2008 regs

[Marbot]

I think that possibly the best way to close up the field is to keep the regs stable for as long as possible.Next year (2006) we have V8 engines and a return to tyre changes.2007 sees a control tyre.And 2008.....

[Dutton]

Do we know how much room the FIA is going to give for negotiations?

I ask this because the thing that struck me was the confrimation of using the split-wing approach. It doesn't seem like a great deal of research etc has been done, or if it has it would be nice for them to publish it for us.

The standardised CPU does ultimately make sense. Smaller front, larger rears is good. The rev-limitation I don't like, but then that is because I love to see just how insane a point they can reach; however, in terms of cost reduction, or what have you, it would appear to make sense.

I haven't read through the full versions yet, but there has been reference to the expected extension of long-life parts: in an ideal world I would rather it didn't happen, but it isn't as though it is the end of the world or anything; HOWEVER, the idea of adding ballast in the event of failure.......that is just horrible, I simply cannot agree with that on any level.

I won't say anything specific until I read through the regs in full, but I will add that I am not going to stop watching F1 or anything.

I think it is such a folly to have a rigid set of parameters in your head about "what F1 is" or "F1 isn't" or whatever, and then presume that anything outwith that must be terrible. The sport has been through so many stages it is stupid. I have things I would prefer, but, in the end, this doesn't mean that is what I view "F1 To Be" as it were.

Personally, I find altered regulations very interesting. I don't have to like them to think this. There have been some in recent years I haven't been fond of, there are some to come I am not fond of. It hasn't in any way reduced my interest in the sport. It changes the areas that please/bother me, for sure, but that is different.

Also, I think, when changes happen, it needs to be noted that they all have pros and cons. This means, for example, the things that I like will have cons to them (half the time they sacrifice a bit of something I perfectly well like).

Nothing is ever going to be an infinite gain, or infinite loss, as the complex relationships between all the different aspects it just nuts.

It is beyond my current abilities/knowledge to understand it all, even in any vague sense, but that isn't go stop me trying.

Right, I am rambling it seems.

Sorry about that.

[kmsport]

I feel that tightening technical regulations brings the grid closer together, and in this case , harder to overtake. Haven't the rules been buggerised essentially for safety in the past?
If safety wasn't a concern, would LOOSENING the rules work?
It is, afterall, Formula 1.