Biggest F1 question of all...

Regulations are put in place to for driver safety as well as to limit sky rocketing costs.

There is no other motor sport in the world that spend over 500 million dollars per team per year. F1 still remains the pinnacle of motorsport.

There is no other series in the world that produces cars that can go as fast as F1 around a race track. Going around in circles does not count, it is not real racing! The fact of the matter remains that Formula 1 technology is far beyond the grasp of any other racing series.

 

The regulations are also there to make the sport competitive for all participants. Some viewers are losing interest to see Ferrari at the top of the chart race after race and that is not healthy for the sport. I am a Ferrari fan and I'd like to see more competitive and exciting races. Some rules are there to sort of even the playing field, address safety issues, encourage more over taking and reduce the overall cost. But it seems no matter what the governing body enforces the aces find a way to be faster than the year before, quite amazing!

 

More than regulation changes what we need are more competitive cars.

In fact I believe this year if nothing changed from 04 we would still have more competition as the Mclaren and Renault look very strong.

The frequent changes to the regulations are really confusing everyone and benefitting the richer as they have more cash to be able to change development.

Among the rule changes that gets my goat for 05 is the one tyre during the race rule for 05. I fear that it will mean that the drivers will take it easy on qualifying (to avoid flat spotting tyres) and during the race pretty much hold station till the last third conserving their tyres till the end. The drivers who try to psuh hard in the first part of the race might suffer fading tyres towards the end of the race.

Mosley's intent in this might have been to cut costs - but I think it might hurt the racing as well. I hope I am wrong

Regulations should try and allow the drivers the ability to push hard throughout the qualifying and the race.

 

This is Formula1, It's supposed to be expensive! By God.
Mosely and Appropriate rule changes is an oxymoron.
IMO any attempt to retard the fantastic technological advances in this great sport we know as F1 is a sacrilege. I dont buy the "let's keep speeds down for safety" as 10 to 20 mph is'nt going to make much difference.
Keeping costs down: Maybe 1 engine for 2 races rule may save some overall but 1 set of tires is ridiculous. I hope for the drivers and marshalls sake this idea does'nt have safety consequences. In fact I hope they do away with this rule soon. Lets hope common sense prevails. I know it's alot to ask from Mosely. Stranger things have happened.
Tuco

 

I've been following F1 for more than 12 or 15 years and I do remember there have always been rule changes. The rule changes do not make F1 less worthy of its crown, it's the teams’ inability to keep up and work around these regulations that could translate in demise. I remember when they went to grooved tires and then they narrowed the track, then one year they said traction control was in and then they said no it's not...If one looks at all the rule changes he/she would realize the changes have hampered the ultimate in speed and performance, but then again, we have been witnessed year after year that the track records are broken and cars continue to be at the leading edge of technology.
Once the season unravels we realize this new regulation regarding tires will not affect the end result. In order to make the tires last longer they will go to harder compound but then changes to chassis will give more mechanical grip to give the cars the same overall type of cornering gs as previous years.
I am not saying rule changes are good or bad, what I am saying those with clever ideas (unfortunately deeper pockets) will surpass the hindering conditions and race like nothing has changed.

 

I was always amused by CART's slogan calling itself the fastest race cars on Earth. That might be true technically going around an oval, but is not the full picture: I'm certain a F1 could go faster if its setup were solely to go around in an oval. Aside from that a F1 can do a few other tricks no other car can.

 

Why do you think a v8 is more low tech than a v10 or v12 or anything?. It is just the number of cylinders.

Now I 100% agree that they should be able to use any number of cylinders they like ... but there is nothing clever about a v10 or v12 or v16 ... just more cylinders.

Remember v10's were a must do by rules too! They have reduced the engine size ... and that is the right direction too maintain peek technology!!!

In the end if you do the calc's for 2.4 ltrs an 8 cylinder engine would be right for F1's requirements anyway. 10 would be too peaky and require to much fuel and cooling (just like Ferraris were hampered by with their 12's).

6 or 7 cylinders just would not be enough for peak power ...

V8 does not mean LOW tech ... we are not talking a Chev small block or LT1 engine here ... der.

Pete

 

There is no doubt F1 is faster than Indy cars...but then again this past summer a F1 car around Laguna Seca was purposely ran to break the Indy record and they failed. There may be a many reasons why they were not able to break the record but the bottom-line it didn't.

 

Yeah, I remember reading that somewhere. That is totally bizarre, I wonder what went wrong? I can't believe an IRL is faster than a F1. Please!

I also remember how CART did a race in Montreal on the F1 circuit and was many, many seconds slower per lap than F1. No wonder with all that extra weight etc etc.

 

Not current car but a customer Ferrari F1 car of last year or before ... and only driven by a test driver, with again only customer Ferrari F1 team running it.

Far cry from Ross Brawn, etc. and real drivers.

Pete

 

And at a track with no prior experience/data. Had it been an actual GP, with the actual team, I guarantee you they would have honed the setup and beaten the CART times.

 

I know all about the circumstances, the car (factory and not a customer car) was brought to Laguna with one purpose only to beat the lap record.

 

Yeah, I think I remember reading that in Forza. That is a major Ouch!

First this and then the Kroyman's F1 car: Laguna Seca has become a nightmare for Ferrari F1.

 

Even so, unless it's Team Ferrari F1 with Schumacher and company, it's a tall order to expect them to march into a new circuit and beat the establishment. CART is still a professional outfit, after all, with years of experience at the track. Plus, do you think the engines were re-tuned to their usual race levels. I know they tune them down after their racing lives.

 

Ah wait, now I get it: It was a CART not an IRL that set the record. Of course since CART drives road courses. I guess I can live with that "humiliation", CART isn't that bad. If it had been an IRL on the other hand...

 

The fact is that there have been regulation changes throughout the history of F1, so this is nothing new at all. The engineering talent in F1 continually moves forward at a fairly rapid rate, so new regulations are imposed to keep them at a level where the drivers are not driving dangerously beyond their own physical limits. I remember a few years ago in CART racing, the drivers were boycotting the race because the speed through the turns was so fast that there was danger of them blacking out, and this was reported by many of the drivers.

There is absolutely no point in creating a car that has 4,000bhp, and can handle 10g's in a corner - the drivers will not be able to handle it.

If you don't think getting a reliable 950bhp out of a normally aspirated 3-liter motor is the pinnacle of engineering in motorsports, then I'd like to hear what racing series you think is.