Quote:
Originally Posted by Pingguest
Due to free development most V8s were faster than the air restricted and revs limited V10s. On the long run all V8s would have become faster any way. Therefore, continuing with a V10 wasn't an option.
|
Sorry, I was referring to drawing up the V8 engine concept completely, I was suggesting that it was possible that it would have been the same V10s but with a rev limiter and/or restrictor plate.
Quote:
|
With a power cap the straight line speeds might become quite equal. At least, no driver will have the ability to overtake someone on the straight by temporarily boosting (more revs and/or more turbo boost) the engine.
|
No problem with that.
Quote:
|
Enforced reliability are artificial and the mandatory reliability of six races is arbitrary too. If a minimum reliability is to be enforced, it should be for (a) qualifying and race, (b) one entire race weekend or (c) one entire season.
|
Yes, it's artificial but then again what are the alternatives? Six races is a natural period of time in a eighteen race calendar (one third of the calendar). There needs to be artificial breaks, like the intermissions in an ice hockey match.
Quote:
|
If we want Formula 1 to be road relevant to a certain point and hence have driving 'laboratories', any kind of "NASA technology" should principally be allowed.
|
Whilst F1 should showcase technologies in road cars, I don't think a technology über alles approach is best in the current economic climate, or a situation where many F1 teams are independent. F1 is a sports league - indeed one of the world's largest and the top in motor racing - first and foremost, but where the technology can peacefully co-exist it should be welcome.