[Rules] Future Rule Changes

[Sodemo]

Lets face it, the FIA dont have a great track record for introducing positive technical changes.

1998 - Narrow cars and grooved tyres.
1999 - Decided the grooved tyres were such a good idea they introduced another groove in the front tyre just for giggles.
2004 - Decided that the front wing should be raised further up from the ground.
2005 - Decided that the front wing should be raised even further up from the ground.

You see, unless there has been a change of good race car dynamics thinking, these tech changes listed above are so unfathomable to think that actually they are actually an act of sabotage.

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

Lets face it, the FIA dont have a great track record for introducing positive technical changes.

1998 - Narrow cars and grooved tyres.
1999 - Decided the grooved tyres were such a good idea they introduced another groove in the front tyre just for giggles.
2004 - Decided that the front wing should be raised further up from the ground.
2005 - Decided that the front wing should be raised even further up from the ground.

You see, unless there has been a change of good race car dynamics thinking, these tech changes listed above are so unfathomable to think that actually they are actually an act of sabotage.

Grooved tyres were ok in 98, but they made it worse in 99. Really they should have gone back to slicks then. And they should have got rid of body aero like winglets and barge boards a lot sooner

[Sodemo]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Grooved tyres were ok in 98, but they made it worse in 99. Really they should have gone back to slicks then. And they should have got rid of body aero like winglets and barge boards a lot sooner

I guess my point (or maybe a question) is, what is the thinking here, who is making these decisions and what is the logic behind them? I can appreciate that there are likely vested interests, political and commercial forces at play too which cloud the decision making.

[S griffin]

Well it seems they have at least learned some lessons from the past, but not enough of them. Still too many rules that shouldn’t be there, which I won’t go into detail about

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

Lets face it, the FIA dont have a great track record for introducing positive technical changes.

1998 - Narrow cars and grooved tyres.
1999 - Decided the grooved tyres were such a good idea they introduced another groove in the front tyre just for giggles.
2004 - Decided that the front wing should be raised further up from the ground.
2005 - Decided that the front wing should be raised even further up from the ground.

You see, unless there has been a change of good race car dynamics thinking, these tech changes listed above are so unfathomable to think that actually they are actually an act of sabotage.

Most of the changes that were driven in the Mosley era were because of safety, (something Max was determined to push through and in hindsight, has the made the sport safer), and the others were based on slowing cornering speeds.
So grooved tyres, restrictions on width, less effective aero, are all with the purpose of slowing the cars down.
The present regulations are so contrived I am of the opinion that they are not good, and have given one team a distinct advantage.
There were reasons for this, but it hasn't created a greater spectacle.

Many of the historical changes in formula regulation have been driven by either safety or speed reduction.

[P38 in workshop]

Its hard to argue against safety improvements.It isn't hard to argue that many of the changes from the Balestre era onwards have been to make it appear that the racing is closer and interesting.DRS is a prime example and my personal bugbear is the compulsory tyre stops.I would much rather they simply allocated each car a pile of tyres for the weekend and let the teams find out how to make the best use of them.Whether it be mixing sets,with hard on one side of the car on some circuits or risking an entire race on one compound versus three stops on a soft compound.Adding another three teams would be enough to give the existing investors a dose of the vapours,even if they were still solvent,but it might improve the spectacle.

[morninggents]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

The present regulations are so contrived I am of the opinion that they are not good, and have given one team a distinct advantage.
There were reasons for this, but it hasn't created a greater spectacle.

Many of the historical changes in formula regulation have been driven by either safety or speed reduction.

The previous regulations also gave one team a distinct advantage.
Having said that I do agree with the points you made.

[Richard C]

More details about the 2026 active aero solution and the future of DRS...

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/w...lans/10599603/

Short version
* An unidentified team said they think a rear wing only solution was viable. Reports of simulations showing undriveable cars was them validating a rear only solution was unrealistic.
* There will be two mode... Normal and low drag
* DRS will go away as structured now. There will be zones that allow low drag to be used, but it's not used to help overtake. So it sounds like anyone can use low drag in the appropriate zone.
* With the removal of DRS as a passing aid what replaces it? A push to pass system!!!

Richard