News

FIA propose radical rule changes

Discussion in 'Other Racing' started by F40Lover, May 2, 2004.

  1. F40Lover

    F40Lover Karting

    Mar 28, 2004
    203
    Manual gearboxes, 2.4 litre V8s and control tyres?

    The FIA dropped a bombshell in the Formula One paddock on Friday morning, when they released details of the proposed rule changes which would take effect from January 1 2008.


    Engines would be 2.4 litre V8s with a maximum of four valves per cylinder and would have to be used for two races not one. There would be a list of prescribed components made from specific materials using a specified manufacturing process. Variable geometry inlet and exhaust systems would be banned, together with ultra high pressure direct injection fuel systems, and a standard ECU, something FIA president Max Mosley has always been particularly keen on.

    Semi-automatic gearboxes would be banned, so manual operation of both clutch and gearbox would be mandatory. Electronically controlled differentials would also be banned, while brake discs, pads and callipers would be standardised. Power-steering would not be allowed.

    Throughout the chassis there would be a general reduction in stiffness via the maximum modulus of elasticity, and the weight limit would rise at least 50 kg to eliminate the need for ballast. A combined tyre and aerodynamic package would be published no later than December 31 2004 to achieve specific targets for cornering speeds, straight-line speeds, grip and braking performance, and the front tyre width would be reduced while the rears would be increased to increase drag.

    The proposed sporting regulation changes are equally far-reaching. Teams would no longer be allowed to use spare cars, and the race cars would be held in parc ferme throughout the weekend. There would be only one tyre supplier, eliminating the way that has so dramatically reduced lap times this season. There would be a drastic restriction on private testing, limited by mileage not number of days.

    There would be two identical sets of tyres for qualifying the race, together with a new package to make sure all cars run on Friday (possibly with a return to a qualifying session) and a new Saturday qualifying system to be discussed with the commercial rights holder, broadcasters, teams and race promoters.

    If qualifying continues to be with race fuel; (which is not yet decided), consideration would be given to whether the amount of fuel in the refuelling rig before a race should be fixed annually.

    Tyre changes in a race would be banned (except in damage situations), but refuelling would stay.

    Consideration would also be given to whether a maximum of four specified cars (two teams) per constructor should count for points, to encourage major teams to make information available to teams coming into Formula One racing. To facilitate this there would no restriction on loan, exchange or sale of chassis and components between teams or to new entrants in the championship. There would be 12 entries per years, instead of the current 10.

    Finally, all future technical and sporting rule changes would require majority voting rather than the unanimity currently necessary.

    The package is extremely controversial, and as is Mosley's modus operandi the FIA is asking for a great deal in the expectation that many of the proposals will fall by the wayside as the essential points they want to see agreed get ratified.

    There will be a meeting with the teams to discuss the proposals on May 4 in Monaco.

    Overall, the intention is to improve racing while eliminating electronic driver aids altogether and drastically reducing costs and encouraging new teams.

    As one might expect, the proposals have met with widely varying reactions in the paddock
     
  2. 62 250 GTO

    62 250 GTO F1 Veteran

    Jan 9, 2004
    7,732
    Nova Scotia Canada
    Full Name:
    Neil
  3. Liquid

    Liquid Karting

    Nov 2, 2003
    78
    Doylestown, PA
    "Tyre changes in a race would be banned"???
     
  4. maranelloman

    maranelloman Guest

    Sounds like Bernie decided not to buy CART...and instead is remaking F1 as CART...
     
  5. snj5

    snj5 F1 World Champ

    Feb 22, 2003
    10,213
    San Antonio
    Full Name:
    Russ Turner
    An unbelievably outrageous set of demands clearly demonstrating his position to negotiate away many. Ferrari, if they haven't already, will no doubt hint or play the card that they will pull out of F1 and take half of all the fans (which would be great if they went back into sportscars).

    It's amazing to me that one of the most money laden sports in the world uses Arabian souk negotiating techniques....
     
  6. Mitch Alsup

    Mitch Alsup F1 Veteran

    Nov 4, 2003
    6,992
    My take on this is that this will reinforce the "alternate" grand Prix championship the teams threatened Bernie and co. with 2 years ago.
     
  7. GrigioGuy

    GrigioGuy Splenda Daddy
    Global Moderator Owner

    Nov 26, 2001
    24,079
    E ' ' '/ F
    Full Name:
    Dindu Nuffin
    Ferrari's already playing the "we'll leave" gambit: see http://www.autosport.com/newsitem.asp?id=27025&s=5

     
  8. CTEV2

    CTEV2 Karting

    Feb 4, 2004
    128
    New Orleans
    Full Name:
    Charlie Thomas
    I'm calling Luca's bluff. He personally led the F-F1 team in the 70s and knows how critical participation in the series is for the marque. Ferrari, combined with the rest of the GPWC's weight, will surely talk Mosley and the FIA down to more "reasonable" terms. A full race on one set of tires? That's funny, tell it again!

    Arden is also looking to make the jump from F3000 to F1 as early as 2005. How much have they been lobbying Mosley? I'm not aware of anyone else on the near fringe of entering F1, which is the purpose of the proposed sanctions.

    Also, Williams is endorsing the proposed changes. Mario Thiessen said "These are aimed at making the driver become more important by outlawing the electronics. These are then no longer aims but the technical solution." Not sure he would have said this had they won the first 4 GPs of the year.

    <http://www.autosport.com/newsitem.asp?id=27068&s=5>




     
  9. bernardo66

    bernardo66 The Crazy Cat Man
    Moderator Owner

    Dec 14, 2003
    21,652
    Montreal Canada
    Full Name:
    Bernie
    They forgot to bring back carburetors!!!
     
  10. rkm

    rkm Karting

    Apr 13, 2004
    130
    Spring Hill
    Full Name:
    Robert Monroe
    If they go to one standarized tyre, and require many of the components to be made exactly the same way by the same company, then that will pretty much draw away from the real point of F1, the CONSTRUCTORS being able to make the cars their own and do their own designs. In the effort to reduce costs, they will restrict teams to the point of making it uninteresting and more like another CART, as was already mentioned above.
     
  11. Tspringer

    Tspringer F1 Veteran

    Apr 11, 2002
    6,155
    Some of these ideas are not that bad. I believe F1 needs some pretty radical changes. As it stands now, its a constructors championship largely dependant on money. There is just no way F1 will continue to grow and thrive under the current structure and rules. Its far too expensive. Worse than that, the racing for the most part SUCKS.

    The cars are so high tech with so many driver aids, skill is evaporating from the equasion. It just does not require the same level of skill to get that last tenth from the car that it did in any previous era of the sport. This is a bad thing.... we dont get racing, we get parades. Boring. I am a 25+ year F1 fanatic who doesnt bother to watch the races live any more because they are just downright boring.

    Here is how I would change F1:

    1. Spec Wings. Aerodynamics should be reigned in big time. Develop a spec single element front and rear wing that every team must use for every race. The teams can adjust the wing, play with gurney flaps and such.... but every team has the exact same basic aero package. No rear diffusers are allowed. No side planks. NO other direct aero aids allowed period.

    2. Larger wheels/tires. Do away with the grooved tires and increase the allowed wheel/tire width by 2" in the rear and 1" in the front. Allow 2 tire manufacturers to compete. Teams are allowed a total of 2 sets of dry, wet and intermediate for both qualifying and the race. This means teams will start the race on the same tires they practice and qualify on and they will only get 1 tire change during the race. Managing your tires will become critical!

    3. No spec engine. Maximum engine displacement is increased to 3.5 liters. Maximum 4 valves per cylinder. No onboard telemetry connection is allowed. The team may not make any changes to the engine during the race except while in the pits, no electronic data link to the ECU. A standardized ECU may be a good idea as it helps enforce rule #4 below.

    4. No electronic driver aids. No traction control of any sort. No power steering. No electronic controlled differentials. No automatic gearbox or clutch. Gearboxes must be shifted via a gear lever and the clutch must be actuated by peddle. No electronic or computer controlled shifting.... meaning no rev matching software and computer pre-selecting of gears and such. The driver is in charge of shifting gears, matching revs and preventing a miss shift and any resulting engine damage!

    5. Brake discs must be made from steel. No carbon brake discs allowed. Brake pads must also last an entire race weekend and if changed put the car on the back of the grid for the race.


    Basically.... give the cars lots more mechanical grip but severely limit their aero grip. Give the cars equal of more power.... but cut back on the high tech expensive stuff required to generate this power. Make the driver actually DRIVE the car. Put full emphasis on making this a drivers series. Bring back the dangers of a missed shift, toasted brakes or roasted clutch. Do away with the carbon brake created stupid late braking that makes pulling off a pass under braking almost impossible. In short.... bring back the wheel to wheel racing while at the same time making it cheaper!



    Terry
     
  12. scuderia47

    scuderia47 Karting

    Nov 5, 2003
    208
    Mainland
    Full Name:
    Bill
    the reason I watch F1 instead of......oh NASCAR lets say, is becuase of how differnt each car is among the differnt teams. thats what makes it interesting and exciting for me. i like the fact that the Ferraris are different from the BMWs. it gives it marque identity.

    i do believe that they should eliminate a lot of the electronic stuff....but they dont have to standardize every car so stringently. having a manual box with a clutch would be awsome, but turning F1 into CART would really kill my interest in F1.

    I think that if these changes go into effect, Ferrari should pull out of F1, and put 100% of their attention into sports car racing, that would be awsome!!


    Terry, well put. i would like to add something to your last sentence,

    "...but allow each car to be unique and differnet"
     
  13. Brian C. Stradale

    Brian C. Stradale F1 Rookie
    Lifetime Rossa

    Mar 17, 2002
    3,603
    Dallas, TX, USA
    If they do as they propose, it won't be "Formula One" any more... it may go by that name, but it'll be just a inch away from a spec series. In which case, I don't see Ferrari sticking around.

    As a Ferraristi, I love Formula One for the constructor innovation element... and that some of that makes it into the street cars. If they make changes, I'd vote for ones that make the innovation more applicable to street cars.

    For example, ban wings but allow all the body aero that you want. Restrict tires and wheels to street sportscar dimensions. Slow down the cars... fine... but don't axe innovation or take the constructors out of it!!
     
  14. CTEV2

    CTEV2 Karting

    Feb 4, 2004
    128
    New Orleans
    Full Name:
    Charlie Thomas
    Excellent thoughts Terry - thanks for sharing. I'm hesitant to endorse anything that standardizes parts between the cars, like the wing, because F1 is as much as a constructor's championship as it is a driver's. I do agree with a single element spoiler and no driver aids. Regarding paddle shifters...I'm still torn.

    What about a budget or R&D cap for the top teams? Is this unenforceable?Untraceable? I'm in favor of keeping the teams autonomous and letting them allocate thrie own money. We don't need extreme measures that would turn F1 into CART, when several smaller issues should be addressed first.

    Innovation is critical to F1, but slowing it so that the lower level teams catch up at a faster rate than the top teams sprint away may help level the ground. This contrasts with having a sweeping reform, then letting the better teams hit the ground running with flexibility and preparedness to take on the changes.





     
  15. 62 250 GTO

    62 250 GTO F1 Veteran

    Jan 9, 2004
    7,732
    Nova Scotia Canada
    Full Name:
    Neil
    #15 62 250 GTO, May 2, 2004
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 7, 2017
    How many steps back are they going to take I wonder? They should move ahead with new ideas. Bringing back old rules and not updating them is odd.
    Here is the Ferrari squad getting ready for next season.
    Image Unavailable, Please Login
     
  16. 62 250 GTO

    62 250 GTO F1 Veteran

    Jan 9, 2004
    7,732
    Nova Scotia Canada
    Full Name:
    Neil
    I think that "last tenth" is always the hardest one to get. And the great drivers can get it most of the time. The problem is, the great drivers are usually in the great cars so getting that extra umph out of the car isn't important and the little guys {smaller teams} can't try to get everything out of their cars due to what is known as "blown-up-again-shoot". But I'm picking at a loose thread. F1 needs help. I'm not sure if these rules are nutty, but I'm wiling to try new ideas to keep F1 the Top Formula.
     
  17. Tspringer

    Tspringer F1 Veteran

    Apr 11, 2002
    6,155
    Hey, dont get me wrong guys, I DON'T want F1 to turn into CART.

    Going with a spec wing set would not do that. Each team would still be required to build their own car. Not just buy the latest Lola or Reynard like in CART. Teams would also fight tooth and nail to gain advantages in HOW they deploy the spec wings and low little drag they can induce otherwise. The building of the car would still be unique.

    Teams will also be encouraged to build and develop engines. The larger capacity would help make for some limitations in ultimate tech... so I would expect to see equal or more power than currently.

    I dont want to see F1 drift away from being constructor focused... I just want the constructors championship to be secondary to the drivers. If we put having great racing first.... the other will of consequence follow.

    I agree that the great drivers always get the ultimate out of the car, but with the cars doing so much of the driving for you like today many lesser drivers are capable of running as a top dog when in past eras they may not have been able too. I want to see the car demand a real DRIVER....

    Terry
     
  18. Doody

    Doody F1 Veteran

    Nov 16, 2001
    6,099
    MA USA
    Full Name:
    Mr. Doody
    hear hear. well said.

    doody.
     
  19. Mitch Alsup

    Mitch Alsup F1 Veteran

    Nov 4, 2003
    6,992
    [Here is how I would change F1:

    1. Spec Wings. Kill off all aerodynamics altogether--no wings, no diffusers, no barge boards

    2. Larger wheels/tires. This is not a problem after you get rid of the aero.

    3. Engine. 3.0 litres, actual pump gasoline, Mechanical valve springs, magnetos, distributors, no engine computers.

    4. No electronic driver aids. Driver shifts transmission with mechanical clutch, radio communications is one way, either driver->team or team->driver chosen by team before start of race.

    5. Brake discs must be made from steel. This is not a problem after you get rid of aero.

    Gasoline: a tanker buys all gasoline used for setup, practice and the race at a random filing station in the town of the race. All race cars use gasoline from this tanker, station to buy gas from is determined by chance the day cars arrive and unpack. Gasoline will be salted with a tracing chemical. The only thing teams are allowed to do with the gas is to run it through a 1-2 micron filter under the watchful eye of a steward.
     
  20. tifosi12

    tifosi12 Four Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa Owner

    Oct 3, 2002
    45,838
    @ the wheel
    Full Name:
    Andreas
    Basically agree with all of this, but two questions:

    - Why the one way radio comm? I think it doesn't hurt if voice (not data) comm is both ways. But as a rule prohibit voice encryption, that way other teams and more importantly the fans can listen in.

    - I love the regular fuel idea, but would that work globally? Does every country have the same kind of fuel? I would think so, but I'm not sure.
     
  21. Brian C. Stradale

    Brian C. Stradale F1 Rookie
    Lifetime Rossa

    Mar 17, 2002
    3,603
    Dallas, TX, USA
    I agree with losing the wings. But I wouldn't try to legislate the shape of the car itself... just nothing extends from the car. That keeps it relevant to street cars.

    Agreed... allow wheels and tires in normal street sizes... 18-20" diameter and 10" wide on front and 13" wide on back. That keeps it relevant to street cars.

    I like the actual pump gasoline idea!! That, again, keeps it relevant to street cars. But I wouldn't outlaw engine computers. We have engine computers in our street cars, after all. And there's so much good that can be done for so little cost via computers and software. I'd let them develop there.

    I agree with no traction control. But I see no need for them to push a clutch pedal. And I agree with tifosi12 on the radio communications... allow two-way communication, but demand that the public can listen in... no coding. That provides some limits, but also allows some good things, and makes the whole thing much more entertaining!!

    I disagree with this!! These carbon-ceramic brakes are AWESOME for high-performance street cars! Why on earth would we want to outlaw them and kill off their further development?!?


    I agree with spec gasoline... not sure about all the controls you suggest.
     
  22. SRT Mike

    SRT Mike Two Time F1 World Champ

    Oct 31, 2003
    23,199
    Taxachusetts
    Full Name:
    Raymond Luxury Yacht
    It's clear Mosley is playing hardball, but I can't quite figure out to what end.

    Maybe he is calling the manufacturers bluff on the GPWC? If so, he is playing a dangerous game. Maybe he is just trying to be a hardass expecting them to cave eventually? Or maybe he is starting his negociations with a very hard stance expecting to soften it but still end up at his desired final outcome? I just don't get it - and I don't think the GPWC has ever been stronger or more feasible than it is right now.

    As for the sport and the changed - I disagree with making it a spec series. The biggest problem with the spectacle of F1 is that it's getting boring. For 3-4 years now, it's seemed like Ferrari pretty much dominate, and nobody else stands a chance. I think its incredibly unfair to penalize Ferrari for their excellence.

    The manufacturers WANT to spend the big bucks, to race, and to beat their competition. Minardi will never have the bankroll that BMW has, and really, just because someone decided to enter the race doesn't mean they should be guaranteed a fighting chance if their technical work isn't up to snuff.

    If there were more passing, and the cars were closer in performance while still allowing technical innovation to be a major part of the game, I think it would be a great thing. Passing seems hampered by a couple of things. First, the outright speed means even the long straights are gobbled up in seconds, giving almost no time to draft, move up, and make a pass. It seems many of the engines are somewhat similar in horsepower output, so the difference seems to be chassis and aero. Perhaps limiting the budget would help here? Another suggestion (I'm sure would not be popular with the manufacturers) would be to make the year before last's car available for inspection to all teams. So the F2002 would be open for inspection right now. Maybe make it 3 generations of car ago? I don't know. On braking, getting rid of carbon brakes would help, by increasing braking distances into the turn and allowing more room to pass. Maybe the FIA could ensure each team gets the same wind-tunnel testing time? Perhaps make everyone pay into a fund that pays for the aero testing and then they divvy up the wind tunnel time equally?

    Probably the best solution is just to cap spending - but if you cap Ferrari at $100MM, Minardi doesn't even have that much - how do you enforce it?
     
  23. tifosi12

    tifosi12 Four Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa Owner

    Oct 3, 2002
    45,838
    @ the wheel
    Full Name:
    Andreas
    Mitch once explained the non aero regulation; you have to do more than just prohibit wings, the whole car acts like a wing. So the car shape has to be convex. Alternatively IMHO FIA wind tunnel testing could probably measure a certain amount of downforce. After all you want some downforce for safety, but not that much to have the high turn speeds again.

    If you allow "just a little bit" of computers in F1 engines, you basically open the door to all the driver aids. Remember why traction control is still not banned? Not because it saves engines (although it does indeed), but because it could never be 100% excluded. Engineers would "hide" it in the motor management software. So you either have electronics or you don't.

    The beauty of no aeros is, that you don't have to modify the tracks. Heck, you don't even have to build concrete wastelands like Sepang to keep it safe.
     
  24. winston

    winston Karting

    Nov 3, 2003
    139
    foothills
    Full Name:
    don
    Mr. Mosley's plan would ban innovation and creativity. Why not reduce size of wings, allow competition between tire manufacturors, allow cars to become wide again? Engine development and brake improvement are directly transferable to production cars.
    Mr. Mosley should probably look into buying into NASCAR as he would be much happier there.
    Winston
     
  25. Brian C. Stradale

    Brian C. Stradale F1 Rookie
    Lifetime Rossa

    Mar 17, 2002
    3,603
    Dallas, TX, USA
    That's a very interesting idea. That will further accelerate everybody's learning and innovation as well as leveling the field a bit. Win-win.

    No, the carbon brakes hold up better... but stopping distances are rubber and downforce limited more than brake limited. Leave the carbon brakes. Get rid of the wings.

    I don't see aero as a bad thing... just not ridiculous amounts of it. 4g's of downforce is crazy. Lose the wings and get down to 2g or so and the speeds and braking distances will change much.

    After getting rid of the wings, if you still have too much, then legislate a minimum clearance from the road... say 4". That, again, makes the aero designs more relevant to street cars... as well as greatly reducing the ground effects effectiveness.

    Or maybe charge all teams an equal amount to fund a single FIA wind tunnel available to all teams to use... teams like Ferrari will just use their own... teams like Minardi will be able to use the shared one. That allows everyone to innovate... everyone to spend money as they see fit... but guarantees a minimum set of resources to all.
     

Share This Page