Formula 1 - 2009 Season
- Thread starter Dave Baumann
- Start date
chavvdarrr
Veteran
Ferrari cutting budget too.
No in-season testing: I'm fine with that, will make for more unpredictability.
Info sharing eliminating need for spotters: good, more info for us.
Reduced RPM and longer life engines: good, but they will still blow up.
I haven't thought about the 2010 stuff much because I think they will tweak it. The 2009 stuff is imminent and there won't be time for much change there.
In other news, Renault will get an engine boost.
tongue_of_colicab
Veteran
The engine stuff sucks. Besides the FIA are a bunch of morons. Really, how many decades have teams races with 1 engine a race (and 1 or 2 for quali) along with development and how many teams ever complained about the cost? The fact is the biggest costs are probably not in the engine but in running 2 windtunnels and a CDF 24/7. Not to mention that they do want teams do build something like KERS wich costs fortunes and than now they suddenly start talking about maybe even using a standard KERS for 2010. Talking about wasting money...
They just need to get rid of all the windtunnel stuff. Just give the teams a basic aero pack and let them build engines again. For the smaller teams do something like a engine price cap. Lets say 20million. Even with 1 engine a race 1 engine wont cost 1 million to build so the selling team will still make a profit and the buying team will still spend less because they dont need to run 2 windtunnels anymore and the public will be happy again because they got back what F1 is about.
Its just going nowhere. 18k rpm max? whats next? v6 or 4 cylinder engines? basic chassis parts? If we wait another couple of years Ferrari doesnt even have to bother making a car anymore, they can just roll out one of the road cars from the showroom and race that.
They just need to get rid of all the windtunnel stuff. Just give the teams a basic aero pack and let them build engines again. For the smaller teams do something like a engine price cap. Lets say 20million. Even with 1 engine a race 1 engine wont cost 1 million to build so the selling team will still make a profit and the buying team will still spend less because they dont need to run 2 windtunnels anymore and the public will be happy again because they got back what F1 is about.
Its just going nowhere. 18k rpm max? whats next? v6 or 4 cylinder engines? basic chassis parts? If we wait another couple of years Ferrari doesnt even have to bother making a car anymore, they can just roll out one of the road cars from the showroom and race that.
Engines were much more fragile back in the day. Cars weren't reliable. Parc ferme helped that, and this will help make the engines less fragile.
I think it was Alonso who told McLaren when he was there that he didn't want an ultrafast - and unreliable - rocketship. He wanted a quick car he could work with. Remember in 2005 when McLaren had the fastest car? Remember how it sucked? Remember how the unreliability of it and its engine made McLaren lose races? Remember that?
I think it was Alonso who told McLaren when he was there that he didn't want an ultrafast - and unreliable - rocketship. He wanted a quick car he could work with. Remember in 2005 when McLaren had the fastest car? Remember how it sucked? Remember how the unreliability of it and its engine made McLaren lose races? Remember that?
tongue_of_colicab
Veteran
Its not my fault mclaren couldnt build a decent engine. Remember Ferrari and Renault with the fastest engines that almost never failed? Remember that? Also, who cares if they break down? I dont mind a big cloud of white smoke from time to time, atleast than something is happening. And atleast you got the idea cars where running as fast as they could instead of now when you have the idea they could be much faster but cant because they are tied down by like a million different rules. And for what? If they want a competative field by bringing the cars closer together I'll go watch the Suziki Swift cup. The whole point of F1 is being somewhat free in what you build. If you're gonna rape that like they have been doing for the past few years and make it even worse in the years to come you might as well make it a standard series and solve the whole money issue. Nobody cares, if you look at the rules coming up cars will have to share so much parts and are limited so much by rules that other than a team making their own car there isnt really much of their own on it anyway.
I rather have 10 cars that are build with the concept of what F1 used to be than that I have 16 cars that are like A1 GP cars (only slower, atleast the A1 car is based on the 2007 Ferrari, probably better than what we are going to see the next few years). Tech was the thing that used to set F1 apart from other open wheel racers, if you lose that, than whats the point?
I rather have 10 cars that are build with the concept of what F1 used to be than that I have 16 cars that are like A1 GP cars (only slower, atleast the A1 car is based on the 2007 Ferrari, probably better than what we are going to see the next few years). Tech was the thing that used to set F1 apart from other open wheel racers, if you lose that, than whats the point?
While I agree with what you say I guess they are implementing all these regs simply to cut costs. I do like the idea of having unlimited engine development but restrict everything else...but then isnt a good car a sum of its parts? It would suck having an awesome engine but not if ther aerodynamics dont help it....
Im glad you said that as Bludd was holding you personally responsible for mclarens engine failures
tongue_of_colicab
Veteran
Well... It would be back to the old days. Big engines and little aero. I personally wouldnt mind that. Besides there are always the tires to atleast keep the cornering speeds somewhat what they used to be incase you lower the aero grip alot.
Good. I had a hunch he did that.
Uh, no, I wasn't saying it was your fault. That's ridiculous. I was saying that when you have unrestricted engine development, you'll get the Mercedes engine which was really fast but really fragile. Also, they used huge amounts of money trying to get 10 more bhp out of it.
I think they are going in the right direction with these ugly front and back wings and slick tyres. I'm less sure about KERS.
I think they are going in the right direction with these ugly front and back wings and slick tyres. I'm less sure about KERS.
tongue_of_colicab
Veteran
Ofcourse I know that isnt what you were saying, I thought Davros post was pretty sarcastic 
I dont see why engine development would be a problem. If you cant make your engine stong enough, make it a bit less fast. Its a case of good design. And ofcourse they spend huge amounts of money. But in what way is that any different than what is done now? They spend 800k a year on wheelnuts alone because they only use them 1 time just to name 1 example. F1 in itself is a big waste of money. Really, I dont see why spending alot of money of trying to get 10hp more out of a engine is any different than running 2 windtunnels and a CFD 24/7 trying to get the best aero. The simple fact is that the FIA started the engine cap to have teams spend less money. All they ended up doing was teams relocating their budget from engine to aero development.
Litterally almost everything the FIA comes up with is exactly the opposite of what should be done if they really wish to save costs. They keep having more fly away races, they keep talking about saving cash and than come up with stuff like KERS which cost huge amounts of money and have little relavance to roadcars (Things like LeMans are alot better for this kind of tech development anyway) as the plan was. They keep changing rules, they keep increasing lifespan of engines meaning a totally new engine has to be designed as (according to BMW) the current engines have a absolute max of 3 races, more than that and you'll need a new design.
The FIA are bloody idiots. They've spend the last 15 years making the wrong choice after the wrong choice. Cant they see what they are doing? They really cant see what the problem is? Just Ban pretty much all aero development. Give the teams a aero package. Let them design their engine like they want. Make them last 1 race. Put a sensible cap on what teams can charge for engines (1m a race should be more than enough for a engine + profit even with constant development). That way you eliminate the thing that keeps the current cars from overtaking. You save alot of money there and you bring back what always made cars overtake and lose some money there but this isnt some amateur race league so if you cant spend 10 million more or less you shouldnt be there to begin with. Than stop the useless fly away races and save even more money. And a total ban on electronics because the current ECU still is one big TC. Should save money too.
I dont see why engine development would be a problem. If you cant make your engine stong enough, make it a bit less fast. Its a case of good design. And ofcourse they spend huge amounts of money. But in what way is that any different than what is done now? They spend 800k a year on wheelnuts alone because they only use them 1 time just to name 1 example. F1 in itself is a big waste of money. Really, I dont see why spending alot of money of trying to get 10hp more out of a engine is any different than running 2 windtunnels and a CFD 24/7 trying to get the best aero. The simple fact is that the FIA started the engine cap to have teams spend less money. All they ended up doing was teams relocating their budget from engine to aero development.
Litterally almost everything the FIA comes up with is exactly the opposite of what should be done if they really wish to save costs. They keep having more fly away races, they keep talking about saving cash and than come up with stuff like KERS which cost huge amounts of money and have little relavance to roadcars (Things like LeMans are alot better for this kind of tech development anyway) as the plan was. They keep changing rules, they keep increasing lifespan of engines meaning a totally new engine has to be designed as (according to BMW) the current engines have a absolute max of 3 races, more than that and you'll need a new design.
The FIA are bloody idiots. They've spend the last 15 years making the wrong choice after the wrong choice. Cant they see what they are doing? They really cant see what the problem is? Just Ban pretty much all aero development. Give the teams a aero package. Let them design their engine like they want. Make them last 1 race. Put a sensible cap on what teams can charge for engines (1m a race should be more than enough for a engine + profit even with constant development). That way you eliminate the thing that keeps the current cars from overtaking. You save alot of money there and you bring back what always made cars overtake and lose some money there but this isnt some amateur race league so if you cant spend 10 million more or less you shouldnt be there to begin with. Than stop the useless fly away races and save even more money. And a total ban on electronics because the current ECU still is one big TC. Should save money too.
Peugeot/Citröen interested to buy Honda Racing
http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/081215090422.shtml
This seems logical to me. They have conquered WRC and they have done well in LM24h.
http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/081215090422.shtml
This seems logical to me. They have conquered WRC and they have done well in LM24h.
I've been watching some races from the 2003 season and I had forgot how bad the graphics were. The graphics we have now came in 2004 and have steadily improved. We get much more information from them, they take less space when on screen even though some elements are on-screen all the time.
chavvdarrr
Veteran
slightly offtopic but it seems Suzuki and Subaru are getting out of WRC...
Similar threads
