The point is to convince all the teams to sign up to the budget cap of their own will, as the FIA cant force it upon them.Originally Posted by Ferrer
Super Moderator
The point is to convince all the teams to sign up to the budget cap of their own will, as the FIA cant force it upon them.
I am the Stig
Fanatic
The first time I read this through I recoiled, but after reading it again, I have found some merit in their plans. Of course, being a modern F1 structuring strategy it has some rather large holes.
I think the public is very tired of the manipulation of rules and regulations to further Bernie and the FIA's agenda. In this I agree with fpv_gtho. I think single-tiered racing is what people want, unless the cars are equally able to win, even if on different tracks (ie. LMP2 cars giving the P1ers a run for their money on the very tight circuits (but it would have to be more equal than that, as there clearly is a superior (over the course of a season) car)).
Increase fuel economy by lowering weight, eh? What a concept.Refuelling during a race will be forbidden in order to save the costs of transporting refuelling equipment and increase the incentive for engine builders to improve fuel economy (to save weight).
Oh, wait, they can't do that. For some reason the cars have to be 605kg.
<400kg or bust!
"Kimi, can you improve on your [race] finish?"
"No. My Finnish is fine; I am from Finland. Do you have any water?"
Enthusiast
Why cap at 13 teams and 26 cars? Why not allow anyone who shows up with a legal car to try to qualify and race? Imagine an F1 race where a team had to go home because they got bumped from the grid! That would be like the good days of Indy (which aren't these days...)
Enthusiast
It's not entirely a 2 tier system. All teams are free to chose either tier. If BMW thinks they have a lot of creative ideas and can win with the cost controlled rules, why not. I really do like the idea of bringing creativity rather than simply high dollar refinement back into the sport.
Incidentally, I do see issues with the idea as well.
Furniture
They did so as well in the late 80's and early 90's in F1.
Lack of charisma can be fatal.
Visca Catalunya!
Novice
With this I agree, but considering how light the cars are already, how much will economy really improve if the cars are made lighter? Furthermore, because of the engine size restrictions, the cars must rev to astronomical rpms in order to achieve the necessary power to be competitive, and as we all know (unfortunately) revs aren't free. I think that that is the main reason why fuel economy is so poor and not so much a factor of the weight. But, I do love the signature screemin' F1 engines, a real engineering marvel.
Also, if fueled up at the begining of the race, can the cars make it an entire race without needing to add fuel or would modifications need to be made such as larger gas tanks or shortening the races? The thing is, more gas on board seems like it could be a hazard and F1 already has realatively short races compared to other racing series'. Furthermore, I feel that this takes some of the essential and competitive element out of a good pit stop strategy.
Super Moderator
^ There is also a practical consideration in taking the weight too low ... the driver
Look around the paddock now and they're all skinny, smallish guys in the main.
I'd rather NOT have a set of rules that favoured jockey-sized folks over skill !!
Fuel on board is not a major issue as tey use competition tanks which don't "leak" if split/damaged. So only a complete and continuous crush woudl be a big issue.
Enthusiast
It would be nice if they could return to that. Did they do the same prior to the 1980s?
Enthusiast
They already have that. I can't imagine a guy the size of AJ Foytt driving a modern F1 car... even when Foytt wasn't as big as he is today.
IRL does have an issue with this because they don't account for driver weight. That's a big plus for Danica Patric. Also even if you do account for driver weight, a tall driver will place weight higher in the car. A small driver's body CG is in about the same spot as the tall driver. But if say the weight difference is 20kg, that 20kg can be carried as ballast right at the bottom of the chassis. Thus the combined weight of driver and added ballast will have a lower CG than that of a big driver.
Furniture
Not AFAIK.
Lack of charisma can be fatal.
Visca Catalunya!
Fanatic
as stated previously, BMW is the manufacturer team who spends the least amount of money, not the overall team who spends the least. RBR, Williams, STR and Force India are all privateers, therefore they have smaller budgets.
BMW isn't completely a new team for two reasons: they are into F1 engines since , then they didn't set up a new team, but purchased a well enstablished one, Sauber, continuing to use their own facilities and various stuff. As Renault did with Benetton, or RBR with Jaguar, or STR with Minardi, or Force India with Spyker...whe was the last time an actual new team was established?
And I continue to not understand why this new rule should scary away manufacturers.
KFL Racing Enterprises - Kicking your ass since 2008
*cough* http://theitalianjunkyard.blogspot.com/ *cough*
Super Moderator
I think you misunderstand the rationale. The cars next year will be starting the race the other side of 750kg, whilst they're currently starting the race around 650kg. If they can get the engines to be more economical, they can start the race with less fuel and thus be lighter.
I am the Stig
Super Moderator
Right. What I like about this rule at least in theory is that cars will gamble track position on how early and often they desire a tire change. Kind of like NASCAR pit stops can run askew with no/2/4 tire strategies.
Rockefella says:
pat's sister is hawt
David Fiset says:
so is mine
David Fiset says:
do want
Enthusiast
What the hell is a refuelling ban? That is a big mistake.
Enthusiast
True, but it takes an organisation a lot of time to learn and improve. Since Sauber themselves did not have a huge budget in the first place, it wasn't logical for BMW to start spending to Toyota levels.
Manufacturers always try to achieve their results by taking advantage of their vast resources. But if they want to do that, they have to add complexity to the organisation. That is why smaller teams can react quicker to rule changes
(e.g. Renault having a double diffuser in Malaysia I think).
Let's not forget that BMW has been in the sport for 10 years more or less and that Renault is always complaining that they don't have enough budget and that they will pull off the plug. In fact in 2006 Renault really threatened to quit F1 because of managerial changes.
In general a budget cap favors ingenuity and not vast resources, thus disadvantaging manufacturers
Minimising losses can maximise net gains
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote