World council approves new look F1 (merged!)

Marbot · 9 Dec 2005, 17:44 (Ref:1480650)

Take a look at what's been approved for 2008.http://www.itv-f1.com/News_Article.aspx?PO_ID=34688

Also officialy here.

You will also notice that entries will not have to be in for March next year!

ensign14 · 9 Dec 2005, 17:47 (Ref:1480652)

Standard ECU? Excellent. Now that the manufacturers have been sidelined, they are stymied on that. Merc and BMW won't like that...but BMW should not have shafted Williams...and if Toyota/Honda do not like it they should not have gone with Bernie...

Stargazer7 · 9 Dec 2005, 17:49 (Ref:1480660)

It's the ECU that I'm concerned about. Too good to be true, manual gearboxes, no TC or LC, even cluch pedal introduced again, is it the 80's we are talking about?

Marbot · 9 Dec 2005, 17:52 (Ref:1480663)

I don't think any GPMA members will be too keen on any of it.

Stargazer7 · 9 Dec 2005, 18:00 (Ref:1480672)

My point exactly. And can u imagine Jean Todt for instance, accepting a "spy device" in his car? Not a chance if you ask me!

Marbot · 9 Dec 2005, 18:03 (Ref:1480676)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stargazer7

My point exactly. And can u imagine Jean Todt for instance, accepting a "spy device" in his car? Not a chance if you ask me!

He is also part responsible for these rules,remember that meeting in January.

ggreen29 · 9 Dec 2005, 18:30 (Ref:1480694)

Quote:

* Restrictions on the ability of the teams to change their aerodynamics during the season...
...At present, top teams introduce new parts at virtually every race, and many make substantial aero upgrades during the season.

This concerns me. Will those teams that bring out aero messes be allowed to upgrade their mistakes while those who get it right have to stand still on design? Or will they all be allowed changes every two or three races? The former slants toward "managed competition" (think <shudder> NASCAR) while the latter is micromanagement.

I'm still more apprehensive than happy.

Logrence · 9 Dec 2005, 18:37 (Ref:1480700)

I think the whole thing sounds contrived and messy.

courageous · 9 Dec 2005, 22:28 (Ref:1480860)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ggreen29

This concerns me. Will those teams that bring out aero messes be allowed to upgrade their mistakes while those who get it right have to stand still on design? Or will they all be allowed changes every two or three races? The former slants toward "managed competition" (think <shudder> NASCAR) while the latter is micromanagement.

I'm still more apprehensive than happy.

I would say, since they are using the wording "restriction" rather than "ban", there will be scope for correcting c0ck ups (I would go with "Aero config must be fixed by the 5th race" allowing teams the first 1/4 of the season to sort out mistakes).

Silk Cut Jaguar · 9 Dec 2005, 23:18 (Ref:1480908)

We hear this every year, I'll believe it when I see it.

Pingguest · 10 Dec 2005, 10:11 (Ref:1481089)

Quote:

FIA push ahead with planned aero changes

[...]

According to the FIA, detailed 2008 regulations will be finalised in the week commencing December 19, 2005, and will include:

A standard Electronic Control Unit
Long life engines
Long life gearboxes
A single tyre supplier
Restrictions on the ability of the teams to change their aerodynamics during the season
Rev-limited engines
and other measures

[...]

Source: http://www.formula1.com/news/3870.html

OK, before we know it F1 is going to be renamed to 'Bridgestone presents Formula 1 powered by Ford'. Not that there's anything wrong with Ford though...

But I think that it's impossible to reduce the costs in Formula 1. If teams save money on an area, they will automatically spend it on an other area.

And if the FIA will introduce restrictions on the number of aerodynamic changes, it could cause even more boring races. Teams will be unable to close the gap to the leading team.

Razor · 10 Dec 2005, 11:47 (Ref:1481116)

Well, I don't like the rule of bringing in a 'control tyre'. Sure, it has worked for the Australian V8 Supercar gatergory with Dunlop, but one of the race team bosses and ironically an ex F1 Driver, Larry Perkins said that even though control parts (brakes for example) may save a few $$$ in the short term, but with no compotition, it will start to get expensive in the long run. So I disagree with them rules, just keep this years rules with the exception of the tyre rule.

mamba · 10 Dec 2005, 12:05 (Ref:1481121)

why dont they just buy formula ford chassis and just put the f1 motors in the back of them. the term formula means developing and changing, evolving

Mekola · 10 Dec 2005, 12:12 (Ref:1481125)

Or why not change petrol engines for fuel cells. That could be excellent to develop hydrogen-powered car technology, and what better than the competitivity of Formula One to do this. Then F1 will still be the pinnacle of technology, contributing to solve the potential oil crissis at the same time.

I bet that Mercedes and BMW would join Ford quickly if they decided to do this...
...in my dreams at least.

Gt_R · 10 Dec 2005, 13:49 (Ref:1481162)

When teams take ages to decide "tyre-change rules" and have a heated debate over Minardi's use of V10... what's the chances of them all raising their hands in agreement to a fuel cell Formula 1?

Close to none i suspect.

Back to topic. The list of proposed ideas may tighten the variables available to teams quite drastically. No more contest between tyres, engines, ecu, aero all taking a reduction in developmenent frequencies. It will cut cost IF F1 stick to it and let years to offset the initial investment required to adapt to these changes. How effective it is towards racing spectacle is on the otherhand a big question mark.

slicktoast · 10 Dec 2005, 14:06 (Ref:1481175)

Looks like it's moving towards an F1 spec-series. Is GP2 the prelude? MnM doesn't like the capitalist car companies much anyway. Are we looking at "Motorsport Marxism" in the future or are Harpo and Groucho here now?

Sodemo · 10 Dec 2005, 17:11 (Ref:1481274)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pingguest

According to the FIA, detailed 2008 regulations will be finalised in the week commencing December 19, 2005, and will include:

A standard Electronic Control Unit
Long life engines
Long life gearboxes
A single tyre supplier
Restrictions on the ability of the teams to change their aerodynamics during the season
Rev-limited engines
and other measures

I don't like any of those measures, but I am willing to accept them if it means more teams entering and ensuring that exisiting teams stay in F1.

Four things I wish they would introduce (which they may still do) are:

-Severe restrictions to "top surface" aero parts, and the rear wing.
Make the rear wing 1 single piece of unbroken bodywork with a mandatory top section placed at 90 degrees, to generate drag, and to ensure good sponsor space. This would mean that teams could still design and develop the rear wing, but hopefully it would reduce the aero (safer), reduce the turbulance (better for overtaking) and also reduce the overall benefit factor of aerodynamics in racing (making sure smaller teams keep up).

-Slicks. Making sure that the rear tyres are 100mm wider than the fronts.
Making the rear tyres wider would effect the overall balance of the car, meaning they could shift more weight of the car to the back, this would also lead to more "slides", and enable cars to follow closer in corners.

-Wider track. Making the cars back to their 2000mm width would increase drag (better for racing) make the cars slower in a straight line (slower, safer).
As a side note, if cars are forced to generate more drag, they will choose to use less aero regardless in order to compensate...

-Ban Re-fueling.

There, and i'm spent!

Marbot · 10 Dec 2005, 17:20 (Ref:1481277)

There seems to be two threads on the same subject.Merge anyone.

Sodemo · 10 Dec 2005, 17:28 (Ref:1481283)

...I feel a merge coming...

mjolnir · 10 Dec 2005, 18:31 (Ref:1481300)

... and don't introduce that CDGWTGX wing in the same year slick tyres make their way back into the series!!!

Stargazer7 · 10 Dec 2005, 20:33 (Ref:1481342)

I don't think anyone can stop evolution in any aspect of life, in particularly F1. Not Bernie, not Max, not anybody. This is what I'm talking about:

F1 Champion Team 1950

F1 Champion Team 2005

And that's the way it goes...

Marbot · 11 Dec 2005, 01:14 (Ref:1481455)

This document may give you some idea of the direction in which the FIA intends to move.Here.

Logrence · 13 Dec 2005, 17:05 (Ref:1483264)

There's evolution and there's genetic modification, though.

avsfan733 · 13 Dec 2005, 17:20 (Ref:1483275)

2009 spec chassis?
2020 spec (cloned) drivers?

so much for F1 being a technical showcase

Chimaera · 13 Dec 2005, 19:19 (Ref:1483364)

First off, hello to all(first post long time reader).
I think the changes proposed in that document would be good for F1. I see nothing wrong with trying to create some validity for F1 in regards to developing mass deployable technologies . Also, giving the general public who seem to be steering more towards the environmentally friendly side of things a reason (other than the usual ones that motorhead come up with) for the existence of F1 can only help the sport as a whole.
In regard to the evolution of the cars, this is how I put it: Eventually the fangs (so to speak) of he animal will grow to the point where they are no longer useful for eating, thus the animal dies off. In the same way, if the technology, costs and politics of F1 get "too long", they outlive their usefulness (a point which can even be argued now) . If F1 cannot use those assets anymore then F1 dies. The suggested evolution of F1 may seem like a softening of the sport, but I think it is necessary before we lose everything.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Court approves CART bankruptcy motions	Dov	ChampCar World Series	3	20 Dec 2003 13:56
World wide TV coverage (merged).	Adam43	Formula One	49	13 Oct 2003 17:13
Latest World Motor Sport Council announcements	SJ Spode	Rallying & Rallycross	11	5 Oct 2002 00:55
World Motor Sport Council	Wrex	Formula One	2	28 Jun 2001 09:53