[Tech Issue] 20,000RPM once again?

[Bononi]

That's very sad, all I can say.

[djb]

I just read athe Mosley response to teh fota, and among other things is the bit about "if you go over budget, then there will be a predetermined fine"
---exactly--
Mosley also confirmed that breaches of the budget cap rules would not result in on-track sanctions, but would instead be 'financial against a pre-agreed formula.'

just what is the bloody point of that? You would get overspending for time-saving widgits or whatever the hell (aero development, who knows) and then teams balancing "sure, we will get fined 10 quid (or thousand, or whatever) but toss it, we just gained X amount of time--seems rather silly to me and just more of a confusion and willy wallying around the rules with a two tiered system--bloody stupid for the fan point of view, vis-a-vis confusion, appeals, lawyers and all that squat............

[johnh875]

Exactly djb, the fines would have to be many times the overspend to be a deterrent.

[Bononi]

Originally Posted by djb

I just read athe Mosley response to teh fota, and among other things is the bit about "if you go over budget, then there will be a predetermined fine"
---exactly--
Mosley also confirmed that breaches of the budget cap rules would not result in on-track sanctions, but would instead be 'financial against a pre-agreed formula.'

just what is the bloody point of that? You would get overspending for time-saving widgits or whatever the hell (aero development, who knows) and then teams balancing "sure, we will get fined 10 quid (or thousand, or whatever) but toss it, we just gained X amount of time--seems rather silly to me and just more of a confusion and willy wallying around the rules with a two tiered system--bloody stupid for the fan point of view, vis-a-vis confusion, appeals, lawyers and all that squat............

I was hoping it could be a one-shot death for F1 but as it seems that it will be a slow one, thanks to Max neverending inability.

[Purist]

I think the real issue with the caps is that the manufacturers are convinced you can't really develop those innovative solutions on the proposed budget. You could spend the entire budget on just the R&D facilities you would need to properly do the job. Windtunnel time is not cheap, and at the very least, you want the cars tested to know whether they will be too aerodynamically unstable, pitch sensitive, etc. Movable aerodynamic devices will just complicate this process.

And of course, if the big teams were successful under the cap, do you really think the newcomers will stick around for long? Conversely, the big teams will eventually leave if they are unsuccessful, wth or without the cap in play.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Purist

And of course, if the big teams were successful under the cap, do you really think the newcomers will stick around for long?.

Do you think that they would even bother to enter under a 'spend,spend,spend' regime! ? Indeed,they do not!

Originally Posted by Purist

Conversely, the big teams will eventually leave if they are unsuccessful, wth or without the cap in play.

As they are always likely to do.

Which leaves the door open for other teams to come in and take their place if they can afford to do so.

[jab]

There is a reason why they don't want a budget cap - it's because they, led by Ferrari and Toyota, just don't want to be limited by how much they can spend. They would rather just make promises and set targets for cutting costs on specific parts like engines and drivetrains that can easily be broken, or that they can indeed meet those targets and promises but continue spending money on everything else. Budgets won't come down that much under their system. And of course it's in their interest that there aren't too many teams taking all the revenues and damaging their PR. I am convinced they don't want it to be a level playing field because otherwise they're under threat from privateers and the "Formula GP3" teams, and we can't have them beating the "big teams"

[Purist]

I very much doubt that, Jab. Look at Le Mans type racing; the privateers still generally get smacked down by the factories. And it was no different back in the day for F1 either.

[jab]

But the FIA still had control and it was possible for privateers to compete

I fear that if the likes of Lola and Prodrive come in, they could be used for a few years before they are purged, forced out in some way or other, once the series is off the ground. Either that or they'll be pushed into effectively becoming B teams

I don't fancy the chances of privateers surviving in a new series at all. Manufacturers and corporations are like that. They'll want this for themselves - self-interest is what drives these companies to the lengths they have gone. They might appear as a unit but only because it serves their own purpose for now

[PTRACER]

Not only remove the rev limits, but ban rev limiters...give drivers the choice to over-rev if they want to.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by PTRACER

Not only remove the rev limits, but ban rev limiters...give drivers the choice to over-rev if they want to.

That would drive up costs,but why not put a 'cheaper' engine in there and let them abuse that ?

You see,we've got to this point where engines are worth hundreds of thousands of pounds and nobody wants to destroy an engine or have to keep building others on grounds of cost,so you stick a limit on it to stop them having to spend hundreds of thousands of pounds trying to wreck their engines.If you had a cheaper 'unit' maybe 'unlimited' would be possible.

[PTRACER]

It would be their choice whether to risk blowing it or not.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by PTRACER

It would be their choice whether to risk blowing it or not.

Maybe it's shouldn't be the drivers choice as to whether or not he should blow up half a million quids worth of engine.

[PTRACER]

That's not really the point, F1 engines never used to have rev limiters hence you would see retirements due to "over-revving" the engine. But at circuits like Monza, you'd maybe need to push the engine that extra 500rpm and then you could slipstream past.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by PTRACER

That's not really the point, F1 engines never used to have rev limiters hence you would see retirements due to "over-revving" the engine.

Over-revving was usually caused by a driver down-changing too early.

This is also the reason that F1 drivers now use fancy semi-auto boxes.Any down changes that are likely to over-rev the engine are aborted by the electronics so as to not damage the engine.

F1 engines never used to be so expensive.DFVs weren't exactly 'ten a penny' but they were cheap in comparison to todays engines.