How I would impove F1

[wiley]

If I were Max, Bernie, or whoever is gonna take control of F1 here is what I would do.

1. Price caps. Like in professional american football, put a cap on the money a F1 team can spend. If a team is caught laundering money or doing any other form of monkey business, the team will be excluded from the championship forever and a statement that publicly humiliates the team, sponsors, and drivers will procede all broadcasts for the next 5 seasons.

2. Introduce spec wings to reduce aero dependance and lower costs.
Instead of that weird, ugly split wing, just put slits in the main rear wing element.

3.Bring back big, huge slicks, to make the cars more turbulent and reduce the unforgivness of modern f1 cars, to give drivers the confidence needed for overtaking.

4.ban fuel stops in the race and introduce limitations of the amount of fuel that can be used in a weekend. This will force engineers to reduce performance to gain efficiency and make the series more realevent to modern automotive engineering problems

[manchild]

I'd say that I support all of your ideas if I believed that money caused the problems. Money in F1 can’t be controlled because no one can guess how much money fuel supplier spent on development of fuel and oil. Same goes for tyre manufacturers etc.

It could be done only if each technical partner of F1 team including the manufacturers themselves would make only F1 cars and nothing else. The way it is now all the knowledge and technology acquired during research and testing in these large companies goes into F1 regardless whether it was meant for F1 or not – experience is universal thing. You can cut budget to all teams but big manufacturers like Mercedes, Fiat, Renault, Honda, Toyota will than have advantage over small teams that don’t test and develop anything apart form F1.

As I've already said, before FIA decided to cut costs and "save" small teams there was over 30-39 cars. Problem came later once the small teams couldn't afford to follow frequent year-after-year changes imposed by FIA. Only in 2005 3 small teams have became history and it happened after a decade of constant cost cutting FIA policy! Once when each car used at least 2 engines per race weekend and when technology wasn’t limited we had variety and now we have monotony.

It all went to hell when Lotus left F1 and they had no support from FIA like Ferrari had even thought Chapman’s team has contributed technically to F1 much more than Ferrari.

[Bender]

I like the idea of running a limited amount of fuel during the race and no fuel stops. that should bring back some of the excitment of pit stops and will make it slightly more relevant with fuel consumption a deciding factor in races

they should free up the regulations on engines to allow modern technologyies like direct injection, variable length intake/exhaust and the number of cylinders. but give them something like 1 or 2 litres to work with to limit power and keep them at sensible speeds

I don't agree that there should be a spec wing, thats boring. I liked the aero development that went on this year, the constant change and details were interesting in a geeky kind of way.

I don't like the idea of an "R&D spending cap" it will probably end up like the 30 day testing cap with teams finding loopholes or using creative accounting to hide costs, so in the end it will be the teams with the best accountants who will win, and who wants that to happen?

I'm still undecided on slicks, it could work but i dont really think it matters as long as there is still a huge dependence on aerodynamics for grip, so it is most likely a moot point

This i am certain of: That there should be a three to five year freeze on the technical regulations to allow all teams to fully develop their cars to level the playing field. Any rule changes within the freeze should only be introduced for safety reasons and be voted on by all teams.

This may not be a perfect solution to the problems of F1 but i think it would go a long way to fixing it, especially the Rule Freeze.

[RH1300S]

I sort of agree with your thinking.

The cost thing is probably impossible to police and F1 has always been a meritocracy. Part of the challenge is being able to push technology and high costs do make F1 an elite sport (which it should be).

A fuel formula is something I have always warmed to. Why not a fuel formula, but free engine tech (design/cylinders/forced induction - whatever you want). You will see different car philosophies, cooling requirements affecting aero etc. I suppose the problem with free engines is that costs could go mad - if someone hits on something good people will just throw every thing away and start again!

Standard wings - I understand you, but don't quite buy it. I like the idea that a good designer will find something special. Although I can't muster a strong argument against having spec wings

Big fat tyres - yes

[DaveKillens]

As long as Formula One is considered the premier motorsport, someone will try to climb the mountain and claim a championship. But there is a hard fact in racing, that it takes a lot of money to succeed, and more to continue success. Ferrari built a dynasty on ( correct me anyone) on a budget somewhere between 350 and 600 million dollars a year. For someone to beat Ferrari, they have to be willing to spend as much money.
If you limit tire costs, then they will buiuld an extra wind tunnel, or a new autoclave. There's always enough projects that scream out for cash.
So here we are in an era of big factories, big money, and no room left for the small privateer. And I honestly believe that with these majot players, it's virtually impossible to hold a line on costs. For the big factories, a lot of racing R&D costs could be hidden in the regular, production car R&D.
So if you are 100% serious about reducing costs, you have to have a hard, brutal system to keep everything equal. I know of only one system, and it too has a LOT of flaws. But it does keep costs down, no one can spend much money on a claimer race. Yes, a claimer, where any entrant is allowed to be able to purchase the winning car, still hot and smoking, for a fixed price. Trust me, if it had been in place in years past, Paul Stoddard would have happily spent four or five million cash to whisk Shu's winning Ferrari from the parc fermee off to his Minardi factory.
Claiming is a terribly flawed rule, but it guarantees a limit on costs.
Other than that, accept the realism that it's big factories, big money using F1 for prestige and image enhancement.

[RH1300S]

As long as Formula One is considered the premier motorsport, someone will try to climb the mountain and claim a championship. But there is a hard fact in racing, that it takes a lot of money to succeed, and more to continue success. Ferrari built a dynasty on ( correct me anyone) on a budget somewhere between 350 and 600 million dollars a year. For someone to beat Ferrari, they have to be willing to spend as much money.
If you limit tire costs, then they will buiuld an extra wind tunnel, or a new autoclave. There's always enough projects that scream out for cash.
So here we are in an era of big factories, big money, and no room left for the small privateer. And I honestly believe that with these majot players, it's virtually impossible to hold a line on costs. For the big factories, a lot of racing R&D costs could be hidden in the regular, production car R&D.
So if you are 100% serious about reducing costs, you have to have a hard, brutal system to keep everything equal. I know of only one system, and it too has a LOT of flaws. But it does keep costs down, no one can spend much money on a claimer race. Yes, a claimer, where any entrant is allowed to be able to purchase the winning car, still hot and smoking, for a fixed price. Trust me, if it had been in place in years past, Paul Stoddard would have happily spent four or five million cash to whisk Shu's winning Ferrari from the parc fermee off to his Minardi factory.
Claiming is a terribly flawed rule, but it guarantees a limit on costs.
Other than that, accept the realism that it's big factories, big money using F1 for prestige and image enhancement.

I'd forgotten about the claimer rule, can you give more detail (I'm a bit foggy on it) - I'm sure people here would find it interesting. Is it unique to the American continent?

I can recall back in the early 1980's in MX a privateer entrant "claimed" and got a completely hand-built works Honda for next to nothing. There was a big stink and I think things changed after that.

[DaveKillens]

The claimer rule is in place to limit people spending money where they shouldn't. It is mostly used in low budget racing, where a person buys an old car to race, and is limited in how much they can spend on the racer. It is to keep some guy from walking into a budget series and out-spending his competitiors in better engines, parts, etc. So in these claimer series, the winner, or maybe the top three cars (or engines, depends on the rules) can berclaimed by anyone who competed against them. They have to provide cash or cashiers' cheque, but basically, someone who claims a competitor's engine or car can literally load it on a trailer and take it home, right then, right there. (yes, there have been fist fights and assorted mayhem) So if a person secretly spends five thousand dollars on a performance engine, where it supposed to be stock, they could see that engine being taken home by a competitor, for a thousand. It sure puts a hard ceiling on spending money, but it has a lot of flaws. many racers and racing series avoid the claimer rule, and for good reason. But it's the only system where overspending on racing might wind up a total waste of budget, with your competitors benefitting.

[jaslfc]

i feel there is too much commercial pressure on the drivers.. thats why they are not fighting 100%.. ppl say that f1 you cant ovetake last season.. but when alonso won the championship and he had no pressure.. he and kimi had a great battle..