The major proposed changes for 2005 are like this (or well, as far as I remember from the pre-race show):

Less rear wing height
More front wing height (total 25% less downforce)
TWO sets of tires for the WHOLE weekend
Engines must last two whole weekends
displacement changes

Am I the only one who thinks reducing speed isn't the answer to all safety problems?

Oh, and CF helmets are pretty schweet. 80-100 grams.

 

The secondary argument is one of cost but doesn't the FIA think about what it costs in engineering dollars every time the regs get changed? I know that teams are pretty much going to spend all of the money they have each season, regardless, but mandating expenditures to adapt to new rules isn't going to reduce costs in and of itself.

K

 

I think I'm alright with most of the changes, but I'd like a few clarifications on a couple of things. An engine has to last two events, but what if you blow an engine in practice? Do you have to sit out that race and the next?

You get two sets of tires right? What happens if one of those little shards of carbon off a car punctures a tire? Do you DNF because of a puncture?

 

I always love seeing the technological advancements in engine, tires, and aerodynamics as a result of the rule changes. However, the 2 sets of tires for the whole weekend seems ridiculous.

 

One minor note, (sorry, I just got done watching the race, so it's still fresh) the rear wing is not losing height, it's moving forward, to reduce it's leverage on the rear tires.

I think the aerodynamic changes are on par with what the FIA should be doing, but I will have to disagree with the engine rule. I think the costs of developing engines to last longer are far exceeding the costs of having extra engines in case they blow up. The teams are keeping extra engines on hand anyways, because starting 10 spots back on the grid is far better than not racing at all, so where is the cost savings?

I'm also very irritated at whomever's fault it was that Kimi's rear wing fell off. How is McLaren going to take the fight to Ferrari, if their equipment keeps failing. I know this is a Honda board, and I'm very pleased with how Button is doing, rooted for him all the way, but I'm still a die-hard McLaren/Raikkonnen fan, who had a great time with championship last year, and not having so great a time this year.

 

Don't forget the diffuser height restriction too.

I like the idea of reducing downforce. That combined with harder tires will hopefully make the cars a bit easier to slide around. I'd love to watch the drivers' hands controlling a powerful car without much downforce.

 

Yeah, that was a pretty scary moment for Kimi, I'm sure. And that failure was very unusual looking.

As far as the changes go, the aero stuff sounds good, but not sure how the tire situation is going to work. I can't see them letting a car DNF cause they didn't have another wheel to put on. That isn't going to please the fans.

I can remember the SpeedVision vrew commenting on the rule changes way back when they introduced grooved tires. One of them commented on how they are going about slowing the cars down in the wrong way. The grooved tires make the car very difficult to handle on the limit and the aero package creates so much turbulence that they can't draft for a pass as effectively. They recommended increasing the mechanical grip with regular slicks and reducing the aero for more passing attempts.

What about introducing some kind of mandatory drag-enducing body element, making it harder to push the cars to their top speed?

And is the safety concern about the overall speed on the strights, or the cornering speed?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Floyd &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
And is the safety concern about the overall speed on the strights, or the cornering speed?</TD></TR></TABLE>

Generally the FIA says corners that are both high speed and high g's are the least safe

 

I say bring back ground effects cars!

Two sets of tires for a weekend could cause some great innovations in tire technology, but more realistically, will just make the races even less interesting.

 

I think these rules are short-term fixes for long term problems

i think the best way of reducing downforce would be to simply clean up the bodywork - allow a rear spoiler, a front spoiler, basic ground effects and nothing else. the cars now all have something like 14 fins sticking out of various spots on the bodywork. screw that.

the best way of reducing cost (or a good way at least) would be to simply put in budget caps. or force teams with bigger budgets to run more cars.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Floyd &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> ... What about introducing some kind of mandatory drag-enducing body element, making it harder to push the cars to their top speed? ...?</TD></TR></TABLE>

I like this kind of thinking: "The rearmost point of the bodywork must be a vertical, unvented, contiguous panel with an area of 5400 square centimeters." (Others may translate to French for consdideration by the FIA.)

Suck.

K

 

The FIA and Bernie, are eventually going to get bit by all this 'reorganization.' Bernie insists on making F1 into a grander spectacle, and the FIA continues to reassert its influence, by biting the hands that feed them; i.e., the major manufactures that support the series. If they annoy ferrari, MB, BMW, Ford, etc enough times with shotgun changes in engine formulae, specs and regs the people pumping 200million/annum into Bernie's TV conglomerate, are going to pull the plug. Glitz and glamour not withstanding. (You can see this already in the dropping LMP entries @ LeMans this year -- the FIA and ACO kept going back and forth about rules WRT the LMP classes, etc and a lot of groups resigned from entry in that class.)
If F1 is reduced into another spec series, what will be the catchet from which it'll derive its appeal? Why blow 200million on a spec racer F1 car, when you can run 'lower' international series, for less, and garner equal exposure and a consistent rule book?
What the FIA, et al should be looking at doing is droping the ridiculous entry bond for upstart teams, and to make appeals possible for new entrants to buy existing chassis' from the major teams; i.e., ferrari, williams, etc.
Rather than limiting the regs, and blunting the advancement of the sport, the gov. body should look into modes of creating avenues for the teams to generate (re)circulating revenue by sale of existing technology.
To revamp the regs and specs every season is, and will continue, to be more expensive -- what F1 (and every series need) is a consistent rulebook, a longer leash on development and a means for generating ind. revenue that is not dictated by the % the top boss (i.e., Bernie) decides to pay into the pot.

 

I have no real problem with any of the proposed changes except the two sets of tires thing.

That's like telling your daughter she can spend any amount of money on her prom dress but she has to wear New Balance sneakers with it.

 

I agree with the statement that the FIA is biting the hands that feed them. The one rumor that really caught my ear was limiting displacement from 3L to 2.4 (also rumored that BMW would pull out if this happened). Slowing the cars down by regulating them to death is not the answer to "safety concerns." Why change the cars at all and impede technology, when you could change the tracks instead?

Look at the impact Kimi had this weekend. Not only was he able to walk away, he walked away more pissed at his car than worried about his own health. The design of the car AND the layout of the track afforded him that luxury. Sandtraps, tire barriers, and large buffers on corners seem to be the best answer, not changing the rules every 5 minutes where only the large and wealthy teams can keep up enough to compete effectively.

So if the FIA enforced certain standards at their venues for safety (
i.e. you do this or we won't race here), then all should be right with the world. To me it seems more spectators/mechanics have been hurt or killed in recent history than drivers. Maybe it is safer to be in the car than out of it??? Perhaps the regulations could be enforced by the speed of the track as well. For instance, regulations at Monaco would not be as stringent as those at Monza.

The cars should get faster over the years, they should be allowed slicks, and qualifying should be determined by how fast you can make your car go around a track, not by how much ******* fuel you have on board (dumbest rule ever, even Bernie wants it changed). This is not NASCAR, and I certainly would hate to see a pack of 20 F1 cars running together around a track in a pack because the only advantage they are "allowed" is drafting. Anyone who has seen any NASCAR highlights lately (I can't stand it myself) can see the effects of trying to make all the cars the same/slower... Massive accidents, and any jackass can win a race at any time. F1 is and should remian the epitome of racing, and the only way to do that is to have a consistent set of rules that allows for just as much competition between the drivers as well as the manufacturers.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by delsolb20 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Why change the cars at all and impede technology, when you could change the tracks instead? </TD></TR></TABLE>

There is no way they'll change Monaco. There is no way they'll stop running at Monaco.

Andy

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Knestis &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

I like this kind of thinking: "The rearmost point of the bodywork must be a vertical, unvented, contiguous panel with an area of 5400 square centimeters." (Others may translate to French for consdideration by the FIA.)

Suck.

K</TD></TR></TABLE>

"L'extrême arrière de la carrosserie doit être verticale, contigüe, sans permettre l'air d'y passer, et avoir une surface totale de 5400 centimetres carrés."

send it off