Special treatment given to Renault by the FIA?

[Jukebox]

Like always, whenever i have spare time i would go through each team's car developments and changes that they have made during practice, qual and raceday.

Today it was Renault and what astonishes me was that i thought the new rule would be, after the second qual session, cars would be locked by the FIA until raceday the day after.

But what bugs me was how on earth could Renault changed their rear wings?

Take a look at their rear wings...see the difference during qual2 and raceday.

Qualifying 2 - Saturday

[Jukebox]

This was what they used on raceday...

[Jukebox]

forgot to mention...it was Interlagos, 2003 Brazilian GP

[Don K]

I think the first picture was not taken during saterday qualifying. During that session, both cars were using rear wings that look like your second picture.

[GTV27]

Could the first picture have been from testing on Friday?

[Jukebox]

I've visited all the F1 sites on the net and i can confirm that it was as i had said.

[Red]

It's no mystery if it was Interlagos. Michael Schumacher was the only one (I believe) to use a rain setup for Q2, knwing that it's most likely to rain on Sunday. All the others set their cars for dry weather and got better times. That would mean that Michael was the only one to screw his qual and all the others screw the race. Problem is that they ALL were allowed to change the setup of the cars on Sunday, when they saw that rain... Ferrari asked a rules clarification after that.

[Jukebox]

If that's the case Red, why would they were able to make aerodynamic changes rather than being restricted to mechanical changes only ?. Rain or not, the aerodynamic setups have little to do with the climate change.

[Don K]

Originally posted by Don K
I think the first picture was not taken during saterday qualifying. During that session, both cars were using rear wings that look like your second picture.

While I was making this post, I checked the video of San Marino's saturday qualifying, so I missed Jukebox' post saying that it was about Brasil.

[Glen]

I think this is the reason (allowable change for a wet race). They would change many features on the cars for a wet set-up, including aero features... more wing for sure. I have to say i think it was wrong for the FIA to allow these changes without penalty - any unchanged car should have been allowed to keep the advantage from their Saturday gamble. The entire field should have been required to go to the back of the grid. (except anyone with the foresight and confidence to qualify with a wet set-up).

[Red]

Originally posted by Jukebox
If that's the case Red, why would they were able to make aerodynamic changes rather than being restricted to mechanical changes only ?. Rain or not, the aerodynamic setups have little to do with the climate change.

Juke, they are allowed to do some wing setup alterations anyway, but for Interlagos they could do almost anything they wanted. For example to replace the rear wing completely. All of them, not only Renault. It's not according regs, that's why Ferrari were not quite pleased with it. They considered that the rules are rules, the compromised the quals for the race instead and they found that it was all for nothing.

[Glen]

Originally posted by Jukebox
Rain or not, the aerodynamic setups have little to do with the climate change.

Never mind rain - even a few degrees increase or decrease in air temperature (and hence pressure) makes a big difference to the aerodynamic performance and might warrant a tweak of wing or some other subtle change.

[Jukebox]

ah well Red...Ferrari do have a point there for questioning the FIAs ruling at Interlagos. What's the point of having those rules in the first place?

Lets assume that the rear wings does make a difference because of the weather Glen, but to change the whole element? Rules are rules, tilting the planes would make sense from what you have wrote, but to change the whole element?

Didn't some team start from the pits although they qualified? i certainly remembered Verstappen, Frentzen and Fisi started from the pits...why would they if they were allowed to change the car setups after qual?

[Don K]

Originally posted by Jukebox
ah well Red...Ferrari do have a point there for questioning the FIAs ruling at Interlagos. What's the point of having those rules in the first place?

I think the rules are meant to make things fair.

Initially, every set of rules contains some gaps.

Rule clarifications are a way to cover those gaps.

Every change in the rules (and every rule clarification) somehow destabilizes the situations, and it usually takes some time to find out how to act under the modified set of rules.
It also takes some time to find a way to cover the new gaps that may have been introduced by the changed rules or rule clarifications.

[Don K]

Originally posted by Jukebox
Didn't some team start from the pits although they qualified? i certainly remembered Verstappen, Frentzen and Fisi started from the pits...why would they if they were allowed to change the car setups after qual?

Verstappen had to start from the pits at Interlagos, because he had to switch to the T-car.

[Glen]

Can't remember who, but there were a number of engine changes, which doesn't exactly fall in the category of wet set up. Ditto deciding to re-fuel - maybe that was what they were up to? I guess if they change anything that can't be justified as wet set-up.

[Jukebox]

Okay then...lets just settle by saying that Interlagos was an exception because of the unpredicted weather Don...but what about those cars that started from the pits although they have qualified?

Why didn't they make use of the exception?

[Valve Bounce]

OK, so we all agree that the rules on changes of setup need clarification, right!!

[Red]

It appears that always something happens at Brazilian GP... A couple of years back all cars bar Fisico's had failed the post race scrutineering, having a much too worn underplanck. They said "there were exceptional" circumstances.

[Adam43]

I thought the rules were quite clear that if the race was wet then more than the just the front wing changes (and other little things) would be allowed. Unusually Ferrari were caught a little by surprise by this. However if it had started dry and rained mid race, Michael would have been looking good (if it rained fairly early).

I suppose careful clarification of when they decided it is wet and what criteria means wet race and the changes are allowed is needed (maybe it is there but I don't know). In Brasil it was farily obvious that the race was going to be wet!

[Glen]

There's wet and then there's wet.... ride height change was presumably essential, even to follow the safety car. This is where the rule looks silly. They couldn't exclude all the cars except Michael Schumacher, but they should have penalised the others somehow.

[Red]

Yeah, relegating them at the back of the grid if someone alteres the setup sounds pretty logical. Respecting the Q2 times if more than 1 car did that. Actually the rules are pretty stupid as they are phrased now.. I believe that they only say that you're not allowed to do it, but if you really have to do something there's nothing previewed for that case. No start from pits, nothing. You simply don't change the setup.

As for the other 2 engine changes (Villeneuve and Raikonnen), I suppose it's OK. They are allowed to replace parts, if the parts changed have same mass and shape and serve same purpose etc..