F1 2024 - News/Regulation change/Developments

You think Red Bull GMbH (drink company) is bigger than Porsche (75% owned by VW) ? LOL

 

And 50% owner, so they'll be sticking their noses everywhere. Horner was doing well: why would he let some random dude from Weissach spoil his job? Also Porsche is often quite stingy respect motorsport, so they probably weren't willing to pay well for his 50%.

Now Horner got what he wanted: they won't depend on Renault making a bad engine or Honda quitting. A risky move, no doubt, but it's all or nothing.

 

50% of Red Bull (a MARKETING expense) is a lot even for Porsche. Audi is bigger than Porsche and had to settle with Sauber.

Porsche even didn't bother to build a proper Hypercar and ordered one of those crappy customer Daytona Prototypes. As I've said, they can be quite stingy.

 

Please, explain what you mean by that.

 

The Porsche 963 is a Hypercar built according to the LMDh rules.
Porsche chose that path for commercial reasons, since they sell their cars to private teams.
The Porsche 963 can race in both WEC and IMSA championships (8 wins so far).

 

Audi even couldn't get Williams and had to buy the last team of the grid.

 

To my knowledge, Williams wasn't for sale when Audi became interested in entering F1.

But Sauber was. It was even considered by Michael Andretti, but the talks failed.

It's more advantageous for Audi to buy Sauber which is nearer home for them, since they will build their engines in Ingolstadt.

 

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/exclusive-what-was-really-behind-the-fias-f1-asymmetric-brake-rule-change/10646001/

Exclusive: What was really behind the FIA's F1 asymmetric brake rule change
A summer break change of rules by the FIA prompted speculation that one or more teams may have been running illegal systems
Jonathan Noble Matt Somerfield Aug 20, 2024, 12:59 PM

Image Unavailable, Please Login

Speculation in Formula 1 got intense during the summer break in the wake of a change the FIA made to the technical regulations outlawing asymmetrical braking systems.

Off the back of the most recent FIA World Motor Sport Council meeting that ratified a host of revised and future rules, an added clause regarding braking systems set tongues wagging.

The changed Article 11.1.2 of F1's Technical Regulations had some fresh text which is in bold below.

"The brake system must be designed so that within each circuit, the forces applied to the brake pads are the same magnitude and act as opposing pairs on a given brake disc. Any system or mechanism which can produce systematically or intentionally, asymmetric braking torques for a given axle is forbidden."

Image Unavailable, Please Login
Brembo F1 brake pistons detail

Photo by: Brembo

The nature of the mid-season change to the technical regulations, something which is not very common, fuelled a wave of speculation that the FIA was responding to a device that one or more teams may have been using this season.

There were even wild accusations thrown at Red Bull that its drop of form since the Miami Grand Prix was linked to a potential banning of a system it may have been using - with some even suggesting that Max Verstappen's retirement from the Australian Grand Prix could have been linked to this.

However, the reality of the situation is very different as high-level sources at the FIA have explained that the change was not prompted at all by anything teams were doing at the moment – it was more about future-proofing regulations.

An FIA spokesman told Autosport: "There is no truth that any team was using such a system."

So what was going on?

Ultimately the tweak alters very little when it comes to the legality of asymmetric brake systems. The changes made by the FIA to 11.1.2 of the technical regulations are supplemental to the original text, which only implies that the forces being applied to the brake pads are equal on either side of the calliper.

The new and additional text forbids the braking circuit, either front or rear, to be able to produce asymmetric braking torques.

It therefore prohibits what would more commonly be referred to as a brake steer system, whereby one wheel, usually the inside wheel, is braked with more bias than the outside, in order to help balance and steer the car.

However, according to FIA sources, the wording that was originally in place was already enough to make any asymmetric braking system illegal anyway.

The real motivation in changing the rules instead came from efforts to tidy up the regulations for 2026, and make it clearer in the next rules era what was and was not allowed.

As part of the ongoing discussions to frame the 2026 regulations, a specific clause has been added to the rules to outlaw asymmetric brake systems completely.

And, following a request from teams to ensure that nobody tried to exploit the tiniest of grey areas before then, it was requested that the new clause be added to both the 2024 and 2025 regulations.

 

Anti-Trust what?? Seems they are pushing forward lol - Hi Andretti, fancy a MotoGP team maybe??

Liberty announces sale of F1 stock to fund MotoGP takeover
F1 owners Liberty Media purchased MotoGP in April and is now selling shares to raise funds for the $4.2billion acquisition

 

Testing loophole closed or is closing.

Exclusive: F1 teams discussing plan to thwart risks of 2025 testing war
F1 teams are in talks with the FIA to finalise rules aimed at preventing the risk of a testing war in 2025
Jonathan Noble Aug 23, 2024, 10:00 AM

Formula 1 teams are discussing plans to prevent an all-out testing war in 2025 by limiting running of recent ground effect cars, Autosport has learned.

With the F1 grid getting more and more competitive, and nailing mechanical set-ups proving to be the key to maximising performance on race weekends, teams have quickly realised the benefits that can be had from running recent cars.

Under F1’s current testing regulations, teams can test for an unrestricted number of days with what are officially known as ‘Previous Cars.’

These are classified as complying with the “technical regulations of any of the three calendar years falling immediately prior to the calendar year preceding the year of the championship.”

For 2024, this means that teams have been able to run with their 2022 challengers – which was the first year of the latest ground effect generation so has relevance to the current machinery.

Some teams are using the Previous Car testing to help prepare young drivers, with Mercedes for example having given valuable mileage to Andrea Kimi Antonelli in its 2022 W13 this year.

Others have, however, used the opportunity to run their 2022 cars for wider gains – with Red Bull in particular running Max Verstappen at Imola in its RB18 ahead of this year’s Spanish Grand Prix to help increase its mechanical understanding of the kerb-riding problems it has endured.

The potential development opportunities that such running offers alerted rival teams and Autosport has learned that the topic came up during the most recent Formula 1 Commission meeting prior to the summer break.

Amid what is understood to have been a warning that some teams were considering expanding their Previous Car running to run full test programmes with bespoke personnel for 2025, moves are being made to introduce a series of rules to limit what is allowed.

Those talks are now ongoing between the teams and the FIA at Sporting Advisory Committee level, with it likely that several key elements will be added to next year's regulations.

While no final decision has been taken, elements that are being debated are a ban on any running at tracks coming up on the calendar for 60 days prior to them taking place, a restriction to just four days of running (or 1000 kilometres total) for drivers competing in the current championship, with a potential likely limit of 20 days in total allowed for TPC tests for the season.
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/exclusive-f1-teams-discussing-plan-to-thwart-risks-of-2025-testing-war/10646733/

 

Ok whos paying the damage bill lol.

F1 considering rookie sprint race plan for Abu Dhabi post-season test
A bold plan for a rookie sprint race to take place after the F1 season is being looked at, says F1 CEO Stefano Domenicali

 

As a former Ferrari team principal, Stefano Domenicali has totally betrayed F1 over the years, I feel.
I can hardly believe that someone who has been part of the Scuderia became so business-minded that he has abandonned over the years the core values of the championship to serve his Liberty masters in the quest of "profit at any cost".
F1 is not in safe hands; that's my impression.

 

He is no stranger to the market profit motive. CEO of Lamborghini was good training for him under the Audi Corportate Tent from 2016-2020.

 

As a former entrepreneur myself, I can understand the need to make some profit, but not at the cost of sacrifying the core value of a business.
It looks like that's exactly what Domenicali has been doing over the years, constantly introducing changes that distance F1 from its origins

 

Sorry MaxBull lol


FIA declares all 2024 wings legal after clarification sought on McLaren, Mercedes designs

 

Nice Q n A read with BBC F1. Assessment of Redbull v McLaren and loss of Newey impact etc.

https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/articles/cgl2dl536nzo

 

So Ferrari are now a main F1 sponsor not team. Moving up possibly!??

F1’s growth in America key to new Santander partnership
The bank will join F1’s list of partners from 2025 after deal with Ferrari expires

 

Santander - correction.

 

Unlimited testing makes this moot.

 

Cost cap. The mantra of F1 Franchise team value is the only thing that matters now.

 

Big surprise there. All the wings flex, but McLaren's in particular did flex a heck of a lot more than others. FIA will say they passed all the flex tests but remember 2021 when Red Bull had a flexy rear wing that passed all the tests? Mercedes complained and weeks later it got banned.

The bias from the FIA will never end.

 

They can always appeal and ask again. If they do not then they have no case it appears. Typical F1. No surprise.

 

They are better off just making their own wings more flexible.