2005/6 regs

[Monstrobolaxa]

Has anyone seen the drafts for the 2005/6 technical and sporting regulations? What do you think of them?
(I'm still going through them....post back what I think of them later)

[Steven]

haha some things are really ridiculous...

Engines 2006: minimum weight and minimum height of centre of gravity
wtf? ok now it's just a matter of reallocating weight from moving parts to stable parts. Don't see the advantages of that, but well....

Aero: front wing raised
euh... why don't we put the front wing 50cm above the ground? than we really get stupid looking cars

Tyres: car cannot be refuelled at the same time as the damaged tyre is changed
Whoever can tell me what this is good for, I'll be glad to listen

There are some positive things like maximum diffuser height, a longer tyre mileage and a 2.4 litre engine. Still I think they are missing the point once again. This won't reduce costs too much, if ever. Again a missed opportunity!

[bernard]

Yeah. Just read the proposed changes. They suck.
One thing is for sure. These changes are like salt in F1's wounds. No tyre changing? Great. Guess now it's just driving to the pits and there's one guy with the hose. No excitement with the stops anymore. NO mistakes. No this team was faster than that one. Just a guy with a hose, a completely unnecessary event in the middle of the race.
Stupid looking cars that are no better than those in the crappy american "we drive around a hundred laps in circles, the guy with the best engine wins" series.
Why do they keep making these crap changes? Change is good, if it is for the better, but this... just reading those proposals make F1 seem a lot duller.
I've said this before and I'm going to say it again: Bring back the old rules! Bring back the old F1! 97-99. Great years.
You want slower cars in corners? Ban diffusers, i said that too in an earlier post. Change the brakes. Not that which makes F1 what it is.

[Guest]

I don't really care what they do as long as they reduce downforce, and remove those stupid winglets on the cars. I'd rather see slower F1's that race, rather than super fast cars, following eachother around, passing eachother in the pits. Also they should get rid of those stupid grooved tyres. Surley slick tyres will produce better racing.

[sharkie17]

grooved tires are here to stay im afraid...

how about these additions?

1. get rid of diffusers.
2. ban all aerodynamic winglets, canards, and other aids.(front and rear wings stay of course)

one proposed changes that disappoints me more than any other is the proposal to ban all engine technology ("Direct fuel injection, variable geometry inlet systems, variable geometry exhaust systems, variable valve timing and variable valve lift systems all prohibited.")

lol.. why dont we just slap on a NASCAR big block V8 to a Ferrari?

[tempest]

Its absolutley ridiculous that there is no variable valve timing or lift and no variable induction, these are all availible on some road cars, and it works.

[Micky]

These engine rules are going to make F1 engines the most technologically unadvanced in use. I was under the impression that F1 was supposed to be the trend setter.

[Irvingthien]

Cut the crap.This will make teams spend more on development and the changes might not favour lesser teams because of their inferiority of their chasis designs.
Why not just limit the numbers of personnel in a team and most of all limit the spendings of a team per year,and that doesn't conclude engine and tyre suppliers too.

[bernard]

The news just keep getting better and better; yesterday the new rules, today mosley says he's going to be in for a whole another year after all, and thet he might even run for the precidency again.
What next? Maybe tomorrow we'll here that Mclaren is quitting F1, ferrari changes its name to fiat in order to boost fiat's crap sales figures and the cars will become square boxes, on sponsors demand, so that their logos will show better.
I just love the direction F1 is being directed in by these pricks who run it these days.

[Guest]

Never could understand how the change to the engine spec is going to help the smaller teams - yes, a 2.4 V8 is cheaper per unit than a 3.o V10, but when the time comes to change I will place money on the fact that the Cosworth engine will not be the most powerful!! Ferrari and BMW will simply spend more money to make sure that they have the most powerful 2.4 V8 they can get. As best I understood the current regs, variable valve timing and inlet/outlet geometry was already banned.

I don't agree with reducing external winglets/canards. With only the front and rear wings, the profile of the body will then become the next area of focus for aerodynamic gains. It should be cheaper to devleop smaller wings that clean the airflow or aid downforce than to develop a whole new chassis shape.

I have a complete shot in the dark for helping the smaller teams - at the end of every year, each team should have to make their cars/engines available for scrutiny by the other teams. Then any gains will be made available to everyone who can reverse engineer them over the winter break. Then the smaller teams will be at least able to match the previous champion for pace - would anyone bet against the F2002 if it raced against the 2004 Minardi?

[Spencifer_Murphy]

Its such a shame to see Mosley do all this crap. Mclaren had the most dominate season in F1 ever in 1988 (I think it wos 88...or wos it 89?, ah well no matter. Anyway...) But nothing was done then to make the competition better. Mosley says its to cust costs. Well since (and including) 2001 we have had changes to the regulations three times in four years. Seriously how is this going to cut costs when teams are having to spend more and more to meet these requirements?! For a man who could have been an MP I think he isn't thinking things out fully, he is obviously a very intelligent man...so why doesn't he use it. And now he says he is going to stay on as head of the FIA after saying he is going to quit...obviously he isn't 100% committed to the job and therefore is not the man who should be making all these changes. F1 is the pinacle of motorsport and limiting all the technology they can use is piontless, it removes the piont of F1.

BUT. If they wanna slow down the cars on the grounds of safety then the regs should be sumthing like:

1. Smaller tyres (Decreases performance in all areas)

2. Limit the size of the front and rear wings and diffuser (decrease over all downforce)

3. Remove Parc Ferme regs (Teams with lesser strategic savvy can correct mistakes made in qualifying straegy intime for the race maening they can perform better come the race which means a greater likely hood of pionts for teams like minardi)

4. keep one-engine-per-weekend engines (This cuts costs on number of engines used and now that the engines are beeing used this will require no sudden increase in development costs)

5. Remove launch control / traction control / automatic gearboxes(Puts driver more in control AND teams with smaller budgets spend less on this complex software)

6. KEEP semi-auto gearboxes (Driver still has to make all the gear shfts but it keeps the hi-tech ethics of F1)

7. Keep race tracks which offer good racing, sod the facilities. Silverstone has crappy facilites compared to Bahrain, so what?! Which track has produced a more interesting race for the fans? After all Mosley wants to improve the spectacle for fans doesn't he?

What do you all think of those changes? If you have any you would like to add to the list / remove from the list / edit a bit post it here. Who knows between us we could figure out exactly what F1 needs. Maybe Mosley's reading?!.....I wish.

[sharkie17]

it was 88... that was when Mclaren had Senna and Prost. back then it didnt matter because F1 had Senna and Prost... I mean, racing was great, drama even better and they didnt have worries about attendence and interests... (they did lower the boost pressure that year to slow the cars down).

your proposal are fine but im afraid it wont cut the cost down... i think Max's main goal is cost cutting... safety side is already done IMO.

The reality is this: no matter what the rule changes to cut cost, teams like Toyota and Ferrari have the deep pocket to do whatever research and development they want to make the car better...

The ONLY way to make the playing field even and cut cost at the same time is:

Make every team spend X amount of dollars each season. (for example, every team can only spend 200 million dollars per season for all the research, development, wind tunnel times, personnel, cars, drivers. no more, no less). lol.. its just my crazy suggestion... probably wont work but oh well.

[Guest]

The biggest problem in F1 is the lack of racing. Is it supposed to be F1 Time Trialing or F1 Racing? We need less downforce & more mechanical grip. SLICKS FOR RACING, SLICKS FOR RACING.

[sharkie17]

The biggest problem in F1 is the lack of racing. Is it supposed to be F1 Time Trialing or F1 Racing? We need less downforce & more mechanical grip. SLICKS FOR RACING, SLICKS FOR RACING.

slicks would be nice...

ban diffusers...

ban all winglets and canards...

ban carbon brakes...

give each team 100 million dollars for total budget for one season...

now, lets race!!

[Steven]

Well idd guest! We absolutely need less aerodynamic and more mechanical grip.

The reintroduction of slicks may be a good idea. It will for a start certainly decrease costs for the tyre manufacturers. (which is after all what we are all looking for in F1)

Now, thinking around the slicked racing car, I suggest we ban the diffuser. A height limit could do too, if that is strict enough, since we might get much more grip from the tyres. I am also under the impression that F1 cars should not get much more faster, since it could become too dangerous for the drivers.

I think Spencifer that smaller tyres are not the way to go, it will decrease drag and increase top speeds.

Finally I would also suggest to not interfere with the winglets, and to limit both front and rear wing to two elements.