F-C

Very Bad:
3 year engine freeze. What are they thinking? Renault is the only manufacturer in favor of this rule. Of course Renault would be in favor of it, as they would monopolize the grid for the next three years.

Bad:
Single tyre supplier.
Replace 10 grid penalty for engine change with 15kg weight penalty.
No spare cars.

Good:
Return to slicks.

Hopefully the teams will be able to change these rules.

dom

Submit the engine design for the 08 season 2 years early? that makes no sense and neither does the rule.

How many km's are currently allowed in testing?

astro

these moves will kill F1 as we know it.

i think the big teams will form their own series, and get Bernie to market it.

Billiam

All these crazy cost containment measures point to the same conclusion:

F1 as we know it has effectively priced itself out of existance.

West6MT

What the heck is this crap,............what a load of BS!!!!! I hope the teams go and form their own series like astro said, and tell the FIA to go F&$* itself.

AS3.0CL

i have said this for the last 2 years....... i htink what FIA is trying to do is complete bullshit. they better make thier own league and let them run what ever they want and do wha tthey want to thier cars.

fsttyms1

This is a load of shit. These arent cost cutting measures. The make things more expensive. Its taking away from what the sport is about. They are on the fast path to becoming like the indy/irl league.

Billiam

Don't get me wrong, I think it would totally suck ass, but how can using the same engine design for three years make things more expensive?

ilitig8

No current FIA limitation on testing. There has been a gentlemens agreement limiting testing which all but Ferrari agreed to in the past. It seems to have fallen apart recently.

ilitig8

First in restriction terms F1 has been dead since 1994.

As for the second statement...step away from the crack pipe! The GPMA has been threatening this for years but it looks like that will all be put to bed sometime this year, sooner than later most likely. But if they did Bernie would NOT market it, the grief between Bernie and the manufacturers is the reason for the proposed manufacturers series! Bernie is F1 and they hate him for it.

ilitig8

The problem is F1 costs have gotten completely out of hand, something does have to be done. However I agree this may not be the way to do it. What most people in the thread seem not to understand is that this are simply another draft of the regs, they will change significantly prior to being put into effect like every other year, compare this to the last draft of these regs and you will see they are quite different.

For the people that want to go back to a pre-94 wide open approach, it ain't gonna happen. Unless you want to see the same 4 teams winning WCCs every year with no chance for anyone new to move up the ladder costs have to be gotten in check. The freeze on engine regs for periods of time make great sense (the manufacturers won't accept just building spec engines). If you freeze engine tech then teams don't have to worry about huge R&D costs every winter since they only have to evolve the engines and the chassis can remain the same as you just develop aero around the same engine package.

For those that wish for unlimited tech remember that F1 has never been that, thus the word Formula in the name, and those who understand that but wish for a lot more lattitude you missed your time to scream a decade ago. In the end unless there is some sort of spending cap (with proper enforsement) spending will always be an huge issue. Rest assured no matter what the FIA does with the regs F1 will always allow money and insightful engineers to gain an advantage.

As for slick I always like to say I am a purist and thus don't like slicks!

West6MT

Toyota spent the most money of all the F1 teams last year according to the F1 magazine I was reading a few weeks ago in a store,.....and I didnt see them on the poduim last year. I would have bought the mag, but is was like 12 dollars Canadian,.....too much.

Total spending for F1 last year was 2.8 something Billion dollars.

ilitig8

The rumor is they have spent the most for the last 4 years showing it is pretty hard to buy yourself up the ladder even if you try in the current conditions. As long as the top 4 keep spending huge cash even matching or beating them doesn't always help. My guess is if the rules stay the same and the 4 big guns don't curb spending they will win every WCC for the next 20 years or more like they have for the last 20 years.

F-C

I believe that these rules were ratified by the World Council, so they are not merely drafts. However, they could still be changed before taking effect.

The way I understand it is that this isn't a freeze on engine regulations, but a freeze on engine designs. Meaning that you can not evolve the engines. That is a huge difference. You will be stuck with whatever engines you have for 3 years.

fsttyms1

I dont mean using the same engine design for 3 years, i mean the cost involved to make a engine reliable but competitive for 2 races, and the same for the gearbox for the 5 races. The amount of R&D and money thats involved is huge. The V8 switch has been estimated at -3 billion euros in R&D for the top teams, which in my book isnt cheap.

Freezing the engine design for that long is taking away what F1 was. It was the best of the best. No other form of racing had its technology.

ilitig8

They indeed were ratified, but I still consider them drafts, which I agree is semanatically incorrect. The teams can change the rules at any time, they just all have to agree and given the GPWA "rebel teams" haven't even signed on yet I think I am pretty safe in saying there will be major changes prior to the 2008 starting, since there have been major changes after every other set of Sproting regs ratified and this time there a significant period of time before their effects would be felt.

As regarding engines that is an Apendix 6 issue and no way to know how it will play out in actual use BUT from my reading it is an effective cap on regulations. You can modify and evolve the engine but you have to resubmit it for rehomologation and it would have to fairly compete with other homologation engines. My take is you would be able to rectify any reliability issues etc but could not gain significant performance advantage. You would likely not be able to change bore stroke ratios or other significant bits but it would set the basic output of your engines. I think it is a fair compromise, you get to design your own engine and develop it for reliability but you are stuck with the basic performance envelope for three years but at the same time reduce the R&D costs by huge chunks of cash.


In the end I persent this:

Most everyone that is a fan (casual or rabid) of F1 claims to be a fan in part due to the technology. Now answer a few questions in your head:

Do you know the bore/stroke ratio of any F1 engine
Do you know what the Hondas gearbox case is made of, is it transverse or longitudal
Do you know who manufactures the brake discs and their maximum width
Do you know the average speed of gearshifts in milli-seconds
What team introduced the first all titanium gear box
Can you draw the simple pictures of zero, single and double keel chassis
What are the benefits of chimneys
Do you know who Giorgio Piola is

My point is even if you know every answer without looking you also know you are in the vast minority of F1 fans. The technology is F1 is still going to be astounding even if the regs go into effect as is. F1 has always had to reign in technology, there has never been an era of unlimited technology, the closest F1 ever got was in the early 90's since that time F1 has reduced the amount of technology in their cars.

Most fans that watch F1, not merely read about it, want extremely fast cars and great racing. Have no fear F1 will still be the fastest cars around F1 tracks and with the proposed changes racing should be even better. The cars will be a little slower to begin with but will be faster after a couple of years and even if they are a little slower consider this, last week when you watched the race in Malaysia at any point did you think "wow these cars are slower than last year".

F1 will still be F1 and will be ultra fast and still high tech but F1 is a formula series after all and it has been constantly changing for over 50 years. I have heard bitching about rule changes for 30 years everytime predictions of doom and gloom for F1, however outside nostalgia I would rather watch current cars then cars of the 70s even with the open engine formula and slicks.

Edward'TLS

The new engine freeze restriction poses the same problem. If one engine manufacturer spends an one-time astronomical sum of money to nail down a exceptationly good engine design relative to the rest of the field, it's cars too are going to win every races for 3 straight years, and there is no chance of other engine manufacturers to catch up due to engine freeze. So what the difference ?

Edward'TLS

The only way to cut cost is to introduce spec engine for all teams, like the Honda spec engine in Indycar, and Cosworth spec engine for CART. But this will completely ruin the F1 series and hinder engine advancement without a doubt. Many of the engine technologies developed for F1 are eventually used in everyday cars.

F-C

I don't think anyone is disputing that. It is good to have rules stability and the like. My beef is with the FIA trying to curb the competitive nature of F1.
Just think, if the FIA freezes engine designs right now for 3 years, that means Toyota will most likely be stuck at the back for 3 years. Do you think that Toyota will stick around for 3 years as the nominated loser? Do you think the viewers will be interested in sticking around for 3 years with a large degree of certainty at the results?

Kighter

All great points.

I read yesterday however that this is already not going to happen.

http://www.speedtv.com/articles/formulaone/auto/22759/

Not great but not as bad as they made it seem initially.

F-C

No modification will be permitted if it results in a performance gain?
Limitation on engine speed? (Whatever that means.)

Seems like the FIA is trying to regulate the performance of the engine manufacturers. The NASCARization of F1?

fsttyms1

Yup. might as well make them run carbs and restrictor plates

dom

Wow.

Billiam

If you think about it, the real heart of the engine problem is that the manufacturers have effectively become huge sponsors to the teams instead of just component suppliers.

Didn't CART have a system in the 90's that banned exclusive engine deals and required the manufacturers to be capable of supplying half the field? I'd do something like that plus spec external dimensions and a price cap for the engines.

I know...keep dreaming. Fun to think about though.

West6MT

Last night I typed out a novel about the potential effects significant changes to F1 (like this thread is about) might have on fans from a psychological standpoint,...........but figured it would be a little dry for you guys so I deleted it.

In any event, I think these rules are really stupid and will results in more bad than good. I already look at F1 is a less favourable light now that they are using V8's and are slower around the tracks. To answer ilitig8's question, yes I did think about how the cars were slower around the track many times during the first two GP's this season. As a race fan, I dont like hearing about cars being made slower or halts on deveopment and technological advancement. I will still watch F1, but my satisfaction level ha been diminished. These new rules certainly wont make me want to watch F1 more, and very possibly could make F1 less competitive for the next few years. I feel they are going about trying to fix their "problems" the wrong way.

ilitig8

First you only considered the speed around the track because everyone was talking about it and comparing it to the V10s. I am very confident that if you did not have a stop watch on the laps you wouldn't have noticed a change in speed.
I also find it funny since you thought they were slower:

Fastest lap in the Malasian GP:

2004 1:34.223
2005 1:35.483
2006 1:34.803

So actually the fastest laps were quicker this year with V8s than with no tire changes and V10s and only .6 second faster in 04 with V10s and tire changes. You just can't see 6 tenths in a lap without a stop watch!


No one likes hearing about cars being made slower, however unless you are a fan of the events during IRL practice last week then you must see that curbing the increases in speed have to occur. Further, if speeds increase much more, quite a few of the older tracks will have to be "Tilked" of dropped of the calender.

In the end I look at it like this, if your age is correct in your profile I have been watching F1 for much longer than you have been alive, I have heard the same doom and gloom stated about every regulation change for the last 30 years, some accomplished the desired effect, some didn't, however in the end it was still F1 and interesting as always, if it didn't work then they changed it.

The rules will continue to change just like I said, no regs are set in stone.

F1 will continue to be the fastest cars around any given circuit.

One last thing to consider. I would argue the engine is one of the most expensive subsystems in an F1 car to develop and replace, however of the major subsystems it has the least bearing on results. Let me illustrate, the variation between top teams horsepower is usually about 20-25hp and it tends to be the same manufacturers that produce engines in upper ranks year in and year out spending huge chunks of money just to keep up with the rest BUT those huge chunks of money don't make the difference on who wins, that almost ALWAYS is the aero and susupension/chassis. My point is you can freeze engine tech (performance wise) for a period of time and while adding stability for new teams to be able to enter F1 you have not curtailed the top teams from getting faster. Despite what people think these regs will still result in faster lap times every year and F1 will still be the quickest cars around any given track.

F-C

CART in the 1990's was some of the best motorsport ever.

I think your idea has floated around for awhile. Previous stumbling blocks came from Ferrari, who didn't want to supply other teams, since they were both the constructor and the engine manufacturer. However, that is changing, with Ferrari, Honda, and Toyota all having B teams (and maybe McLaren).

A byproduct of this could be the reduction of the number of engine manufacturers involved and the end of manufacturer owned teams.

dom

I'll never forget everyone wanting a "Chevy" engine. I was a huge Scott Goodyear fan back then. He was estactic about "qualifying" for a Chevy for the follwing season after having a few good runs.

Billiam

You're forgetting one important thing. More horsepower gives you the option of dragging more downforce around the track (pun intended). That's basically how McLaren dominated the '88 and '89 seasons. From everything I've read, the cars themselves were good but not really anything special. Honda's horsepower advantage simply allowed them to run more downforce. That said, Honda probably had a greater HP advantge on the field back then than the top engines do today.

West6MT

I just sent you a PM because I dont want to burden everyone else with the absolutely HUGE response I wrote up for you. I think you will see we agree on more than you think. Hope you have a bit of free time.

astro

lets see the PM dude.

West6MT

Haha, I pm'ed him, he responded, I responded and agree with what he is saying,..........nothing too exciting astro. I thought you can read PM's anyway?

F-C

From Speedtv.com:

I guess it's official now. I believe Ferrari has bribed the FIA just like they bribed Italian football.

Chief F1 Fan

Engine design: 3 years? C'mon Max! On the good side, at least the manfrs won't be developing too many engine designs simultaneously like last year (3 at once)

tire warmers-none! that blows, nothing like racing on cold slicks, which in itself, is a good thing.

I gotta say, I get the overwhelming feeling this series is getting over-regulated to the point of it becoming another Barber-Dodge series.

Parc Ferme from Friday till Sunday? That just plain blows. Why show up on Friday then? Just show up Saturday, qualify and be done with it. Fuck!

One thing is cool though: even though there are two less cylinders and 1.1 liters less in the engines, the cars are very very close to the records set previously w/ V10's due to the high cornering speeds.' I agree w/ the testing ban too, that is just insane some of the amounts of testing being done and at tracks w/ no medical professionals around to boot!

West6MT

Im confused F-C,....... did Ferrari want the engine freeze???

F-C

Here is what we know, or at least what we appear to know, gleaned from web stories:

During the last weekend, the constructors voted on several technical issues.

1) Push back the date of the engine design submission to March 2007. I think it is currently scheduled for next month. Only Ferrari, Red Bull, and Toro Rosso were against it.

2) Increase the design freeze from 3 years to 5 years. Only Ferrari, Red Bull, Toro Rosso, and Prodrive were for it.

3) Abolish the 3 year design freezes completely. 8 out of the 12 teams wanted to abolish the rule. No list of who voted for what was released, but based on 2), we can guess that Ferrari, Red Bull, Toro Rosso, and Prodrive were against it.

West6MT

Ahhhhhhh ^^, very interesting.

Edward'TLS

If Mosley really want to prevent the increase in the cost of competing once entries have been accepted, he should set out additional rules to freeze the chassis, gearbox, suspension, and aero designs too. Who said it is cheap to run a wind tunnel and perform aero design tests.

ilitig8

Well in the interest of accuracy Flavio and Renault are the ones that originally proposed the idea of an engine freeze last year. Now Ferrari seems to just be saying this was what we signed up for so this is what we should have. Renault proposed it when they had the best engine out there, Ferrari is just riding the wave since they know they have built the best engines in F1 when averaged over the last 8-9 years.

F-C

There seems to be a small chance that the rules might still be changed. Who knows what kind of politics are being played behind the scenes. Ferrari=Agnelli=Mafia