My apologies for what I'm sure many here will say is a silly question. Here it goes: Are manufacturers only allowed to test their cars during Pre-Season testing? If this is the case, how is this enforced? Couldn't a team do some midnight runs out in the middle of nowhere? Thanks for the education.
Yes only allowed during pre season. Used to be different with for instance teams having access to Silverstone or ferrai has their own circuit. There are exceptions for new drivers as you see in Abu dabhi… even controversy there as Alonso was allowed to participate. In some instances, which I don’t recall (likely tyres relates) I have seen teams testing new tires/future drivers on a car that precedes the current year. Of course they could do what you say but pretty sure that would be a ban and hard to do that given the teams and noise required for the cars to operate Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yep and the FIA is constantly involved with said cars of the same year. Testing also comes in the form of: 1) filming 2) Pirelli tire tests 3) I know there's a 3rd one but it slipped my mind. During these tests, the team can swap.out as many PU's as they want without being penalized in the component allocation allotment. You can test components on"mule" cars but not all components at the same time on the same year car.....understand?? i.e. I want to test the 2022 turbo BUT I cannot test it on the 2022 car.
They stopped unlimited testing because Ferrari own two F1 tracks and would test sometimes 24 hrs a day. It was a move to stop Ferrari dominance in F1.
I agree it was put in place to stop Ferrari dominance, but it's also there to reduce costs which I am sure it does in a massive way. Logistics in F1 cost an unbelievable amount, so does actually running a car (tire, fuel, parts, etc). Forcing teams to rely more on simulators to develop is not a bad thing at the end of the day, so I support that. It's funny though, if a team has 400 million bucks to spend, and you take away 80% of the testing to save money, they will still spend 401 million dollars.
Relying on simulators instead of real testing was an absolutely stupid idea. Not a single "cost saving" measure has actually saved any costs. It just transferred the cost to a different area...and usually it cost more. Plus the drivers and crews are less prepared, new ideas that might have arisen during the testing, now never come up. The lack of testing track time has dramatically reduced the ability to field a car in its most competitive form. Now the first four or five races are shams in terms of having the best cars in their best forms, showing up on the grid.
Wrong. Unlimited testing came when Bernie Ecclestone proposed the teams more money by having more GPs but with restricted testing.. Ecclestone could sell extra races to TV channels, but not testing time. TV rights is what finance the teams, and increasing the pot brought more revenue for the teams. The championship soon jumped from 10 or 12 GPs to 16, and reached 20, I believe, before Liberty took over. Now a season is 23GPs, leaving not much time for testing. The teams are already stuggling to attend 23 races, and the staff is under pressure. Unlimited testing used to spend a lot of teams' budgets, but didn't bring any income. It's wrong to say it was directed against Ferrari because it had its own tracks. First, Ferrari didn't use its veto to oppose the deal, but gladly took the money. Also, other teams had their testing programmes, often sharing tracts on different locations. Technology has, up to a point, replaced track testing with simulator sessions.
The unlimited testing ban came when there were already 18 or so gp's a season, initially limited to 30K kms (as a reference, 2022 testing Ferrari had the most KM of all at 3900)
I did always find it strange. IMO it was never about money. To rent an F1 sized track (Silverstone, Imola, Monza, Magny Cours, barcelona) going rate was around 20K a day back then. Hardly cost prohibitive for an F1 team. As others said, moving to simulator/windtunnel only testing has only shifted cost from one area to another, with IMO the richer teams still the prime beneficiary as they can afford better equipment for longer periods of time. Only now with the 2022 regulations is there some sort of limit. I have always found it odd that teams the size of Ferrari (especially since they own several tracks) never had a (fake) LMP programme where they tested an F1 engine in real world conditions, I mean an LMP car is pretty much an F1 car with a body around it. True testing aero and chassis updates wouldn't be very accurate, but that wouldn't be the primary focus of the test anyways. The limited engine use has also skyrocketed cost. Manufacturers work over time with multiple engines on dyno running 24/7 to find the optimum reliability/power spec. Truth be told it would've been FAR cheaper simply having an engine a weekend!
No. It's not actively enforced, but there aren't many racing tracks that are useful for F1 testing where can hide. If for example Ferrari decides to perform a midnight run in Mugello, the whole city will hear it. Also, take into account that at every F1 test there must be a whole team supporting it: fire fighters, ambulances, etc.
Correct. The FIA does not use any kind of surveillance of the teams in regards to testing, because the chances of rumors of a test leaking out, or someone recording evidence of it in some way is so high, that it's not worth the risk to the teams, as being caught testing illegally would warrant being banned from several races or excluded from the points. What's shocking is that Mercedes did such an illegal test, under the guise of it being for tires, when it turned out to be a lie. They had been caught grossly cheating, and should've been banned for several races at a minimum, and Pirelli should've been gone. Mercedes got a huge illegal advantage out of that that lasted several seasons.
Ferrari indeed had an advantage in owning two tracks. The English teams hated it. Back then, Ferrari could test and keep their cards very close to their chest, and toy with with them in the official ones.
A limit on testing was introduced as far back as 2007. The mileage was reduced for a few years, until it was found unworkable. This is when Ecclestone made a deal with the teams that accepted it. It puts all the teams on the same playing field. Like many aspects of the rules, limited testing may be unpopular with the fans who accuse the FIA, but it was in fact approved by the teams.
Yes - this is correct. The fact that Ferrari own tracks has nothing to do with testing. Foriano is way to short for proper F -1 testing - and Mugello would be the place for testing. or Monza or Imola for that matter. It was a "cost" saving move - so that the smaller teams could compete more. Ferrari test the engine in a variety of "mules" at Foriano and other tracks. suspension and brakes etc.. are all rig tested. CFD and Simulation tests are 24 -7 all year round, so they just shifted the $$ to simulation. the fact that cars are now so reliable really also reduces the need for testing. Basically Free Practice on Friday is a "test" you are allowed to run various incarnations of parts - and use test drivers - or development drivers.... the difference from simulation to on track is about .0019ec... so pretty small by the time a part gets on the car they know what the improvement should be. if it does not work in reality - its usually something to do with calibration of the CFD baselines.. which is what causes teams to go off in the wrong direction..... its what you start with as a base line that matters the most.
I disagree that the testing ban was against Ferrari ... it was cost savings. Ecclestone said I'll pay you more but you have to do more races ... teams said we cant test cost x travel etc... so he did away with testing - that money then can go to more travel for the team - and he did not have to give up as much $$$$$. I think in his mind there was a play for making testing a pay-for view on TV as well.... that so far has not happened, but is coming. Ferrari was / is spending close to a Billion $ in F-1. if you add up all the technical development costs, staffing, etc... and fold in the F-1 team... its there. MB and RB are close as well. McLaren not too far behind. They would not do it if there was not $$$$$ to be made... selling shirts, hats and TV... and a few cars.
Wow, just wanted to say thank for all the wonderful information. I really appreciate it. Kind regards to you all.
One thing worth mentioning is that some drivers such as Stroll and Mazepin did tens of thosands of KMs in private F1 testing before getting into F1. They used 2/3-year old cars and thus not covered by the test ban. BUT who guarantees that the teams didn't use these events also to test current car parts?
2005 all teams made a gentlemans agreement to limit testing. Ferrari never agreed to it and happily tested during the season. Limited articles available back then as most of it was still f1 magazine based and few newspapers would be interested enough to print it, but found this one: Ferrari chief still against testing cuts (motorsport.com) Gentleman's agreement - will it last? | GTPlanet This does suggest that the British based teams are the ones that wanted the test ban to happen.
It absolutely was about Ferrari and the R&D process it had in F1. The team was like NASA from 98-2008. Mugello and Fiorano might not be typical F1 tracks, but real life data is absolutely king, and Ferrari got it year round, whereas other teams had to go and lease tracks to test at. 2004 was the last straw for the FIA. After winning both titles by a hair in 2003, Ferrari worked their tails off at the factory and in testing to make the F2004 better. People hated it that we won yet another championship, and the British teams were made a monkey of the entire year. That's when testing limits were discussed and in the meantime, the absurd rule to ban tire changes was made for the 2005, and what was an open targeting of Ferrari. I don't actually mind that the FIA changed the regulations to control Ferrari's dominance, and spice things up. What I do have a problem with is that when Red Bull and Mercedes dominated in equal or more brutal ways, nothing was done. In fact, with Mercedes, the FIA has looked away at clear instances of cheating regarding secret tests, and often questionable components that never get TD's. Mercedes dominance has been much more brutal to F1 than the eras that Ferrari and McLaren dominated the sport. Frankly, the last few years, I wasn't ashamed to just watch the first few laps, then fast forward to the finish.
