The changes I think should have been made...

[Sir_GT]

Originally Posted by Formula 1 Live The 2005 regulations were aimed at reducing costs and increasing safety. Lap times at the opening race of the year in Melbourne indicated that lap times are in the region of 1.5 seconds slower than they were at the same time last year. With the 20 racers forced to use the same set of tyres for qualifying and the race, it had been suggested that there would be a great deal more passing on track as drivers grapple with varying levels of grip. However, Nick Heidfeld for one believes that it is just as hard to pass this year as it ever has been and the reason is purely aerodynamics. "You lose downforce when driving too close behind another car," Heidfeld told the WilliamsF1 web site. "Therefore it remains difficult," Heidfeld said. The BMW Williams driver is of course talking of the 'dirty air' put out by each race car from the rear diffuser which in turn creates turbulence for the following car. It is an age old problem and particularly apparent at circuits which have a long fast final turn as the drivers are unable to tuck under the rear wing of their rival for the long main straight and therefore unable to make the pass. "I suspect there won't be much of a change," Heidfeld continued. "Of course, as a driver I would like to see more overtaking. It would create a better show for the fans, too."

I disagree completely.

Safety must be looked at, but it shouldn't be the governing force behind the rules or rule changes of a sport, especially when it actually affects the execution of the sport itself.

If anything, F1 should be going balls out. Bring back slicks, high reving engines, state-of-the-art aerodynamics, and all the good things that we used to have. F1 is the pinnacle of motor racing, and they shouldn't be racing at speeds which are equal to or slower than "lower class" racing leagues.

Formula 1 is all about excitement, danger, glamour, high-tech wizardry, and world-class engineering. Why go for the "thrill" of sky diving if there is a giant net that will catch you in case you fumble? I'm not saying that we should go out and try to kill all the F1 drivers (although that isn't such a bad idea), I'm just saying that part of the thrill is the knowledge of danger. Slowing down a racing sport is stupid, protecting the racers isn't. There's a difference. If I wanted to see slow-moving, fast-looking cars, I could bring out my Tamiyas or Kyoshos. I don't want to see that kind of shit on the greatest racing sport in the world.

The only thing that should be changed is the way money is distributed across the participating teams, because at the end of the day, it is the funds which will bring the greatest level of competitive equality to the sport.

If you look at it from a financial point of view, Max and Bernie basically tried their best to "help out" less fortunately funded teams WITHOUT having to resort to a shake-up of the way F1's funds are distributed; almost like a "Right, let's make you guys happy, let's try to make the races exciting, but let's try to keep the money going the way it is, ok? (i.e. most of it going to Bernie and Max)"

If you ask me, the money should be distributed equally in a sort of base fund from which all the teams can take their money from. Funds could be distributed equally between the 10 teams, which would form the base of their funding, and then any additional funding can be sourced from the outside, such as a parent company or sponsors. The funds sourced from the base fund should be operated as a loan, to be paid back by the borrowing teams through several channels, one of which are the sponsors, or the prize money awarded to teams whenever they win points. Teams can also choose to NOT source any money from the base fund, in order for them to not owe anything back, and simply receive money from outside sources, or the race wins.

This way, even small teams like Minardi would have a basic fund to work with, instead of simply their piggy banks of fivers and tenners, in addition to their sponsors. Yes I agree that the bigger teams will still have an advantage (it just may be that Minardi theoretically gets £20M from the base fund whilst Ferrari receives £100M from their company alone), but at least it gives the smaller teams SOME money to work with for development and other necessary expenses, instead of nothing at all.

This, combined with certain rule changes, should level out the playing field, and bring back the fun, the glamour, the excitement, and the REASON why we watch Formula 1 - because it is the pinnacle of motorsport.

Personally, I think one full engine for every two weekends including qualifying sounds good enough, with only one replacement car, but they must remove the rule which allows not finishers to replace engines for the next race. I think with the base fund already in place, they should actually penalize non-finishers with a "two places down" penalty. I.E. if they qualify third for the current race, because they didn't finish the last race and had the engine replaced, they should be moved a place down and start the race from fifth. Why? Because with a base fund from which they can spend development costs on, they should be able to produce engines - or cars really - that can cope with the stress of racing. I think tire changes during pit stops should be brought back (because they were bloody exciting dammit!), and aerodynamics should be brought back to anything goes status... because that's when we see real breakthroughs in racing technology.

That's it. Discuss.

[antonioledesma]

looks like someone wokeup with an inspired vein

ok, I'll try to put something, even with my wet-back english.

bring back the slicks, now that the grooved tyres have been proven useless. Remember when they were proposed? you had 2-3 seconds more per lap than other years, now the grooved tyres with the new compounds are better, faster, etc than the old slicks.
I can cope with not bringing them back

the aero packages, no limit, you can have all the appendixes you want (whale tails, x-wings, y-wing, whatever), except when they are ridiculously big and unnecessary such as a 3 feet high wing just over the pilot, I want to see great cars
an idea I had some years ago, is that teams should be allowed to have "intelligent aero appendixes", so the front and rear wing, diffusers, etc, change when they are at a straight, and then change to an appropiate manner when they're at a curve, a sweeping right hander, etc. You develop more techniques. Of course the FIA bans these things

I remember a discussion with a school mate years ago, almost 10, he said: "why do you like so much F1 if Indy cars are faster? and the moment the race leader has a 4 seconds advantage, it will continue to grow and other cars will never catch it"
because I like the constantly improved tech, the paddock (even when I've not been able to be there), the show a small team can bring because the hitted the right/sweet spot for a car. Just remember prost, jordan when got the third place for manufacturers, steward, some special moments from the minardis, only some examples.

the new engine rules... :roll: are dumb. If you change the rules so the teams can only change their engine if it blows or have a DNF... I don't doubt a team will be capable to send via computer a very high rpm regime to the engine so it blows, moments before the race is over
So, again with the only one engine per GP weekend.

I think I'm done.... my brain can't withstand a headache...

[mike_sayer]

Sir_GT, I think most of your points are spot on. Slicks should definately make a return, and i also think that this whole one-set-of-tyres-for-the-whole-race thing is pretty ridiculous. Caneswell made a good point to me a while back, which i agree with completely, and that is that in order to increase overtaking you need to have a limit on aerodynamic downforce, and the have no regulations regarding mechanical grip. Which is why slicks are a good idea. This would ease the "dirty air" problem considerably. I feel exactly the same way as Sir_GT in that F1 should be going balls out.

I think the problem is this - on the one hand, what I and most others want is for F1 to consist of amazing racing. On the other hand, we want it to be a technical showcase of car development. But i'm not sure if these can go hand-in-hand. To have good racing, you need to bring the teams closer together in terms of finance, which means either limiting how much the top teams spend or giving the lower teams more (but where does this come from?). However, if you restrict how much a team can spend you also restrict how much technology they can develop. There has to be a trade-off somewhere.

It's a sad reality that it all boils down to money, but that's modern sport for you. I for one really hope that Max Mosley pisses off, and they bring someone in who can truly balance F1 and make it the elite racing series we all want so badly.

What does everyone else think?

[ZfrkS62]

x-wings, y-wing, whatever

I think someone has been on a Star Wars marathon


These rules are exactly the kind of thing that happens when people in charge get old. They lose their sense of fearlessness and want everything to be safe and sane..almost as if they were working for an insurnace company :roll: The problem is, safe and F1 should not be in the same sentence, as Sir_GT mentioned, should not be the driving force behind the sport.

There is not one F1 fan out there that wouldn't like to see the sport return to the days of Senna, Hill and Prost where overtaking was an epic battle throughout the race, instead of a rarity or handout due to pit stops as they are today.

I really can't say a whole lot that hasn't already been said. I agree that these new rules are killing F1. Max and Bernie both need to resign and let someone younger and braver step in and take over to save this sport

[antonioledesma]

Originally Posted by ZfrkS62 x-wings, y-wing, whatever I think someone has been on a Star Wars marathon

maybe (at last I got the episode 3 trailer... I can watch slooo-mo for each frame ) but I was talking about these:


and a lot of f1 teams used them, for example ferrari with the F300 Tower Wing or x wing
Sorry, I didn't find any real car pics


http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?...tem=6950104068

[ZfrkS62]

/\ i figured that was the type of thig you were on about. I couldn't resist the bad joke though

[SPEEDCORE]

These points have been made many many times. We all know what needs to be done and everyone here has a good idea what should be done we may not agree on everything, but alot of the ideas are similar. But its not that simple.

The problem isnt just money. Its also political, if u visit the FIA website one of their main goals are

To promote continuously improving safety standards in all forms of motor sport -To encourage and implement the adoption of common regulations for all forms of motor sports and series across the world

also

"Safety and environmental matters are priorities." The elected members of the FIA World Council for Mobility and the Automobile come from different countries and from all regions of the world. Among the main goals and concerns of the World Council for Mobility and the Automobile are: - Road safety and car construction standards

They cant make the sport more dangerous it would go against their goals. Now how they make it more safer and at the same time make it interesting is a challenge in itself.

I agree thou Max Mosley is taking the sport in the wrong direction, there is other ways in making the sport safer without it becoming boring. The ppl with the great ideas dont have the power and there doesnt seem like anyone wants to step up and take the challenge on

:cry: