Regulations

[Edmonton]

Is F1's regulations to restictive?

[Adam43]

Well, I guess by definition, rules are meant to be restrictive! However are they too restrictive. In some ways yes. The cars are all too similar nowadays. There are decent reasons for a lot of the restrictions, but not all IMHO.

Just to touch on one point, that is similar to another of your threads Edmonton, I would like to see more diversity in engines. The odd V8 and V12 kicking around would go a miss (realistic)! Let alone the potential for a flat engine, or straight or whatever (unrealistic!). I do see why this has been stopped. The manufacturers don't want to change designs totally every other year as another format becomes favoured. However I think it is a shame that this aspect of diversity has been lost to F1.

Overall I would like see more diversity.

[crozier74]

Look at the variation in the shapes of cars on today's F1 grid compared to those in the past. In the "good old days" the cars could look totally diferrent to each other. Now they all just look the same. Perhaps this is what some people consider reaching the pinnacle of mechanical and aerodynamic excellence, or maybe they're just afraid to think outside the box? And surely the regulations have a part to play in this. Look back a few forum pages and you'll see the Dream Williams and CVT threads, they give you an idea of what F1 would be like without such restrictions. The one thing I hate is that because of the rules we may never again be able to hear the beautiful wail of a V12 in F1...

[Edmonton]

Is GPWC beef with Bernie and F1 in genereal just about money or is it about the regulations as well?

[Adam43]

My understanding it is related mainly with the financial side of F1. Any change of control over the regulations is unlikely to result in a fundamental change. Although I dare say some tinkering would be done. The whole plan for GPWC was for 2008 anyway at which point F1 migh be up for a little overhaul anyway.

[Mr V]

Originally posted by crozier74
Look at the variation in the shapes of cars on today's F1 grid compared to those in the past. In the "good old days" the cars could look totally diferrent to each other. Now they all just look the same. Perhaps this is what some people consider reaching the pinnacle of mechanical and aerodynamic excellence, or maybe they're just afraid to think outside the box?

In the "good old days" when cars looked different, we would also see a 10 second gap between pole man and last qualifier on occasion. Thats 10 seconds in 1 lap.

I like designers to have "freedom off expression" for want of a better word, but i also want to see some racing.

[Adam43]

Originally posted by Mr V
In the "good old days" when cars looked different, we would also see a 10 second gap between pole man and last qualifier on occasion. Thats 10 seconds in 1 lap.

That is a good point. However the racing was fine then too.

A lot of racing came in the past from having different cars that behaved differently through a race too. A different design might be, say, relatively quick in qualy but less so in the race. This provides racing. The scope for this is less now.

There was also more competitors too, so there was likely to be a bigger difference between first and last.

If you also take this to the extreme of one make racing (ultimately restrictive rules!) you can end up with a close grid, but poor racing.

[esorniloc]

As long as F1 doesn't start specifying components such as Tyres, brakes or engines, then there should always be diversity.

I don't see why a 180 deg engine can't run under the current rules? Is there a max V angle in the rules, or could someone build an F10?

[Adam43]

Originally posted by esorniloc
I don't see why a 180 deg engine can't run under the current rules? Is there a max V angle in the rules, or could someone build an F10?

Funnily enough Edmonton also enquired about flat engines today:
http://tentenths.com/forum/showthrea...threadid=47644

[Dani Filth]

Originally posted by AdamAshmore
That is a good point. However the racing was fine then too.

A lot of racing came in the past from having different cars that behaved differently through a race too. A different design might be, say, relatively quick in qualy but less so in the race. This provides racing. The scope for this is less now.

well . we did have something like that in 2002 ... remember the williams on poles ????? ... was any racing in that year ???????

[Adam43]

good point I suppose it shows that none of this is cut and dry.

[Dani Filth]

the point .. is ... it was racing .. IMHO .. : )

[Red]

It's about money. Basically FIA doesn't make regulations because they want or can, it's because the teams want or agree them. The V12 were banned... not banned, but delayed till 2007 because the teams feared that it will lead to increased costs for everyone. (they didn't ask Toyota though, and Toyota wasn't part of F1 anyway )

As for aero-restrictions, oh well, the situation is different now. 25 years ago they were mainly guesing, hence those 10 seconds per lap gaps that a team might get in 2 weeks between the GPs. Now they do their homework (some better than others) and this is not possible anymore. Millions invested in technology translate in fraction of seconds, not more. Besides, everyone screams to remove the aerodynamic parts completely.