2021 Cost Cap Rumours and Speculation

[chrisc90]

This morning the rumours are that its only a £1m overspend for redbull.

Whats the chances of the truth for everyone coming out tomorrow?

[tpe]

Reminds me another "creative" interpretation of rules: time spent in wind tunnel. If memory serves me well, back then RB was recording the hours only after the air reached full speed. I don't remember what was the outcome of their dispute with FIA though...

Yeah, well .. then windtunnel time is just poorly defined, isn't it?
Shouldn't be that hard one would say

It wasn't. Actually every one else in the world understood the specific rule the same, except of one team.
But cost cap is different. Because it's the same as taxes. If you have the money, the incentive and the right consultant, you pay less, if you pay anything.

Although I like the idea of cost-cap, I believe it will be very difficult to monitor it and even more difficult to enforce it. At least at it's full scale.

[tpe]

This morning the rumours are that its only a £1m overspend for redbull.

Whats the chances of the truth for everyone coming out tomorrow?

Close to zero

[PlatinumZealot]

Come to think of it.... RedBull was always suspiscious in 2021 the amount of developnent they were doing deep into the year!

[langedweil]

Reminds me another "creative" interpretation of rules: time spent in wind tunnel. If memory serves me well, back then RB was recording the hours only after the air reached full speed. I don't remember what was the outcome of their dispute with FIA though...

Yeah, well .. then windtunnel time is just poorly defined, isn't it?
Shouldn't be that hard one would say

It wasn't. Actually every one else in the world understood the specific rule the same, except of one team.

But in 2020 there where 9 teams that understood perfectly well that an adjustable suspension shouldn't be part of their route towards gains. One team though just thought differently ...

[CHT]

Come to think of it.... RedBull was always suspiscious in 2021 the amount of developnent they were doing deep into the year!

Honda did a fantastic job to close the gap on Merc PU, and I am glad they are able to carry the momentum forward to 2022 despite pouring their resources in 2021 to win the WDC.

I understand the Ted that RBR may have exceeded the budget by 1m, which is much smaller than what was going round.

[ispano6]

Driving on the public highway is not covered by this as no one voluntarily puts themselves at risk of a crash by the actions of someone else on the road. However, if you tried to help the police by blocking a fleeing criminal and they crashed in to your car and caused you injury, you'd probably be unable to sue because of the volenti principle - you willingly put yourself at risk of being involved in an accident. It would certainly be an interesting court case.

What? Driving on public roads is a privilege, not a right. You as a driver DO voluntarily drive on the public road knowing there could be someone who runs a red light, is speeding through an intersection while texting, or be rammed by a car fleeing the police or even get hit by a police cruiser/suv yourself. When a police officer accidentally kills an innocent driver, the police department is either sued or pays a settlement. If a law abiding citizen causes an accident, their insurance pays for it and/or they get sued or go to prison. If a criminal or road-rager kills you, well you're out of luck. So basically you're saying if you or your car is severely damaged in a race, the offending driver nor his insurance company have to pay for the damages and only has to serve the 10-sec penalty and penalty points on their super-license. Bottas and Hamilton both were guilty of that offense and it helped them be in the championship fight toward the end of the season, didn't it? The damage caused was NOT insignificant. And Mercedes WINNING the WCC title did result in MORE money for them.

[Hoffman900]

Driving on the public highway is not covered by this as no one voluntarily puts themselves at risk of a crash by the actions of someone else on the road. However, if you tried to help the police by blocking a fleeing criminal and they crashed in to your car and caused you injury, you'd probably be unable to sue because of the volenti principle - you willingly put yourself at risk of being involved in an accident. It would certainly be an interesting court case.

What? Driving on public roads is a privilege, not a right. You as a driver DO voluntarily drive on the public road knowing there could be someone who runs a red light, is speeding through an intersection while texting, or be rammed by a car fleeing the police or even get hit by a police cruiser/suv yourself. When a police officer accidentally kills an innocent driver, the police department is either sued or pays a settlement. If a law abiding citizen causes an accident, their insurance pays for it and/or they get sued or go to prison. If a criminal or road-rager kills you, well you're out of luck. So basically you're saying if you or your car is severely damaged in a race, the offending driver nor his insurance company have to pay for the damages and only has to serve the 10-sec penalty and penalty points on their super-license. Bottas and Hamilton both were guilty of that offense and it helped them be in the championship fight toward the end of the season, didn't it? The damage caused was NOT insignificant. And Mercedes WINNING the WCC title did result in MORE money for them.

It’s not comparable and this is a bad take. You’ve been posting like this for a year. Get over it.

[tpe]

Yeah, well .. then windtunnel time is just poorly defined, isn't it?
Shouldn't be that hard one would say

It wasn't. Actually every one else in the world understood the specific rule the same, except of one team.

But in 2020 there where 9 teams that understood perfectly well that an adjustable suspension shouldn't be part of their route towards gains. One team though just thought differently ...

This is completely different.
And it wasn't one team, it was one team that perfected an already exploited area.

[Stu]

Not sure that is correct, DAS as an engineered system was a first (in F1); frankly, it was adjustable suspension and aerodynamic device. Look at the push-rod offset (both lateral and longitudinally), operation of the device (which happened equally on both wheel-hubs) would serve to increase the ride height of the front axle. It’s not even a grey area…

All teams construct their suspension with reduced unwanted compliance, which is the only other way to create a passive version of this function (and is used in mass-produced vehicles to both reduce NVH & tune the handling characteristics of the vehicle).

Anyway, this is all very 2020 and very off topic.

[basti313]

Come to think of it.... RedBull was always suspiscious in 2021 the amount of developnent they were doing deep into the year!

Less than 1% over budget. Yes, one could see this, very obvious...
I guess it is more that RedBull is always suspicious for some.

This is completely different.
And it wasn't one team, it was one team that perfected an already exploited area.

When we discussed the cost cap here it was always "wait, what happens if the minor overspend is exploited". Even to the point that you may have to overspend to the minor infringement.
I do not see the teams exploiting it to be at big fault...my opinion was also that you may need to exploit also this grey area. The error is, that
- the penalty is not defined and harsh.
- the cost is not monitored "on the fly".

Now we are 10 months after the season and need to discuss a penalty which spoils the result and is too little for one side and too harsh for the other side.

[astracrazy]

I think a lot of Merc/Lewis fans that believe everything that rolls out of Toto's mouth are going to be disappointed. Especially the ones who think last years championship will be handed to Lewis.

There will only be very minor infringements by some teams, none of this 10 million nonsense. 1 million sounds more accurate. It wouldn't surprise me if Merc and Ferrari are slightly over too and just expect Red Bull to be more so - he who shouts the loadest usually has something to hide.

Teams interpreting rules to their advantage is nothing new. It is what gave us DAS, FRIC, flexi wings etc etc.

Like with all of these, teams expose the interpretations and the FIA seek to close them down for the future.

I don't think we are going to see any different here.

[Just_a_fan]

Driving on the public highway is not covered by this as no one voluntarily puts themselves at risk of a crash by the actions of someone else on the road. However, if you tried to help the police by blocking a fleeing criminal and they crashed in to your car and caused you injury, you'd probably be unable to sue because of the volenti principle - you willingly put yourself at risk of being involved in an accident. It would certainly be an interesting court case.

What? Driving on public roads is a privilege, not a right. You as a driver DO voluntarily drive on the public road knowing there could be someone who runs a red light, is speeding through an intersection while texting, or be rammed by a car fleeing the police or even get hit by a police cruiser/suv yourself. When a police officer accidentally kills an innocent driver, the police department is either sued or pays a settlement. If a law abiding citizen causes an accident, their insurance pays for it and/or they get sued or go to prison. If a criminal or road-rager kills you, well you're out of luck. So basically you're saying if you or your car is severely damaged in a race, the offending driver nor his insurance company have to pay for the damages and only has to serve the 10-sec penalty and penalty points on their super-license. Bottas and Hamilton both were guilty of that offense and it helped them be in the championship fight toward the end of the season, didn't it? The damage caused was NOT insignificant. And Mercedes WINNING the WCC title did result in MORE money for them.

You're wrong, plain and simple.

[Just_a_fan]

Yeah, well .. then windtunnel time is just poorly defined, isn't it?
Shouldn't be that hard one would say

It wasn't. Actually every one else in the world understood the specific rule the same, except of one team.

But in 2020 there where 9 teams that understood perfectly well that an adjustable suspension shouldn't be part of their route towards gains. One team though just thought differently ...

A number of fans of the sport don't understand that the system didn't affect the suspension as determined by the rules of the sport. That's why the rules were changed at the end of the season.

But, hey, details...

[Just_a_fan]

Not sure that is correct, DAS as an engineered system was a first (in F1); frankly, it was adjustable suspension and aerodynamic device.

It wasn't either and thus was allowed to be run. The rules were changed to prevent further use. That's the clue - if the rules have to be altered to prevent something, then it wasn't illegal previously.