Quote:
Originally Posted by duke_toaster
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.
|
Indeed the FIA gave teams the a choice: an introduction of technically less restricted V8s or continuation with rev-limited V10s. As the manufactures choose for the first, the FIA only allowed rev-limited V10s for the smaller teams (e.g. Minardi).
The choice the manufactures made was far from surprising as they're more looking for technical challenges.
We're used to watch processions, aren't we?
Quote:
|
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.
|
This year's calendar has 17 races, the 2005 season saw 19 races. And I don't see the need artificial breaks. Until 2005 Formula 1 never had those breaks.
Quote:
|
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.
|
Yes, Formula 1 should be a drivers' championship in the first place. That's why driver aids (drive-by-wire, semi-automatic gearboxes, active differentials, power braking, power steering, telemetry and tyre blankets) should be banned at once. But I don't see why any engine technology shouldn't be allowed.