F1 future rule changes

TheNewBob · 8 Dec 2006, 15:02 (Ref:1785198)

http://f1.racing-live.com/f1/en/head...08151613.shtml

This interesting article shows the future of F1 changing over the next few years.

Quote:

Originally Posted by F1-Live.com

possible elimination of aerodynamic appendices (barge boards, winglets, chimneys, etc) forward of rear wheel centreline and behind front wheel centreline (subject to unanimous agreement of competing teams)

I sincerely hope this proposal is agreed upon!

Kieran20 · 8 Dec 2006, 16:32 (Ref:1785243)

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheNewBob

http://f1.racing-live.com/f1/en/head...08151613.shtml

This interesting article shows the future of F1 changing over the next few years.

I sincerely hope this proposal is agreed upon!

thats good. will make the cars look alot nicer, and also less downforce dependent i hope.

back to basics

Sodemo · 8 Dec 2006, 16:48 (Ref:1785248)

"Freeing up of all driver aids" - doesn't sounds too good on the other hand...

Marbot · 8 Dec 2006, 17:00 (Ref:1785252)

From the FIA web site.

http://www.fia.com/mediacentre/Press...081206-03.html

Interesting stuff eh!

Suze · 8 Dec 2006, 23:31 (Ref:1785453)

Was reading this earlier, is some interesting stuff. Does seem to be a lot of rule changes / updates etc at the moment and lots and lots of chopping and changing including some things that have already been released and now changed again!

FPV GTHO · 9 Dec 2006, 09:02 (Ref:1785741)

Just getting rid of all the barge boards etc could fulfill the teams and FIA's desire for less downforce and more on track action. Its all that crap the teams design to redirect the airflow back to the wings.

Pingguest · 10 Dec 2006, 12:50 (Ref:1786789)

It is interesting to see that the current 2.4 litre V8's are a pure wase of money, as the FIA already has plans to repace them. On itself, I agree that Formula 1 should concentrate itself on fuel efficient engines. But I don't really agree with the way the FIA wants to implent this.

And I don't understand why drivers aids will be re-introduced. From that point of view, the future ban on these aids are just a throw away of knowledge.

Marbot · 10 Dec 2006, 13:42 (Ref:1786818)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pingguest

It is interesting to see that the current 2.4 litre V8's are a pure wase of money, as the FIA already has plans to repace them.

I don't understand this statement.Most money is spent on development,and over the next three years they'll be very little.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pingguest

And I don't understand why drivers aids will be re-introduced. From that point of view, the future ban on these aids are just a throw away of knowledge.

I don't like this either.Hopefully the racing in the intervening years will be so good that the FIA will change their minds.

Sodemo · 10 Dec 2006, 13:51 (Ref:1786823)

What happened to the standard ECU idea?

Marbot · 10 Dec 2006, 14:01 (Ref:1786833)

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Monster

What happened to the standard ECU idea?

Unfortunately the rules change year on year.That's progress!

We should at least try to savour the next three years.

Pingguest · 10 Dec 2006, 15:28 (Ref:1786862)

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyn bott

I don't understand this statement.Most money is spent on development,and over the next three years they'll be very little.

The introduction of the V8's increased the costs significantly. But for what? From 2007 the engines will be 'freezed' and replaced by 2011. It would had been a lot cheaper to keep the V10's.

Marbot · 10 Dec 2006, 16:14 (Ref:1786882)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pingguest

The introduction of the V8's increased the costs significantly. But for what? From 2007 the engines will be 'freezed' and replaced by 2011. It would had been a lot cheaper to keep the V10's.

I agree,but you can't blame the FIA for that one.The FIA gave the manufacturers the choice of producing a new V8 (on grounds of safety) or using a restricted V10 like the one used this season by STR.And now we have restricted V8s.So it's an own goal for the manufacturers really.

Pingguest · 10 Dec 2006, 16:33 (Ref:1786895)

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyn bott

I agree,but you can't blame the FIA for that one.The FIA gave the manufacturers the choice of producing a new V8 (on grounds of safety) or using a restricted V10 like the one used this season by STR.And now we have restricted V8s.So it's an own goal for the manufacturers really.

You can't blame the manufactures for the introduction of the V8's, as they didn't choose voluntary. And I disagree that a reduction of engine power was necessary.

Marbot · 10 Dec 2006, 16:47 (Ref:1786900)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pingguest

You can't blame the manufactures for the introduction of the V8's, as they didn't choose voluntary. And I disagree that a reduction of engine power was necessary.

Oh yes they did and Oh yes it was!

Pingguest · 10 Dec 2006, 18:49 (Ref:1786983)

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyn bott

Oh yes they did

Do you really think the manufactures would have chosen the V8's, if the FIA didn't obligate them to choose? By the way, I just read in an article that the FIA mandated the V8's after the manufactures didn't want to make a choise.

Quote:

Oh yes it was!

Hmm, the cornering speeds have increased impressively partly due the introduction of the V8's.

Marbot · 11 Dec 2006, 09:27 (Ref:1787692)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pingguest

Do you really think the manufactures would have chosen the V8's, if the FIA didn't obligate them to choose? By the way, I just read in an article that the FIA mandated the V8's after the manufactures didn't want to make a choise.

They didn't want V8's,particularly as some manufacturers had started to fit V10s to their road cars.But they didn't like the idea of running rev limited V10s either.But they were given the choice.Imagine how much power an unrestricted V10 would have now if the regs were left untouched.They were also given the choice of a control tyre to control the speeds,but a certain Italian manufacturer baulked at that one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pingguest

Hmm, the cornering speeds have increased impressively partly due the introduction of the V8's.

Probably more down to the tyres and aero than anything else.You don't suddenly start going faster by losing 200 bhp! Oh,and how much faster would they have been had they kept the other two cylinders!

**Adam43** · 11 Dec 2006, 09:51 (Ref:1787725)

Pingguest did specify cornering speeds. The packaging of the V8s helped this, although how much is unclear if you try to factor in the normal development of the car even if it stayed with V10.

On the engine Would the V10 have been that much more powerful than 2005? The rate of progress was slowing. I never thought them too powerful anyway.

I do think that the FIA partially acheived what they wanted to, despite resistence of the teams. The current V8s are OK. I wouldn't have done it and if I had a free hand I would change it, but it is so difficult to get changes and it isn't the most outrageous change!

FPV GTHO · 11 Dec 2006, 10:53 (Ref:1787790)

You guys might think its scary to think what would happen had the 2005 V10's continued. Well what about the 2003 V10's that only had to last the race?

Pingguest · 11 Dec 2006, 10:55 (Ref:1787796)

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyn bott

They didn't want V8's,particularly as some manufacturers had started to fit V10s to their road cars.But they didn't like the idea of running rev limited V10s either.But they were given the choice.Imagine how much power an unrestricted V10 would have now if the regs were left untouched.

Well, they could had reached the 1000 bhp border, but we will never know. As Adam mentioned, the progress was slowing down. The most powerfull engine had around 900 bhp in 2002, but 'only' 950 bhp in 2005. That's still 550 bhp less than the turbo-engines produced in 1986.

Quote:

were also given the choice of a control tyre to control the speeds,but a certain Italian manufacturer baulked at that one.

I still think a control tyre doens't fit by Formula 1. Formula 1 has always been a driver's championship with the most advanced open-wheel cars. The control tyre, together with regulations as the engine 'freeze', will change that.

Quote:

Probably more down to the tyres and aero than anything else.You don't suddenly start going faster by losing 200 bhp! Oh,and how much faster would they have been had they kept the other two cylinders!

Well, the V8's significantly improved the handling. That's why drivers complained about the fact that some corners can be taken flat out now.

Marbot · 11 Dec 2006, 11:25 (Ref:1787833)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pingguest

Well, the V8's significantly improved the handling.

Which is wierd because the V8s actually weigh more than the V10s.

Makes you wonder why some of the teams didn't think of detuning their V10s in previous seasons.

Marbot · 11 Dec 2006, 11:57 (Ref:1787861)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pingguest

I still think a control tyre doens't fit by Formula 1. Formula 1 has always been a driver's championship with the most advanced open-wheel cars. The control tyre, together with regulations as the engine 'freeze', will change that.

I don't understand this statement either.Currently the Car/Driver input ratio is about 70/30.Wouldn't it be better to try and get that reversed? Or is Bridgestone versus whoever more exciting?

We seem very keen to keep F1 cars at the top of the technology tree.But even on this forum the drivers take precedence over mere machinery.How many times have we run out of superlatives to describe the drivers,only for the paragraph to be finished off by saying "let's hope that RedBull (or whoever) give him a decent car".

FPV GTHO · 11 Dec 2006, 12:03 (Ref:1787873)

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyn bott

How many times have we run out of superlatives to describe the drivers,only for the paragraph to be finished off by saying "let's hope that RedBull (or whoever) give him a decent car".

A finely laced message to a few of us eh?

I'd agree though that i'd rather seeing drivers able to make more of an effect than the engineers, although having both affect the overall outcome should always be part of the game. 70/30 back in the favour of drivers may never happen, and may be too much for some fans, but im sure even an even split would produce some interesting results.

**Adam43** · 11 Dec 2006, 12:13 (Ref:1787886)

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyn bott

Which is wierd because the V8s actually weigh more than the V10s.

Makes you wonder why some of the teams didn't think of detuning their V10s in previous seasons.

It is the packaging that has led to the improvements, especially aero. The weight wasn't a big a factor. The detuning is certainly not the reason handling got better, although it may have reduced (slightly) the speed the car was reaching the corner.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mb

I don't understand this statement either.Currently the Car/Driver input ratio is about 70/30.Wouldn't it be better to try and get that reversed? Or is Bridgestone versus whoever more exciting?

Wonderful numbers there!

There are plenty of series out there that have the same tyres etc. We don't need another one.

Quote:

We seem very keen to keep F1 cars at the top of the technology tree. But even on this forum the drivers take precedence over mere machinery.How many times have we run out of superlatives to describe the drivers,only for the paragraph to be finished off by saying "let's hope that RedBull (or whoever) give him a decent car".

How will that change? There weren't any internet forums in those days, but there were lots of superlatives flying around at the end of, say, Jerez 1985 (result effected by tyres) and also when there was a Minardi on the front row at Phoenix in 1990.

A single tyre manufacturer means less variables and more chance of monotony.

**Adam43** · 11 Dec 2006, 12:15 (Ref:1787893)

Quote:

Originally Posted by FPV GTHO

70/30 back in the favour of drivers may never happen,

Out of curiousity, when was it last 70/30 driver/car?

Marbot · 11 Dec 2006, 12:23 (Ref:1787899)

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdamAshmore

Wonderful numbers there!

There are plenty of series out there that have the same tyres etc. We don't need another one.

But it's what we've got,and have had before.

And is there anything wrong with the numbers?

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdamAshmore

A single tyre manufacturer means less variables and more chance of monotony.

Ferrari/Bridgestone

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Post your fantasy F1 rule changes.	duke_toaster	Formula One	42	1 Aug 2006 23:07
F1 third driver rule	David1234	Formula One	4	21 Sep 2005 09:01
Sensible ideas for future technical regs anyone?/Rule changes - more to come [merged]	AMT	Formula One	74	12 Nov 2002 16:09
The dumbest rule in F1!!!	neutral	Formula One	12	30 Oct 2000 08:48