The standard monocoque idea

[juicy sushi]

taken from a discussion within another thread. should F1 move to having one standard tub/driver cell, with the teams free to develop bits around it? it seems that we're already seeing a lot of standardized components being introduced to f1, with all sorts of economic/competitive justifications. if they're going to go down this road, why not have a standard tub for all, and then teams could bolt on whatever parts they wished (within the rules)? it could likely save some costs, but retain a fair amount of open development.

of course, i think the big question with such a move would be, what do you gain doing this?...

[johntt]

A standard tub wuld be the best way to cut costs in a big way and not impact upon development, imo they should do this then and open up things like tyres and engines to development.

[TomStoten]

If a standard tub was used would that effect the front suspension mounting points? Because if so wouldnt the teams then all have very smilar front suspension? Also would it impact on the aero?

[FPV GTHO]

Front suspension, aero, cooling, engine installation would all be compromised. The exterior parts might be free, but there'd be limited scope to get the best out of it. I'd personally be more in favour of at least allowing the tubs to become customer units like the engines, if the teams and FIA arent going to allow complete customer cars.

[Leighton Irwin]

And just who is going to make this tub? Whose design? I do not think any team would be happy to use a tub designed by another team. Would you trust Mad Max and his merry band of twits to design a tub? Do the teams get to make them or is it farmed out to some independent supplier, whose quality control may be questionable? If the teams make them to a standard design what is to stop some judicious strengthing in places? If they do not make them there is going to be a whole bunch of large enclaves on the market at bargain prices.
It would just dumb down F1 more than it is now.

[zac510]

Like F3 then?
I'm not in favour of dumbing it down either.

[johntt]

Originally Posted by Leighton Irwin

And just who is going to make this tub? Whose design? I do not think any team would be happy to use a tub designed by another team. Would you trust Mad Max and his merry band of twits to design a tub? Do the teams get to make them or is it farmed out to some independent supplier, whose quality control may be questionable? If the teams make them to a standard design what is to stop some judicious strengthing in places? If they do not make them there is going to be a whole bunch of large enclaves on the market at bargain prices.
It would just dumb down F1 more than it is now.

I'd give the contract to Dallara. They have a good grasp on how to make a tub given that they made the tub for the Audi R8, R10 (and maybe the mythical R9) as well as the tubs for their single seaters which are used in Gp2, WSR, F3, IPS and IRL.

Their quality control is in no way questionable, just ask Ernesto Viso: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=fOU5KsXwsFM

[duke_toaster]

Originally Posted by zac510

Like F3 then?
I'm not in favour of dumbing it down either.

No, F3 has several makes but customer chassis (which F1 should have). There are Dallaras, Lolas, Mygales plus more I can't name of the top of my head.

If we want significant cost cutting, instead of a control tub we should seriously look at contol aerodynamic parts ...

[J-C]

Why not just go the whole hog and make it a spec formula? Allowing any form of customer/standard chassis will merely lead to a series full of identical cars anyway as teams converge to the best one available.

Remember that F1 is pretty much the only open-wheel championship in the world that is not a spec chassis formula - ChampCar, IndyCar, F3, A1GP, WSR all are either through intent or convergence to the best package. Many of these series had a proud history of having multiple constructors but ultimately have become spec formulae. Yes F3 has a sprinkling of Lolas and Mygales but it is basically just another Dallara catagory.

Control aero parts would cut costs by putting hundreds of aerodynamicists, model makers and wind tunnel technicians out of work.

[chris bailey]

Come on guys. Stop with the dumbing down process. Cost-cutting and F1 do not go together and never will. Those with the money will still spend the most, wherever they can. If I want spectacle, I'll watch sprint cars. F1 should be pure, unconstrained excess in all areas. Right now, it's on the road to (compromised/over-regulated/ill-managed/squeaky-clean) ruin........!

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by chris bailey

F1 should be pure, unconstrained excess in all areas.

A money spending competition. There are several other places you could go to watch that!

Originally Posted by chris bailey

Right now, it's on the road to (compromised/over-regulated/ill-managed/squeaky-clean) ruin........!

Whereas if we just let all the teams spend as much money as they can get their hands on and open up all the regs.........

[chris bailey]

Yes, well it's never been for the financially challenged.........!

[zac510]

Even with control aero parts you'd still get the teams putting the models into their wind tunnels so they can measure what it can do through all states to build their knowledge of the car. In no way would the suddenly up and sell/dump all their staff and facilities. That's a very naive idea.

[J-C]

Originally Posted by zac510

Even with control aero parts you'd still get the teams putting the models into their wind tunnels so they can measure what it can do through all states to build their knowledge of the car. In no way would the suddenly up and sell/dump all their staff and facilities. That's a very naive idea.

Compared to the resources teams pump into aero development at the moment, were you to have controlled aero parts/spec cars you would only need a fraction of that - teams would probably keep their WT facilities but lease them out to other users for instance. Why is there this total desire to eliminate any form of engineering innovation in F1 by having spec this and spec that?

[Mekola]

Originally Posted by J-C

Remember that F1 is pretty much the only open-wheel championship in the world that is not a spec chassis formula - ChampCar, IndyCar, F3, A1GP, WSR all are either through intent or convergence to the best package. Many of these series had a proud history of having multiple constructors but ultimately have become spec formulae. Yes F3 has a sprinkling of Lolas and Mygales but it is basically just another Dallara catagory.

And the million dollar question is why all these sub-Formula 1 series became spec series huh? Perhaps the costs to make a carbon-fibre chassis with that all aero regs is one, and other that the excellence made that even the slight difference of quality with one or other chassis, makes the difference on track catastrophic to the racer of the poorer car (the best car is 0s5 quicker per lap... imagine in 40 laps. Like the Lola B99/51-gate in the 1999 F.Nippon season, all competitors wants to get rid of them it that point that no Lola were seen racing in the following year).

I don't want F1 to follow their footsteps and became spec-series, it could be shocking to see Mercedes, Ferrari, Renault... with a spec-chassis, BUT think it should be better to allow lower teams to buy customer chassis from other teams. Like it was in the '50s, '60s and '70s... SFW could claim that he could but he couldn even have started in F1 in he was in his 1975 situation today.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by martyn bott

A money spending competition. There are several other places you could go to watch that!

Formula 1 has always been an expensive sport. It's an illusion to reduce costs significantly. But money is everything. Renault became champion the 2005 and 2006 seasons without having the biggest budget. In fact, the teams with the biggest budgets -Honda and Toyota- had one of the most problematic cars in the last couple of seasons.

[Mekola]

Problem is - that teams like Toyota and Honda could think to leave the series, if they realize that they're spending big budgets in vain.

[clioracer]

Originally Posted by Mekola

Problem is - that teams like Toyota and Honda could think to leave the series, if they realize that they're spending big budgets in vain.

The two teams you mention have for lord knows how long wasted money on F1 along with several others!
Ford did too until they realised that they have a comprehensive wrc challenge to pour resources into, Honda and Toyota don`t.

Could it not be an option for some teams to buy a chassis from other teams? Would other teams be prepared to sell chassis to customers in this way?

I can`t imagine any "top" team competing in F1 and not building there own chassis, imagine why BMW, Ferrari, McLaren or Renault would compete in F1 if they didn`t build there own cars, what`s the point? the series would be too compromised for them....wouldn`t it?
I don`t think any of the "top" teams should be buying a chassis from another manufacturer even if they are an independent chassis builder, it would be too much of a compromise for the sport.

[tristancliffe]

F1 should always be about designing and building their own cars. If you want customer chassis, there are plenty of other series to enter/watch.

[Rennen]

As the one who first muted this idea, allow me to expand upon it. Firstly it came about by me picking up on the another posters use of the word 'Chassis' in another thread, and I suggested it wasn't a chassis in the traditional sense it's just a carbonfibre tub or man-capsule to locate the driver.

Actually they are officially referred to as 'Safety Cells' and currently conform to the safety specification of the FIA, so it's really an FIA design anyway!

I ventured that if they were all lined up as blanks straight out of the various teams / manufactures Autoclaves you probable couldn't tell them apart anyway!

The actual definition of what actually constitutes 'the car' itself is debatable.

Some posters have raised some concerns such as locating components...well havn't you ever wondered how teams change engines? A good (or bad) example is the 2006 Aguri, it used an obsolete Arrows tub but the latest Honda motor fitted it! And I doubt very much that it used the original Arrows suspension and certainly not it's brakes, or aero!

Other concerns raised was that the 'manufactures' (Toyota & Honda) would leave F1...Why? surely their interest in being involved is the mecahnical and and electronics not the carbonfibre safety cell.

The clever bit about F1 is how the whole 'package' works as one, and how it's is operated and run I would have thought.

[tristancliffe]

The tubs are altered to fit new engines. Whilst Aguri was using old Arrows tubs, it wasn't using ones lying around - new ones were made to Arrows' designs, with modifications for new engine mounts (and possible other things like master cylinders or whatever, depending on what was necessary).

The FIA Safety Standard does NOT mean they are an FIA design, just that they meet certain criteria.

Also, the Carbon Safety Cell is what everything else is bolted to, and would define a lot of mechanical and aerodynamic solutions based around it. It's not 'just the bit the driver sits in'.

[Mekola]

Originally Posted by clioracer

I can`t imagine any "top" team competing in F1 and not building there own chassis, imagine why BMW, Ferrari, McLaren or Renault would compete in F1 if they didn`t build there own cars, what`s the point? the series would be too compromised for them....wouldn`t it?
I don`t think any of the "top" teams should be buying a chassis from another manufacturer even if they are an independent chassis builder, it would be too much of a compromise for the sport.

That's out of discussion that "top" teams should make a chassis of their own - mainly these supported by a car manufacturer. Problem is, that "privateer" teams could need to run with customer chassis partly for cost reasons, and with the current regulations they can't.
Fears of top teams about customers should be calmed, because experience says that it is not common that a customer could be faster that their chassis providers, unless the official team have a poor chassis / attendance of their own cars. I remember only one win of a customer team that won over their providers (Siffert on a Rob Walker Lotus at 1968 British GP).

[Leighton Irwin]

Different era but Baghetti did it in a Ferrari, Maurice Trinighnant (spelling?) in a Rob Walker Cooper and one S. Moss in both Coopers and Lotus for Rob.

[Teretonga]

The customer car issue became significant for other constructors when they thought they were going to be beaten. The guys at the back didn't like Super Aguri and the ex Minardi boys coming in and beating them when they were working their tails off on limited budgets, but still more than the 'borrowers' were doing. Super Aguri proved it would work if you were well run.

When Prodrive began working with McLaren SFW and others quickly realised that you would not be up against a works McLarens and a private team of second hand or year old Mclarens, or even a B team, but effectively four 2008 'works ' McLarens, two of which were run by a 'satillite' team....

That was too much for SFW and PH...
But I think they are wrong. (Under the existing Concorde agreement/rules they are correct)
Customer cars should be allowed.

[Gt_R]

I think that if F1 really wants to cut cost, areas that have limited scope of development could be freezed or standardized. The ECU has been standardized, which is good as it is bad. The safety cell section, or tub around the driver, could be too freezed for say 10 years, and FIA could even hire a sub-contractor for that job.

So teams will be allowed to divert their money or development onto the aerodynamic add on parts and build around the tub as they wish.