Cost cutting

[Irvingthien]

Here what i think should be a more effective way of cost cutting in F1:
a) Decrease the numbers of pitcrews during the pitstop.This should save
more money and more excitement during pitstops.
b) Put a limit to engine horesepowers and weight limits, even better if a
the FIA limit the revs produced by engines.
c) Limited days of testing.
d) keep the one engine rule.
What about you guys' view?

[rodders]

well having watched and some time in my life being involved deeply in Motor Racing, I still hold F1 as the epitome of Motor Sport in general, I believe that the cutting of costs in this form of racing is detriment to the general improvement of Motor Cars in general.

Going back in the 60's a lot of ON ROAD car development was directly credited to F1, like Radial Tyres, more then 2 valves per cylinder, Over head cam shafts, fuel injection, disk brakes, god the list goes on and on.

So my arguement is WHY hinder F1 development ??

Maybe one day well will see Racing cars that use small fuel motors and electric motors, a bit like the Toyota Prius road car, running at similar speeds as todays high powered fuel cars. all for the betterment of the environment and the cost savings in everyday travel.

IS IT POSSIBLE ??????

[seymour]

This sort of argument might have held water in the past, but I don't believe it does anymore. Today's rules are so restrictive that real innovation that might be applicable to production cars no longer has a place in the sport.

Furthermore, I think the supposition that auto manufacturers need competition to drive innovation is no longer true either. I think auto manufacturers are in the sport purely for marketing reasons.

[pompelmo]

Well I think it's a good idea!
But travelling a lot it's a another financial problem!
1st there's a race somwere, there in a other part of th world, then in a diferent part of the world...

[Carbon]

Without question, cost-cutting needs to happen, and soon. In a recent F1 magazine, someone floated the idea of a race tire that would endure the rigours of an entire race weekend, much like a one-engine rule - reducing the number of tires used, and slowing the speeds. Good idea? Of course it would reduce the pit stop spectacle.

Of course testing should be reduced - perhaps limiting on track activities to a number of 'open days' per year, and introducing open sessions on Friday's of race weekends.

[rodders]

Hi Carbon, well you touched on another topic there, Tyres, like the average road car uses maybe 70 down to 35 ratio side wall tyres where as F1 still have those big balloons normally associated in Oz for beach 4 wd vehicles

And as for PIT STOPS I seem to remember when Re-Fuelling was BANNED because of the fire risks !!!! so why not make the cars carry enough fuel for the race distance ? coupled with a tyre that would last the distance, that would have to reduce costs by heaps, and both these items would not only slow them down but also define the better driver i.e. no added problem with pit stops.

I am still a firm believer that F1 does and will have an impact on normal road cars, even though ABS braking is Banned ???????

[Steven]

Well I really don't think fewer stops is the way to go at the moment, but there are some things that should be addressed. F1 must cut costs, but it may not include a reduction of the spectacle, since income and tv also mean a huge amount of money.

So what I would like to suggest are the following things:

- Severely limit testing, let's say about 30 car-days.
- I would also somehow reduce braking power a little, knowing that one F1 car can make it to a stop in 3 secs from 250km/h, I would like to see this reduced to 4 to 5 seconds. I think this is a real problem in the overtaking. (confirmed by Mark Webber recently)
- Set a maxmimum limit of the team's personnel, I suggest 400 people, including the engine engineers. This would also mean a huge amount of cost cutting for the larger teams, and on a medium term closen competition. (don't know yet how to sort customer engines out)
- Run 20 races a year, it costs less than testing, since there is spectator income, and we get to enjoy it. Time would be no problem, since we have less testing

What do you think about these things?

[Becker4]

i agree with you tomba, i have been thinking myself that more races and severly limited testing is probably the best way we have right now to cut costs, but limiting personel is also a very good idea, and reducing the power of brakes would certainly help the issue of passing, as would less downforce.

[Scuderia_Russ]

Look at the time,money,people and effort that has gone into aerodynamics over the last 15-20 years.It's all too easy for someone to say "ban wings" but this is not going to happen,purely for the above mentioned reasons! As for brakes,maybe the grid could revert to steel disks as longer breaking distances means more overtaking,but then there's the argument of F1 being the pinnacle and steel disks might be seen as a step backwards in this sense.I think everyone is agreed on the testing side of things,and Bernie has made it known himself that with the loss of the cancer stick cash,more measures have to be bought in to reduce costs.

[Steven]

wouldn't a simple diameter reduction of the brake discs have the same effect? (I think too F1 should keep the carbon brake discs)

[Becker4]

or a limit in the number of calipers (i think thats what there called)

[350plus]

I think a limit in the maximum appliable force by the piston could also work. This could be acheived by restricting the piston dimensions.

[Steven]

maybe we can somehow make it to an agreement and bundle all our ideas, after which I could try contacting the FIA to let them know of our suggestions

[Guest]

All good stuff guys.

My view is that testing is one of, if not THE, major cost component of the current F1 circus. My suggestion is to limit off-race testing during the year, extend each GP weekend and have free testing Thursday and Friday, 3 cars max. per team.

This way, teams not only have the opportunity to dial the cars in for the circuit and conditions, but the test driver could be parallel testing new aero and other development parts/systems - all in front of a paying crowd! It seems stupid to me that teams are doing 5,000+ kms of testing over a 3 day test in front of seagulls (or squirrels or cows or whatever).

(On this point, I thought the FIA were spot on with their Heathrow Agreement - I don't think Renault's performances last year was sheer coincidence, rather, I think the Agreement was a major factor in their improvement. Why the hell did they scrap it)?

Finally, go to a control tyre and cut out the tyre war crap.

[Wildcard]

Sorry all, I posted the last reply having reconnected in the middle of my post and not re-registering - just so you know who I am...