|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
27 Mar 2018, 22:33 (Ref:3811367) | #2701 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,648
|
Quote:
Whilst I get that the "three power unit" requirement is about trying to manage cost etc, to me it goes against good racing and with the development needed to achieve the reliability, could increase cost rather than reducing. I tend to subscribe to the Colin Chapman approach of a car winning the race and falling apart just after crossing the finish line. F1 cars should be edgy, wild broncos that only the very best can control and hang out over the edge. Once they start restricting usage, it effectively becomes endurance racing (nothing wrong with endurance racing but it's not F1). The current rules have given us long, porky, ponderous cars that rarely race each other hard due to aero shadow, sound terrible and now hide the drivers down under a coloured cage - F1 has absolutely lost its way. Mr Brawn has a big job to do but in my humble view, wholesale change is needed - the comparison with MotoGP is a telling one and Damon Hill's comments ring true too - if rules that are right for the sport and the competition mean that a manufacturer or 2 leave, that may actually be of benefit to the future of the game. |
|||
__________________
“We’re far from having too much horsepower…[m]y definition of too much horsepower is when all four wheels are spinning in every gear.” ― Mark Donohue |
28 Mar 2018, 00:25 (Ref:3811381) | #2702 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
Then add this to the problems:
"So Hamilton – rightly proud of a stunning lap – didn’t want that attributed to a mode he didn’t use. From Wolff’s perspective, playing that down and sending an impression of the full mode having been used but without quite specifying what he meant by that, was perhaps trying to divert attention from the fact that with the full ‘party mode’ Hamilton might’ve been on pole by 0.8sec. Which is not a good message going into F1’s new season." https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/o...-vs-party-mode Turns the whole show into a farce. Vettel's victory was just "pure dumb luck" and the inability of the cars to race. |
|
|
28 Mar 2018, 00:42 (Ref:3811384) | #2703 | |||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 23,763
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying." Colin Chapman. |
28 Mar 2018, 07:24 (Ref:3811422) | #2704 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 854
|
I think the "dumb luck" more refered to what happened after Ferrari's risky, but successful strategy - the best driver in the best car had nearly half a race to overtake the second best driver in the second best car and couldn't.
Follow this to it's logical conclusion. |
|
|
28 Mar 2018, 12:15 (Ref:3811488) | #2705 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,540
|
Quote:
In a sport of teams with casts of literally thousands and hundred million dollar budgets, is not building more copies of engines really making a difference? It certainly does for fans when cars sit in garages to keep miles off them. |
|||
|
28 Mar 2018, 14:45 (Ref:3811517) | #2706 | ||||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,968
|
Quote:
RB certainly has a difficult road ahead. Quote:
i would rather see simpler engines being made and finding the savings there rather then complex and expensive engines being conserved over the course of the season. but if they insist on more complicated engines then i suspect (and all things being equal and with no numbers to back anything up) there is an economic (economies of scale) argument to be made for producing more units...rather, each additional engine made (and sold) theoretically should reduce the marginal cost of every engine made as the R&D and sunk costs are shared across a greater number of built units. or to put it another way, it is possible that the price of engines are artificially being inflated as a result of restricting their usage and therefore production. from there, there are sensible precautions that can be taken (parc ferme/reduce the number of race team staff/cap the number of hours they can work over the weekend) in order to prevent the big teams from installing a new PU for every session. as an aside to that, whats the point of spending money on massively improved thermally efficient engines if they cant actually showcase what they can do on any given weekend? while i dont like the amount of money they are spending....if they are going to spend it them at least let them use it! a side benefit to this could lead to a faster development/catch up cycle for Renault and Honda. easier said then done of course! |
||||
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place |
28 Mar 2018, 15:37 (Ref:3811524) | #2707 | ||
The Honourable Mallett
20KPINAL
Join Date: Feb 1999
Posts: 37,621
|
I'm of the opinion that budget caps are not the way to go. They will simply lead to what we have now, because the large organisations will find ways to cram more manhours into a shorter time by using more technology. A good example of this is the fracking boom in the USA. OPEC thought that if the price of oil dropped below $50 pb the frackers would die. They were right initially but all that did was remove the small fish. The major players developed drilling techniques that are far more efficient and now the break even is somewhere near $30 pb.
Hybrids are becoming less and less road relevant so the only other way to go is electric and that's already being tried. For me the solution lies in less technology; and the freedom to design or buy your own engine which must be naturally aspirated and fueled by good old petrol. |
||
__________________
I've decided to stop reaching out to people. I'm just going to contact them instead. |
28 Mar 2018, 16:42 (Ref:3811543) | #2708 | |||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 23,763
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying." Colin Chapman. |
28 Mar 2018, 17:35 (Ref:3811552) | #2709 | ||
The Honourable Mallett
20KPINAL
Join Date: Feb 1999
Posts: 37,621
|
Yes that's apparently the idea, but look at my example above which was, in effect, a budget cap. All that will happen is the manufacturers will find more efficient ways to make the same things, leaving those without the facilities to struggle.
|
||
__________________
I've decided to stop reaching out to people. I'm just going to contact them instead. |
28 Mar 2018, 17:38 (Ref:3811553) | #2710 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 11,094
|
Budget caps are too easy to work around. Red Bull already did it.
Red Bull energy drinks form a new company called Red Bull Technology. Not an F1 team, just a random company. The new Red Bull Tech spends a LOT of money developing an F1 car, but they aren't bound by the budget gap as they aren't an F1 team. Red Bull Tech sell that car to Red Bull Racing for £20, which keeps the Red Bull Racing budget low and allows them to invest money elsewhere. That example is quite simplified, but we know it's been happening. |
|
|
3 Apr 2018, 21:59 (Ref:3812689) | #2711 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,636
|
How about they let the teams have different title sponsors on their cars?
|
||
|
4 Apr 2018, 10:47 (Ref:3812774) | #2712 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 18,738
|
BAR tried that and weren't allowed
|
|
__________________
He who dares wins! He who hesitates is lost! |
4 Apr 2018, 22:47 (Ref:3812913) | #2713 | |
Racer
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 184
|
||
|
5 Apr 2018, 00:38 (Ref:3812917) | #2714 | ||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 23,763
|
IndyCar have been doing this for years but I like the corporate team liveries in F1, it's part of F1.
|
||
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying." Colin Chapman. |
5 Apr 2018, 12:14 (Ref:3812968) | #2715 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
Ross Brawn says he finds it "personally offensive" when people such as Sergio Marchionne accuse him of "dumbing down" Formula 1.
http://www.f1reader.com/list/news/la...iticism-193070 I feel that that this issue is being deliberately confused. Most of us feel that F1 has been dumbed down in a racing sense, the cars do not sufficientlr reward good driving skills, the above statement is trying to shift the goal posts to the technical input and complexity of an F1 car. F1 has been dumbed down in a racing sense Mr. Brawn, there is NO racing, most of us want racing and this is what simpler and cheaper cars will deliver, do not confuse eye wateringly complicated aerodynamics and PU specs with “dumbed down F1”,the fact that these cars simply cannot race or pass one another, and that is the reason F1 is “dumbed down”. Do not “dumb it down” any further, the lack of racing is the problem you are supposed to be addressing. “Simplificate and add lightness” [Colin Chapman] . He knew what he was talking about! |
|
|
6 Apr 2018, 08:12 (Ref:3813170) | #2716 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 18,738
|
All Ross wants to do is a new set of regulations that allow cars to race closer. Hardly dumbing down
|
|
__________________
He who dares wins! He who hesitates is lost! |
6 Apr 2018, 11:49 (Ref:3813216) | #2717 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,478
|
When are we likely to hear the 2021 announcement from Ross Brawn? I thought we were going to get some information this weekend from Bahrain?
|
||
|
6 Apr 2018, 12:43 (Ref:3813224) | #2718 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,406
|
Quote:
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/h...-for-2021.html |
|||
__________________
When did I do dangerous driving??? |
6 Apr 2018, 14:21 (Ref:3813251) | #2719 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 18,738
|
He's already looking to make the racing better for 2019, which is quite right, we can't wait till 2021 for racing to be exciting again
|
|
__________________
He who dares wins! He who hesitates is lost! |
6 Apr 2018, 14:37 (Ref:3813256) | #2720 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,636
|
It could also be keeping teams from securing major sponsors that cannot justify the cost to support an entire team. As viewership drops, I think this will get continually more difficult.
|
||
|
6 Apr 2018, 15:10 (Ref:3813269) | #2721 | ||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 23,763
|
I don't see why that would detract from attracting major sponsors? Many F1 teams already have a major sponsor as well as associate sponsors/partners, whose logos are incorporated into the livery.
|
||
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying." Colin Chapman. |
6 Apr 2018, 15:27 (Ref:3813271) | #2722 | |||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 23,763
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying." Colin Chapman. |
6 Apr 2018, 15:42 (Ref:3813275) | #2723 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,636
|
|||
|
6 Apr 2018, 17:02 (Ref:3813303) | #2724 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,147
|
It will be interesting to see the details. The items listed are clearly "goals" (and are pretty much listed as such). The difficult task for Liberty is...
1. Achieve their goals, which I think also implies successfully wrestling some significant amount of power away from the current players such as Ferrari and Mercedes. These goals effectively looks to take away their largest advantage... money. 2. Making it enticing enough to convince enough of that same group to sign the next version of the Concorde Agreement. They need critical mass to survive. I think the sport can survive loosing someone like Ferrari, but will Liberty "have the balls" (for a lack of a better expression) to risk doing that. Richard |
|
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
6 Apr 2018, 18:04 (Ref:3813329) | #2725 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,478
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[Rules] Are more rule changes necessary ? | Marbot | Formula One | 51 | 27 Sep 2009 17:19 |
F1 future rule changes | TheNewBob | Formula One | 57 | 20 Dec 2006 09:19 |
Sensible ideas for future technical regs anyone?/Rule changes - more to come [merged] | AMT | Formula One | 74 | 12 Nov 2002 16:09 |
Future Tourer Future | Crash Test | Australasian Touring Cars. | 13 | 17 Jul 2002 23:01 |