a statement that cleared Ferrari and protected any trade secrets — you do not need to specify the exact mechanism if you are concerned about others trying to cheat, but you could still make a statement on the legality of an unspecified device.

Even this announcement seems to be something that the FIA had to be pressured into making by the rest of the field, as there are allegations in the Italian and German press that the FIA had originally wanted to shut down their enquiry into Ferrari without ever stating why the investigation was closed or whether any action was being taken against Ferrari — not just to the public, but also to the teams.

Even in the act of shutting down the investigation, the FIA stands accused of a lack of transparency and accused of trying to hide the fact that the investigation was coming to a close — as if the investigation itself was now something that they did not want to admit had existed at all.

Brian bealzbob 2nd March , Good article, thanks Dieter. It has at least offered a softer option than my cynical default that Ferrari were cheating. Being extremely clever with a loophole is to be commended IMO, and protecting your ingenuity is a reasonable step. It does seem as though it has had a tangible effect on their performance though. Hopefully for the sake of the championship they can make up the lost ground asap.

Brian bealzbob 3rd March , It is only to do with a governing body and a team coming to any kind of a private settlement, and not coming out to declare something completely legal. Regardless of the team involved, that scenario in itself would normally put someone in the frame of mind that something was up.

GechiChan gechichan 2nd March , Completely agree, it would be stupid for any team to discover a loophole that provides a significant gain and not take advantage of it as long it is legal. It does appear to be legal for , however. Because if they did, they cheated.

FIA announcing a settlement… A settlement in an accusation implies which other teams accused ferrari of cheating is there is truth the accusations!

If FIA simply said, we investigated claims, and cleared Ferrari of any wrongdoing within the rules! Is there a statement that says Ferrari didnt brake the rules? Which does not state they cleared Ferrari of any foul play! In the contrary, it fuels the rumors that they knew something was up, but couldnt prove it definitively! But they cant reveal it because Ferrari agreed to disclose their cheat to FIA so noone can know about it, and FIA can know what to look for in the future!

Dave 3rd March , The technical regulations Using oil to burn in the cylinders and generate power is not allowed, it is not done openly as it is against the rules.

The problem is that there is always natural oil loss in an engine — no engine would get to the end of the race with the same amount of oil as it started with. For that reason there has to be a tolerance in the amount of oil lost over any given distance which I think is currently ml per km. If the FIA finds that a team is deliberately using oil in combustion then the car is in breach of the rules. Ferrari knew what they were doing was illegal but knew that they might be able to defend a case against them — at great cost to both sides and an uncertain outcome.

Both sides therefore benefit from granting of immunity, sharing information and avoiding a costly and uncertain legal fight. If the fuel meter measurement is circumvented while running, clearly it will not show up extra fuel being used. That is why Dieters take makes sense; if now the FIA knows how it could be done by Ferrari, but to get that knowledge they had to promise not to punish or tell and, even if they know it was there, like the Benetton software mode, they cannot prove it was used!

Dennis 5th March , They did not use more than the total amount of fuel allotted, as that is easier to see with the weighing of the cars before and after. There is a regulation of the rate that you use the fuel, and they were exceeding this, thus generating more HP.

If this limit was not in the rules, the cars could generate a lot more HP. What Ferrari learned is how to capitalize on the fuel management, using more that the limit on the straights, and get the speed advantage, then back off on the slower sectors, thus using the total allocated… They had a way to erase these excess consumption rates from the F1 once the engine was switched off… thus the F1 only had data on the total usage….

Then there should have been a statement about Ferrari operating within the limits of the rules. Would have also boosted Ferraris image and countered the cheating accussations. No one is expecting a report with tech details. We didnt get any clarity which can basically mean 1 thing. Doesnt take a conspiracy theorist to come to that conclussion.

Dale Foster 3rd March , The FIA dont always share the technical details of something they deem legal and so they could have sad it was legal if it was without stating the specifics.