The "Armchair Max" thread.

[Inigo Montoya]

Yes, we can let Toyota and Honda battle for that honour.

[Knowlesy]

Are they real teams under your criteria though?

[Inigo Montoya]

Toyota at least. They have the cash to compete, they just don't have the talent.

I retract my "real teams" terminology - as I don't want to offend anyone. How about "the big boys" instead?

I realize my views are more radical than Red's even.

[Knowlesy]

Nothing wrong with a radical view.

[Dutton]

Arrange the WCC order (or create a third title?) to be ranked according to the "points-per-pound" ratio type thing. That way, spending a million-squillion-bucks would not necessarily assure overall victory.

[Red]

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

Unfortunatly they don't all build their own chassis now. STR chassis are RBR ones with the engine mountings changed, Sauber used to use old Ferrari parts when they were not BMW (IIRC) - now SA use last year's Honda.

Not happy about that already.

Cost cutting means nothing. You can't cut the costs. Simple as that.

[Red]

Let me rephrase that. You CAN cut the costs. Dramatically. Remove the motivation and the big guys will not spend anymore money. Standard everything, engines smaller than my 94 Corolla etc and Mercedes/BMW/Honda/etc will not spend any cent in F1. Is that what you really want?

[duke_toaster]

Originally Posted by Red

Let me rephrase that. You CAN cut the costs. Dramatically. Remove the motivation and the big guys will not spend anymore money. Standard everything, engines smaller than my 94 Corolla etc and Mercedes/BMW/Honda/etc will not spend any cent in F1. Is that what you really want?

Decent racing and cost cutting aren't mutually exclusive.

It won't change the factory teams drastically but it will cut costs for the privateers dramatically. Ideally people like Carlin/Prodrive/888/WSR would run semi-factory outfits like using old (or even this year's) (say) Ferrari as "WSR present Alfa Romeo" or something like that

[Red]

Ok. Let's try another angle. Why don't privateers try to run decent racing teams in cost cutting series like GP2 for example? Why it really really has to be Formula 1 free for all?

[duke_toaster]

Originally Posted by Red

Ok. Let's try another angle. Why don't privateers try to run decent racing teams in cost cutting series like GP2 for example? Why it really really has to be Formula 1 free for all?

It's good for those teams as they can get their sponsors more exposure.

It's good for us (the fans) as more cars = bigger grids = better racing. We don't want a situation with a re-run of Indy '05 every other weekend as the costs stop teams entering.

[Red]

Can't really follow you here. You really want more Paul Stoddart's?

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by Inigo Montoya

And if we really care about cost cutting, let the big boys spend what they want so that we can have some real cars (and not the pimped up karts that some are suggesting) - and.. work out a profit sharing scheme.

Well, I'm not proposing the 'pimped up karts' to reduce the costs. I don't believe it's possible to cut the costs and it is not necessary at all.

I agree that the technical regulations have become too restrictive. Formula 1 has become a 'semi-spec' series. But technical restrictions are necessary to keep the sport safe. From that point of view it'd better to eliminate downforce and relax the rules regarding the tyres, engines and minimum weight in stead of doing the other way around.

[duke_toaster]

Originally Posted by Red

Can't really follow you here. You really want more Paul Stoddart's?

YES!

[Red]

Why on earth would you want that?

[duke_toaster]

Originally Posted by Red

Why on earth would you want that?

Because he was doing a good job on limited resources and added to the numbers.

[Red]

Like what, killing Minardi? I can do that for free, let alone a small budget.

[Dutton]

Minardi had gone a fair bit before Stoddart, IMO.

[Red]

Indeed. But Stoddart nailed the final nail in the coffin despite promissing the world that he's the saviour of the universe.

[duke_toaster]

If the FIA made more aggressive cost cutting measures, like the ones I suggest, Minardi would almost definately still exist under that name.

[Dutton]

He was just a businessman working the game, when it came down to the crunch. I don't think he ever hid that fact. I think he was sincere enough, but I am not sure he always took the right tack.

Well, the name doesn't mean much when it has been sold on (by which I mean, in the Minardi instance, when Minardi failed to own majority control in the team).

Teams live and die. Life goes on. This will happen regardless of the system (at least with those striving to maximise their income).

[Red]

If the FIA didn't make any cost cutting measures the.... Jordan or Sauber would still be with us. Not Minardi. Minardi was doomed.

You have to realise that any change that FIA introduced so far, for cost sake, actually INCREASED the short term costs. It might help cost cutting later. To those who survive.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

If the FIA made more aggressive cost cutting measures, like the ones I suggest, Minardi would almost definately still exist under that name.

With the measures you suggested will worsen the situation in Formula 1. The current 'cost-cutting' measures have taken away much from the show, haven't they?

I mean, is it good for us to see drivers slowing down, because they have to save their engine for the next race weekend? Is it good for us to see that teams can't improve their performances rather than by aerodynamics, because engine and tyre development is rule out?

[duke_toaster]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

With the measures you suggested will worsen the situation in Formula 1. The current 'cost-cutting' measures have taken away much from the show, haven't they?

I mean, is it good for us to see drivers slowing down, because they have to save their engine for the next race weekend? Is it good for us to see that teams can't improve their performances rather than by aerodynamics, because engine and tyre development is rule out?

Well, my measures IMO would improve the show as well as cutting the costs. I forgot to mention an aero homogolation system (shame about the ten minutes post editing limit) which would cut costs, ground effect and smaller wings would improve the show, slicks would improve the show, customer chassis would improve the show and cut costs, the engines would improve the show and cut costs ...

[Red]

I'd just want to pinpoint that we, meaning the armchair enthusiasts can't propose anything. We (that means you and me) have no idea what we're talking about. They (that means FIA and their working group) do.

Sadly though. They (meaning FIA and technical working group) pay too much attention to us (meaning you and me) who demand "no downforce standard chassis more overtaking more cars liberty for all" rules. This is sad.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

Well, my measures IMO would improve the show as well as cutting the costs. I forgot to mention an aero homogolation system (shame about the ten minutes post editing limit) which would cut costs, ground effect and smaller wings would improve the show, slicks would improve the show, customer chassis would improve the show and cut costs, the engines would improve the show and cut costs ...

The American open-wheel series are already familiar with these 'cost-cutting', 'show-improving' and artificial regulations. And what has it brought to them?