Imminent F1 shakeup?

[SectorOne]

I guess I can't really give you an example of a team coming form dead last to clear first in one season,

That´s my point. Aerodynamics is also in a sense locked for the season.
You can modify it here and there but you don´t go from a F2012 Ferrari to RB levels in one season, it´s just not happening.

This is why world championship cars are quick from the very start. It might not be the quickest outright but it´s at the short end of the grid from the word go.

[Cam]

That makes no sense at all....Merc pull the plug on development, then have there best year in 2013?
You can't prove it because it's a fallacy.

I've not tried to prove it - I said I cannot. Clearly, several times. It seems you never really read my posts, or jus absorb what you want too, is more likely. It's a theory, something this place has troubles dealing with, sorry, I should have known.

It's my theory, that, most teams stopped developing very early in 2013. Red Bull did not. So any performance Mercedes had over the others, would have remained, because they all switched too. Ergo, having a good year does not equal tonnes of development - it can equal all other teams stopped competing. Just a theory.

Mercedes executive director Toto Wolff has revealed Mercedes will begin to switch some of their focus to their 2014 challenger before the end of May. Wolff told the official formula 1 website “We’re already working on 2014 and we’ll gradually raise the percentage of people working on next year’s car, I would say that in May we will reach a point where more than 50 per cent will work on the 2014 car.

Boullier explained that other than Red Bull he expects most teams to now slow development of their 2013 machinery, turning their full focus onto next season.“I think we will see most of the teams – with the exception maybe of Red Bull – slowing right down in their development of this years’ cars in preparation for the challenge of 2014.” Alan Permane, Lotus’ Trackside Operations Director, echoed the comments of the Frenchman, stating that to remain competitive in 2014 most teams will now have to make the switch in focus to next year. “I expect most, if not every team on the grid to be focusing the majority of their design and aero resources on next year’s cars by this stage”, he said. “The changes are so significant that – without unlimited resources – you really have no alternative but to have switched your focus in this respect if the aim is to be competitive in 2014.

Red Bull’s chief technical officer Adrian Newey admitted the team should have switched its attention fully to the team’s 2014 car earlier last year.“Looking back it would have been smarter to concentrate full power on the new car earlier on,” said Newey in an interview for Red Bull’s magazine Red Bulletin. “In August, no one could have guessed that would we be so far ahead with the RB9 by the end of the season.”

They might have been so far ahead because they all stopped developing?

So, all I've done is look at what the teams have said publicly, and drawn a conclusion. To me, it appears that one team pushed on in 2013, most (if not all) switched very early to 2014.

[Cam]

I guess I can't really give you an example of a team coming form dead last to clear first in one season,

That´s my point. Aerodynamics is also in a sense locked for the season.
You can modify it here and there but you don´t go from a F2012 Ferrari to RB levels in one season, it´s just not happening.

This is why world championship cars are quick from the very start. It might not be the quickest outright but it´s at the short end of the grid from the word go.

Again, I disagree. Aero was not locked. It was changed. See what you're sayng but I think it's not accurate.

The 2012 season was probably an even better example. The EBD was banned. This really hurt the dominate team. To a certain extent, it was a bit of a clean slate for aero.

This is what the FIA intended.

Now, we all know that's not what happened.

So again, the teams found some nice aero development in the regs - and - the other teams could copy, and develop their own systems during the year.

Adoption by other teams
With the McLaren style exhaust\sidepod being increasingly adopted and few teams have yet to follow this design. Ferrari were closest in concept to the McLaren with their original Acer duct exhaust design. It was Force India, Toro Rosso, Sauber and Caterham who soon followed McLaren and Ferrari subsequently altered their Acer duct to follow the McLaren style more closely. Mercedes, Williams and latterly Lotus now sport a coanda exhaust. This leaves just Red Bull following the fully ramped sidepod design, with Marussia having a design very close to the original Sauber\Red Bull set up. Only HRT remain with a simple periscope exhaust set up.

One team simply did a better job. But that didn't prevent all teams from either a) doing the same, or b) doing somethign even better.


Does this make sense?

[SilverArrow]

That makes no sense at all....Merc pull the plug on development, then have there best year in 2013?
You can't prove it because it's a fallacy.

I've not tried to prove it - I said I cannot. Clearly, several times. It seems you never really read my posts, or jus absorb what you want too, is more likely. It's a theory, something this place has troubles dealing with, sorry, I should have known.

It's my theory, that, most teams stopped developing very early in 2013. Red Bull did not. So any performance Mercedes had over the others, would have remained, because they all switched too. Ergo, having a good year does not equal tonnes of development - it can equal all other teams stopped competing. Just a theory.

Mercedes executive director Toto Wolff has revealed Mercedes will begin to switch some of their focus to their 2014 challenger before the end of May. Wolff told the official formula 1 website “We’re already working on 2014 and we’ll gradually raise the percentage of people working on next year’s car, I would say that in May we will reach a point where more than 50 per cent will work on the 2014 car.

Boullier explained that other than Red Bull he expects most teams to now slow development of their 2013 machinery, turning their full focus onto next season.“I think we will see most of the teams – with the exception maybe of Red Bull – slowing right down in their development of this years’ cars in preparation for the challenge of 2014.” Alan Permane, Lotus’ Trackside Operations Director, echoed the comments of the Frenchman, stating that to remain competitive in 2014 most teams will now have to make the switch in focus to next year. “I expect most, if not every team on the grid to be focusing the majority of their design and aero resources on next year’s cars by this stage”, he said. “The changes are so significant that – without unlimited resources – you really have no alternative but to have switched your focus in this respect if the aim is to be competitive in 2014.

That's not exactly the "two years" that you mentioned earlier though, and that's pretty much all teams switching focus and not just Mercedes. Not that two years is much anyway considering the scope of the changes introduced this year (I'm sure most teams were working away towards this year for an even longer period, PU and all).

I think SectorOne summed up FoxHound's point quite well on the first post of this page. Both sides of the argument are correct, but it seems you guys either keep missing each other's points, or are just continuing this out of bitterness?

[SilverArrow]

Does this make sense?

It does, in the sense that one team outspent all others by an absurd factor (in an arguably unsporting way) and in the end got the results they wanted.

One team simply did a better job. But that didn't prevent all teams from either a) doing the same, or b) doing somethign even better.

You can't seriously believe that?

[Cam]

That's not exactly the "two years" that you mentioned earlier though...

As I said, just a theory. I can go pull quotes from previous years that 'suggest' they did, but it's just my interpretation. There's little doubt Mercedes have been working on their engine for some time. I simply proposed whether that was at the expense of a full blown tilt in 2012 & 2013.

Or another way - did Mercedes give 100% to the 2012 & 2013 cars and campaigns?

Does this make sense?

It does, in the sense that one team outspent all others by an absurd factor (in an arguably unsporting way) and in the end got the results they wanted.

One team simply did a better job. But that didn't prevent all teams from either a) doing the same, or b) doing somethign even better.

You can't seriously believe that?

Again, I think you are confusing competency (and resources) with legality. No one is doubting how much Red Bull spent. Was every other team prevented from spending the same amount in the rules? No, of course not. Whether they spent as much cash or not is irrelevant - all teams has access to aero innovations during that period. Unless you're suggesting they weren't?

"I can only build a small house because I have no money - so why is my neighbours house a mansion" is not an excuse. You can both build a house - what you build is reliant on your skills, abilities and resources. The rules are equal for all (well, were).

[FoxHound]

That's not exactly the "two years" that you mentioned earlier though...

As I said, just a theory. I can go pull quotes from previous years that 'suggest' they did, but it's just my interpretation. There's little doubt Mercedes have been working on their engine for some time. I simply proposed whether that was at the expense of a full blown tilt in 2012 & 2013.

Or another way - did Mercedes give 100% to the 2012 & 2013 cars and campaigns?

Does this make sense?

It does, in the sense that one team outspent all others by an absurd factor (in an arguably unsporting way) and in the end got the results they wanted.

One team simply did a better job. But that didn't prevent all teams from either a) doing the same, or b) doing somethign even better.

You can't seriously believe that?

Again, I think you are confusing competency (and resources) with legality. No one is doubting how much Red Bull spent. Was every other team prevented from spending the same amount in the rules? No, of course not. Whether they spent as much cash or not is irrelevant - all teams has access to aero innovations during that period. Unless you're suggesting they weren't?

"I can only build a small house because I have no money - so why is my neighbours house a mansion" is not an excuse. You can both build a house - what you build is reliant on your skills, abilities and resources. The rules are equal for all (well, were).

What if the mansion Red Bull built was not attainable to other teams because of their locked in advantage?
No team could compete with Red Bulls tailor made infrastructure which took full advantage of the testing ban.
We saw most teams attempt restructuring during the last 4 years to rectify the issue, all within strict confines which Red Bull were not subjected to prior to 2009.

[SectorOne]

Does this make sense?

No i don´t think it does to be honest.

Or another way - did Mercedes give 100% to the 2012 & 2013 cars and campaigns?

Not even Red Bull can say that. They all divert some resources to the new car. Some more then others.

[FoxHound]

Does this make sense?

No i don´t think it does to be honest.

Or another way - did Mercedes give 100% to the 2012 & 2013 cars and campaigns?

Not even Red Bull can say that. They all divert some resources to the new car. Some more then others.

Concurred.
And why do they divert the resources to the following season, some earlier that others?

[Cam]

Or another way - did Mercedes give 100% to the 2012 & 2013 cars and campaigns?

Not even Red Bull can say that. They all divert some resources to the new car. Some more then others.

I probably shouldn't have used an exacting figure in that example. Let me rephrase.

Personally, when I watch a competition, I want to watch it knowing everyone is giving 100% - win, loose or draw.

Mercedes executive director Toto Wolff has revealed Mercedes will begin to switch some of their focus to their 2014 challenger before the end of May.

That's only about 6 races in. Not many. So perhaps a better question to ask is - at what point did Mercedes (and others) switch the majority of efforts from 2013 to 2014?

Let me see if I can give an example of why I think this situation should be 'shaken up'.

Ever watch the olympics? The 100 metre final? Never once have I ever watched that thinking "I wonder how many runners have already switched training to be ready for the next olympics?". Could you imagine that situation? The gold medal race and 5 competitors have already given up trying to win.

Or football World Cup - Brazil, regardless of the talent and resources, decides to switch focus to the next World Cup because it lost the first two games.

Regardless of how legal it is, in that scenario - do you agree that fans might feel cheated or short-changed by this? As a spectator and fan - would you like that?

[SectorOne]

Ever watch the olympics? The 100 metre final? Never once have I ever watched that thinking "I wonder how many runners have already switched training to be ready for the next olympics?". Could you imagine that situation? The gold medal race and 5 competitors have already given up trying to win.

Different sport but surely you must agree that what they do in one year will be massively important for all future events?
It´s not a switch you can just turn on when you get close to the Olympics, they train their whole life to be at their best in every single one they participate.

So what they did before the last Olympics, will be massively important for the next Olympics.
They don´t have to divert resources because it´s the same sport, same shoes, same clothes. No problems.

They don´t have to design an entirely new car every season.

Or football World Cup - Brazil, regardless of the talent and resources, decides to switch focus to the next World Cup because it lost the first two games.

Different sport, football players play football, the ball will be round next time around.
In F1 the ball isn´t the same shape from one year to the next.

Regardless of how legal it is, in that scenario - do you agree that fans might feel cheated or short-changed by this? As a spectator and fan - would you like that?

No i can´t see why they would feel cheated. It´s important for the future of the team to start thinking ahead, they all do that.
If you put all your eggs in one basket you won´t be having much success in Formula 1.

[Frafer]

Or another way - did Mercedes give 100% to the 2012 & 2013 cars and campaigns?

Not even Red Bull can say that. They all divert some resources to the new car. Some more then others.

I probably shouldn't have used an exacting figure in that example. Let me rephrase.

Personally, when I watch a competition, I want to watch it knowing everyone is giving 100% - win, loose or draw.

Mercedes executive director Toto Wolff has revealed Mercedes will begin to switch some of their focus to their 2014 challenger before the end of May.

That's only about 6 races in. Not many. So perhaps a better question to ask is - at what point did Mercedes (and others) switch the majority of efforts from 2013 to 2014?

Let me see if I can give an example of why I think this situation should be 'shaken up'.

Ever watch the olympics? The 100 metre final? Never once have I ever watched that thinking "I wonder how many runners have already switched training to be ready for the next olympics?". Could you imagine that situation? The gold medal race and 5 competitors have already given up trying to win.

Or football World Cup - Brazil, regardless of the talent and resources, decides to switch focus to the next World Cup because it lost the first two games.

Regardless of how legal it is, in that scenario - do you agree that fans might feel cheated or short-changed by this? As a spectator and fan - would you like that?

I have to say that maybe you miss the point about switching development resources inside f1.
Into a team (at least the biggest ones) there are various departments, each one linked to a particular sector of the car: aero, chassis, suspension, power-train, electronics etc. With the current formula 1 rules the only way to improve performance during a season is with some fine tune set-up (tires and PU management, ride height, suspension handling etc..) and aero tweaks, nothing else; more or less all the engineering departments apart from aero are working for the following season even before the current one starts.
Saying that you're switching some of the focus means some people from aero department is going to start working for the following year with CFD, nothing more.
It has been always like that, while a f1 car is racing the R&D departments are working for the oncoming year.

[SectorOne]

Can i just say also regarding the whole thing about "you can´t improve performance of an engine in these regulations"

It´s false. You can improve driveability and improving driveability improves performance.
You might not have more raw horses but more horses hit the ground.

[jz11]

this is getting really ridiculous right about now, I think this thread is kept open only for 1 simple reason, so the nonsense doesn't spread to other topics

[FoxHound]

Can i just say also regarding the whole thing about "you can´t improve performance of an engine in these regulations"

It´s false. You can improve driveability and improving driveability improves performance.
You might not have more raw horses but more horses hit the ground.

The actual Renault combustion engine is not far off according to most reports.
There is only so much you can extract from 1.6 litres of displacement. And all manufacturers know the tricks to get them nigh on par.

The real issues for Renault is the energy harvesting, storage, and then use. They have often said the engine itself cannot run at optimum due to those issues.

To be frank, I don't think Renault prepared well enough for these regs and are scrabbling to make a recovery.