FIA Press release on regulations.

[Super Tourer]

http://www.fia.com/mediacentre/Press...160704-01.html

FIA FORMULA ONE WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP
16.07.2004

The FIA has today provided the Formula One teams with details of a package of measures to reduce the performance of Formula One cars. These measures are likely to be imposed if satisfactory proposals have not been agreed by at least 8 teams and presented to the FIA before 6 September 2004.

Full details of the package are available for download from www.fia.com


1. Aerodynamics (2005)

Diffuser height limited, front wing raised, rear wing element moved forward and changes to the bodywork immediately in front of the rear wheels. Together, these changes are estimated to reduce downforce on a current car by at least 25%, but reduce drag by less than 4%.

Explanation: lower downforce will reduce speeds, particularly in fast corners, and slightly increase braking distances, while the small reduction in drag will have a minimal effect on straight-line speeds.

2. Tyres (2005)

A driver may choose from two types of tyre, as in 2004. He will then have two sets of his chosen tyre, one for Friday and Saturday practice, the other for qualifying and the race. A damaged tyre can be replaced during the race (taken from the first set), but the car cannot be refuelled at the same time as the damaged tyre is changed.

Explanation: a tyre which must last 350 km rather than 80 km will have less grip, reducing cornering speeds, increasing braking distances and possibly producing less tyre debris or “marbles”.

3. Engine (2005)

One engine to last for two race weekends.

Explanation: both peak and average power will be less than for an engine with a shorter life.

4. Engine (2006)

2.4 litre V8 (90º) with maximum bore diameter, fixed cylinder spacing, minimum crankshaft centre line height, minimum weight and minimum height of centre of gravity. Direct fuel injection, variable geometry inlet systems, variable geometry exhaust systems, variable valve timing and variable valve lift systems all prohibited. Only one spark plug, one coil and one injector per cylinder. Exotic materials banned.

Explanation: a 20% reduction in capacity will produce a corresponding drop in power. Constraints on design and the use of materials will significantly slow the rate of power increase and reduce the scope for using engine design to improve chassis characteristics. Keeping existing cylinder sizes retains many current engine components while keeping engine revs close to current levels.

5. Other engines

During 2006 and 2007, teams which cannot obtain a 2.4 litre engine will be able to use a 3 litre V10 with power restricted by means of a rev limit fixed by the FIA.

Explanation: this will ensure that all teams (including new entrants) have access to a competitive engine, even if supplies of the new 2.4 are initially restricted.


For Media Information Purposes - No Regulatory Value

[Super Tourer]

This phrase is interesting - These measures are likely to be imposed if satisfactory proposals have not been agreed by at least 8 teams and presented to the FIA before 6 September 2004. - 8 teams agreeing is currently less than the full agreement the Concorde Agreement stipulates and leaves the way clear for some lobbying.IMO.

These are the measure the FIA aims to force through on safety grounds. They are looking to reduce both power and mechanical and aerodynamic grip.

[twig]

I am surprised that at this time of the year, they are still planning on the aerodynamic changes, when the teams are where they are at in their development of the 2005 chassis, which will need to be changed.

I like the 2006 engine rules though, the idea that if some of the lower teams cannot get their hands on a competitive engine, they will be given a BIGGER AND BETTER engine to play with - even if it is restricted. Somewhat humourous, but a nice idea.

[Logrence]

I'm thinking that the teams who are supported by manufacturers (ie 7 of them, directly) will find some way to appease the FIA through greater concessions on aerodynamic make-up of the cars...the engine manufacturers are desperate not to have to change everything around in the next couple of years - lots of money and all that.

Sauber will fall into line with Ferrari, Jordan and Minardi will do anything for the right price.

The tyres and the aero are good ideas - it's mainly the tyres that influence the lap times. I'd expect to see some sort of proposal containing a return to slicks, smaller wings, blah blah blah.

[Kicking-back]

These proposals are all sensible.

[BootsOntheSide]

Generally good ideas, but I'm not sure making teh tyre change for 2005 is fair on the manufacturers, who would ahve to change their development direction very quickly. The current tyres would not be durable enough to last an entire race,a dn the onyl way to find the limit would be to run them hard until they puncture, with possibly catastrophic results. As one of the two will be dumped from F1 only a year later, it's not a clever approach.

[Red]

That's not going to happen.

Anyway, just pure curiosity, how will they police the "2 weekends" engine rule? Will they keep the cars in parc fermee all year? Will they remove the engines from car, give them to FIA and expect teams to agree? Something else? That's something that actually confuses me for some time, if anyone can shed some light please?

[twig]

Im not a supporter of the 1 engine a weekend rule at the moment, so im not really into the 1/2 and engine a weekend rule that has been proposed. Hasn't anybody noticed that the laps done in practice have dropped since they have been conserving them? Now this is going to make the situation worse, and the spectators wont like this too much.
Im surprised they haven't introduced 2 pre-qualifying sessions to sort out the order for pre-qualifying which will sort out the order for qualifying.

[Wrex]

With one set of tyres and smaller engines (combined with a change to the qual format) see an end to pit stops at some races?

[Kicking-back]

Depends how big they build the fuel tanks.

I'd hope these regulations are taken that little stage further and refuelling is banned.

[BSchneiderFan]

And now Max has decided not to quit after all. Will this affect the new regs?

[Kicking-back]

Don't think it'll make a difference, BSF

[Tim Falce]

Why do they want to reduce grip and downforce? I think I am probably missing the point here but isn't the safest thing to make them stick to the road better in the bendy bits and slower on the straight bits. Why not make the cars and tyres wider to slow them and make them grip more and maybe limit the engines to cut power.
Also ban pit stops completely except for emergencies, then they will have to race on the track, not the pit lane.

[Gt_R]

Besides the down sizing of engines and the 1 engine per 2 race rule, i think the rest i do find them agreeable.

But honestly, is this change enough to increase the show? The one tire per qual/race isn't too bad...but honestly, is the changes drastic enough to "increase the possibilities of overtaking"?

And are drivers supposed to make a choice of tyres BEFORE the practice sessions? If so, it would reduce quals and racing very much into a lottery (a team could just lose it with a wrong choice), and teams would do alot of pre testings and simulations just to avoid it.

As i understand, many leading teams such as Ferrari, Toyota, Williams have already started doing their car for next season, probably even a couple of months back.. I've read Ross saying that he wish that the rules for next season be fixed asap (even if Ferrari doesn't support the changes), just so that teams can continue working on their car without distruption and wastage.

[BootsOntheSide]

One word falcemob - overtaking. The ideas you suggest would make it even harder than currently.

[Kicking-back]

More grip makes road cars safer, because you're not approaching the limits on the road.

But in a racing car reducing grip is safer, as it reduces the speed you can corner.

If the car had massive downforce, it'd stick better in the corners, agreed, but that would mean much faster cornering speed and a major risk if you were to have a catastrophic failure.

[Red]

Originally posted by BSchneiderFan
And now Max has decided not to quit after all. Will this affect the new regs?

Max' proposal and resign "threats" are strongly related. He won't quit. This is only first stage of Max' new election campaign. (His slogan being "I want to give power to the people, evil teams don't let me do it, blame them")

PS: Hmm "front wings raised"... Raised.. how high? They're already ridiculously high; next step will be "above nose cone"

[Super Tourer]

On top of which, when something breaks on one of these cars the driver is an instant passenger, there is nothing they can do except wait for it to end - as the Ralf, Massa and Trulli accidents have shown.

The major teams have invested heavily in wind tunnels over the last year or so, the fruits of which we are seeing in smashed lap times at every track. Without a pullback they will find more grip and higher speeds will be the result.

Cornering speeds need to be reduced IMO. The cars are safer than they have ever been, but there is no need to test that safety any further.

[Tony_Simpson]

Some of these rules are a step forward some seem silly.

I agree with having tyres that have to last a race distance, it means they have to be harder and therefore drivers have to use there brains to make them last.

A reduction in downforce is interesting. Yes it will slow them down a bit, but the will just spend shed loads of money in a wind tunnel to get most of it back. Advantage Ferrari, Williams etc, etc.

The engine rules seems silly though. Teams will now have to spend alot of money getting engines built to the new rules. Making them last two weekends is not practical, one race weekend is fine at the moment.

One thing the rule makers have not seen and is a big cost cutting measure (the 'in' words???) is to ban re-fueling as well, the teams just about like it, but it is still dangerous. It would make the drivers think alot more about how they drive, especially on full tanks.

If refueling is still used, then why not limit the number of people who can work on the car, like they do in the states. It means that the stops will take a bit longer, less people in the pit lane at any one time, etc.

IMO, you might get some costs saved, but it will not be much. A new team might try and break into F1, but might not last too long,

Anyway my rants is over for now.

[Red]

There is no such thing as "cost reduction". Max should actually understand this. What Max should try, but only if he cared, would be to reduce the investment/performance ratio. And he is NOT helping. Keep that darn regulation stable for more than 1 year; don't chaotically change them and see what happens after.

[Kicking-back]

If there are no tyre changes, you will have very few people in the pit stops.

Two to hold the fuel hose and refuel, one to steady the car and a couple with fire extinguishers.

No need to even jack it up for that.

[Tim Falce]

All this sounds just as boring as it has been for the past 10-15 years. Eventually they will end up like slot cars and circulating round at the same speed.

[Red]

Yeah, $200 cash in sallary saved each race. Ok, make it 500. And other couple of grands, the tyres themselves. Of course, tyre makers will invest 50 more million to design tyres to last the distance, and the teams will have to cover this plus design new cars to cope with new tyres, but what does this matter!? They've cut costs.

[Kicking-back]

Given one of the supposed justifications for racing is that it improves things for road cars, it's only right the tyres and engines should last longer than they do....

[Dick Spanner]

Having just gone to the trouble of building a brand new V10 engine for the new M5 road car the marketing for which I would imagine will use F1 fairly extensively, how do you think BMW are going to feel about this? I think they could be hard nosed enough to pull out if the V10's are banned.