[Rules] Budget cap,2010 regs confirmed

[awrb]

Originally Posted by Lotusonpole

the teams that would go for a budget cap are the most likely to not be a team with unlimited resources and therefore even if they think of innovative solutions would they be able to afford them?

The teams that would rather not take the budget cap route because they have bigger funding would be able to more easily afford innovative design but are not allowed to do much?

So all the non-capped teams need to do is get a hold of some documents with all the ideas the capped teams can afford to research but not to implement...

[fourWheelDrift]

Originally Posted by Lotusonpole

So does it end up evening things up?
Seems a very complicated way of having a level playing field to me at least.

I believe the optional budget cap is simply a political device, there was huge resistance to a compulsory budget cap so MM came up with this optional version which makes it hard for the big budget teams to argue against a cap without losing credibility. In reality the FIA make sure that the capped teams have sufficient adavantage that no uncapped team can compete effectively whatever their budget so going uncapped is not in fact an option and Max and Bernie get what they want - again. Whether it's a good thing or a bad thing for the future of F1 I am not sure, only time will tell.

[old man]

Regulators nightmare, impossible to police properly so it will lead to lots of cries of "foul". We will need to add an accountant to the list of Stewards as well as an expert in the valuation of intellectual property, patents and "prior knowledge"

Unworkable through a season

[Marbot]

Toyota in quit threat.

Toyota are threatening to take their mystique and charisma elsewhere unless something gets done about the fact that they aren't going to be allowed to spend more money than anyone else.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/75164

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Toyota in quit threat.

Toyota are threatening to take their mystique and charisma elsewhere unless something gets done about the fact that they aren't going to be allowed to spend more money than anyone else.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/75164

Another report insinuates Farrari are looking elsewhere too.
F1 at present is being too badly managed and is likely to lose some teams, to be replaced with 'garagistes' on 40 million budgets....

It would not be a loss for motorsport generally if Ferrari, Toyota, and another joined Audi, Aston Martin, Accura and Puegeot in fighting for ALMS honours.
Endurance racing would go through a revival, the WCC would become a lesser award as it was in the 60's, 70's 80's and 90's, and the WDC would be fought out by the drivers, which really is what the current 'circus' was built up on.

I actually think all this is healthy and out of it will come a better F1 championship. We may lose Max and Bernie on the way through it but some think that would be no bad thing in the longer term anyway.

[Sodemo]

The big budget teams were always going to be the ones crying over the budget cap, so thats mainly Ferrari and Toyota.

I think Renault might welcome the cuts as would other teams, but Toyota and Ferrari were always going to be ones not happy with it, as they plough through their several hundred million pound budgets per season...

[Marbot]

Martin Whitmarsh says that F1 has reached a 'critical' point.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/75205

I find it difficult to believe that FOTA will sort this out to everyones liking,since the teams may give the impression of being united,but will ultimately have only their own best interests at heart.Max and Bernie will be loving this.

[JeremySmith]

The budget cap that has been proposed will not work, Red Bull, McLaren and Ferrari spend more than that on hospitality centres..

It's not a realistic figure that Mosley and his team have come with, not even close...

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

The budget cap that has been proposed will not work, Red Bull, McLaren and Ferrari spend more than that on hospitality centres..

Perhaps a budget cap on hospitality centres then ?

If Ferrari want to spend that amount of money on a new hospitality centre then perhaps someone who does their budgeting didn't quite get the balance right between their 'motorhome' and what actually happens out on the track.

They say that 40 mil will mean the return of the 'Garagesti' most of whom were kicking their butts pre-Schumacher era.

[JeremySmith]

This is a little unfair Martyn and I will tell you why I feel that way..

F1 is just a big money sport, it always has been and will remain so...

If Mr Mosley and his team was that concerned about the amounts of money being spent, then why are the rules in F1 always being changed? constant changes...

12, 10, 8 cylinder engines..KERS, grooved tyres, back to slicks..

Traction control, no traction control, active suspension, no driver aides..

I don't think it's the business of the FIA what the teams spend to be honest..

The show is not going to happen for 40 Million or even double that...

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

If Mr Mosley and his team was that concerned about the amounts of money being spent, then why are the rules in F1 always being changed? constant changes...

Because the teams used to be able to spend millions and millions of £/$ making their powerful engines more powerful and their aerodynamics more slippery and the tyres more grippy and then bring it all together by pounding endlessly around far-flung test tracks.This would then raise alarm bells at the FIA because the lap times are getting out of control and someone could end up being killed (think Senna here) and so V10s become V8s and low wings become high wings and tyre wars were stopped.

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Because the teams used to be able to spend millions and millions of £/$ making their powerful engines more powerful and their aerodynamics more slippery and the tyres more grippy and then bring it all together by pounding endlessly around far-flung test tracks.This would then raise alarm bells at the FIA because the lap times are getting out of control and someone could end up being killed (think Senna here) and so V10s become V8s and low wings become high wings and tyre wars were stopped.

Points well taken Martyn..

If though you are constantly given new rules to deal with which cost huge amounts of money in development costs, surely that would be the first place to start to save money. let's have some breathing room in the rule book for a change...

It seems the teams will continue to find ways of clawing back the speed..

[Sodemo]

Yes, the decision to move from V10s to V8s was idiotic, cost the teams millions in development, only for the following season the FIA to state "ok, now you have to rev limit the V8's". Well, why couldn't they have just rev-limited the V10s in the first place?

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

let's have some breathing room in the rule book for a change...

This is the whole point of the budget cut.It will get people to think rather than just throw money at a problem.Sometimes,in fact most of the time,the best solutions are found by people working within a restricted environment.

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

Yes, the decision to move from V10s to V8s was idiotic, cost the teams millions in development, only for the following season the FIA to state "ok, now you have to rev limit the V8's". Well, why couldn't they have just rev-limited the V10s in the first place?

This has always been a sticking point with me too...

And then why KERS when you can turn up and down a V10 when ever you want to...Not very smart thinking for otherwise quite smart people...

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

Yes, the decision to move from V10s to V8s was idiotic, cost the teams millions in development, only for the following season the FIA to state "ok, now you have to rev limit the V8's". Well, why couldn't they have just rev-limited the V10s in the first place?

The FIA were,once again,clever about this.They said that we need to reduce the performance of the cars,we need to downgrade to V8s or you can run rev-limited V10s.Now the teams didn't like the idea of running rev-limited V10s because their vast engine R&D departments hadn't quite spent the last few billion dollars getting the last 5-10 bhp out of their hugely road relevant three litre 20,000 rpm V10s.And so the teams decided that the best way to go was to spend those billions of dollars on finding the last 5-10 bhp out of hugely road relevant 20,000 rpm V8s.You see where this is going ?

[Crazy_Pigal]

Absolutely right Marbot, the teams are forever shooting themselves in the foot, rev limited V10s would have been so much cheaper.
The truth is big boys have been used to throwing money at F1 & it's just not in there culture to do the job efficiently, they (Ferrari, Toyota & Mc') haven't got a clue how they'd do the job for £40 mil, & frankly they know they'll end up looking very silly when they get soundly beaten by the likes of Willaims, RBR & Torro Rosso who have been used to running a much tighter ship for years.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Crazy_Pigal

The truth is big boys have been used to throwing money at F1 & it's just not in there culture to do the job efficiently, they (Ferrari, Toyota & Mc') haven't got a clue how they'd do the job for £40 mil, & frankly they know they'll end up looking very silly when they get soundly beaten by the likes of Willaims, RBR & Torro Rosso who have been used to running a much tighter ship for years.

Totally spot on.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

And then why KERS when you can turn up and down a V10 when ever you want to...Not very smart thinking for otherwise quite smart people...

Once again the FIA were clever about this.They made up regulations that made KERS not only not compulsary,but also hardly worth having.They also gave the teams the option of doing away with it altogether on several occasions,but ironically enough it was BMW that held the vote to make KERS a reality for this season.

[veeten]

can you say 'albatross'...

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by veeten

can you say 'albatross'...

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by Crazy_Pigal

Absolutely right Marbot, the teams are forever shooting themselves in the foot, rev limited V10s would have been so much cheaper.
The truth is big boys have been used to throwing money at F1 & it's just not in there culture to do the job efficiently, they (Ferrari, Toyota & Mc') haven't got a clue how they'd do the job for £40 mil, & frankly they know they'll end up looking very silly when they get soundly beaten by the likes of Willaims, RBR & Torro Rosso who have been used to running a much tighter ship for years.

Yes but had the FIA said we are "demanding" you use rev limited V10's then surely that would have been the end of it?

[old man]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Once again the FIA were clever about this.They made up regulations that made KERS not only not compulsary,but also hardly worth having.They also gave the teams the option of doing away with it altogether on several occasions,but ironically enough it was BMW that held the vote to make KERS a reality for this season.

I tend to think that you credit the FIA with too much here

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

Yes but had the FIA said we are "demanding" you use rev limited V10's then surely that would have been the end of it?

You mean like when they are demanding a budget cap ?

You have to at least give the teams a chance to shoot themselves in the foot.It's the only sporting thing to do.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by old man

I tend to think that you credit the FIA with too much here

Maybe so,and maybe it wasn't one of their better ideas.But it didn't stop the manufacturers from falling over themselves when it came to raiding their 'piggy-banks'. They could have said NO!