F1 Single engine for 2 races and drivers being penalised!
Discussion
God this is just one more reason to not watch this once great sport.
Which t
t thought is up (bad enough for even one whole GP - should just be free - it is not really reducing cost and the 2 engine rule certainlt isn't).
What a pile of cack. We want to see all the cars at 100% efficiency, this is almost as bad a rule economy racing from late Turbo days.
AND driver getting a ten place knock back on the grid - not there fault in these modern time with electric gear changing (gay and one more reason that the gap is close between the great and the good! - still not in champ cars and they do not have a problem there!). This is just balls and OK for the idiot arm chair viewer might spice it up a bit - but imagine being the driver!
AHrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.
Which t
t thought is up (bad enough for even one whole GP - should just be free - it is not really reducing cost and the 2 engine rule certainlt isn't). What a pile of cack. We want to see all the cars at 100% efficiency, this is almost as bad a rule economy racing from late Turbo days.
AND driver getting a ten place knock back on the grid - not there fault in these modern time with electric gear changing (gay and one more reason that the gap is close between the great and the good! - still not in champ cars and they do not have a problem there!). This is just balls and OK for the idiot arm chair viewer might spice it up a bit - but imagine being the driver!
AHrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.
As a cost reducing measure it's possibly worthehile until you factor in the developmental cost of switching from V10 to V8 it makes a mockery of it.
Penalising the driver merely runins the flow of the championship.
With Mercedes reliability issues last season it really hit Kimi hard - you could argue that Merc should've provided a more reliable package but some of the problems were pretty random-seeming. I suspect that, withough the 10 place rule, we'd have a different F1 champ now.
Penalising the driver merely runins the flow of the championship.
With Mercedes reliability issues last season it really hit Kimi hard - you could argue that Merc should've provided a more reliable package but some of the problems were pretty random-seeming. I suspect that, withough the 10 place rule, we'd have a different F1 champ now.
It is just Bernie and Max trying to make it more "Interesting and close championship up now" - utter cobblers free engines for all. And More Bloody POWER.
Will be better when TC is gone for ever and even less wing in 2008.
Oh and another thing ITV is better without Rosenthal and Steve rider has alway been a huge F1 fan - Top Bloke - what happened to my Hit man taking out James Allen - (I will have to get my money back).
Ooh and F1 was better when on the beeb - No Qualifying (who cares to watch that crap). All we every needed was the Sunday 2hours tune in (listen to the Fleetwood Mac Chain) here the grid, and lets watch the race. Perfect.
Will be better when TC is gone for ever and even less wing in 2008.
Oh and another thing ITV is better without Rosenthal and Steve rider has alway been a huge F1 fan - Top Bloke - what happened to my Hit man taking out James Allen - (I will have to get my money back).
Ooh and F1 was better when on the beeb - No Qualifying (who cares to watch that crap). All we every needed was the Sunday 2hours tune in (listen to the Fleetwood Mac Chain) here the grid, and lets watch the race. Perfect.
stew-typeR said:Whatthe F*&k has the penalty to do with the driver of a modern F1 car not his fault - they need to be where there qualified pre-any engine blow ups - give them all ferrari engines!! - there don't blow up.
i really dont like the 1 engine/2 race rule. while its good to make the cars more reliable, the costs of making the parts to last has probably gone up. i really wish they would change it to 1 engine/1 race. but penalty if you need to change it during the weekend.
10 places back utter armchair modern tinkering!
I don't understand cost-cutting in F1 .. there'll always be ways of spending money, hidden or accountable.
I say let them spend whatever they like, but they must declare it all, have random audits, and whatever they spend on their yearly budget they *must* donate exactly the same amount to a variety of charities chosen by a poll of F1 watchers.
200million for an F1 season? 200 million to charity
I say let them spend whatever they like, but they must declare it all, have random audits, and whatever they spend on their yearly budget they *must* donate exactly the same amount to a variety of charities chosen by a poll of F1 watchers.
200million for an F1 season? 200 million to charity
jellison said:
i really dont like the 1 engine/2 race rule. while its good to make the cars more reliable, the costs of making the parts to last has probably gone up. i really wish they would change it to 1 engine/1 race. but penalty if you need to change it during the weekend.
10 places back utter armchair modern tinkering!
i didnt say penalise the driver. penalise the team. if the driver gets his points let him keep them, but deduct them from the teams points. if the team doesn't score any points then there is no problem because they didnt gain anything from it(midland/super aguri for example would need a miracle).
obviously if the bottom end teams change engines every race then that needs looking into.
the 10 place penalty is very very very wrong.
jellison said:
give them all ferrari engines!! - there don't blow up.
LOL. So Massa and Coulthard (only 2 drivers so far on an engine change penalty for Malaysia) don't have Ferrari engines then?
Stupid rule though and the sooner its gone the better. Actually manufacturing the engines has to be a tiny proportion of the cost of developing them, so why bother limiting the number you can use. Oh well, since when did anything the FIA does make sense anyway
Exactly and look at the difference a ferrari made to Masser - just off P1 and Kimi coming from the back in a fantastic car - christ it would be great it the all drove a reliable and the same car - I don't give a stuff about who make them or the technology in them, as long as stupidly quick and we have the 22 best driver sin the world in them - give them all GP2 cars just get rid of the manufacturing stuff - get all teams to just run the off the shelf stuff - Look at CART / Champ cars (great big balls power reliable cars and great racing).
but the whole ruling is flawed,
it wont reduce the costs as the teams will do more testing, so the engines are reliable. the testing is done on closed circuits so we the general public wont get to watch, and the winning team will be the one who is most efficient at testing and has the deepest pockets. (last year is an exception but can that be attributed to tyres?)
so this year who has done the most testing honda appear decent and fresh out the box have improved over last year. but are we seeing any sport, not while their is so much money involved.
How much would it hurt the sport to get rid of all the manufacturer deals. ban them all, would be difficult with Ferrari and the other manufacturer teams but when they all expect to win, what can you expect.
it wont reduce the costs as the teams will do more testing, so the engines are reliable. the testing is done on closed circuits so we the general public wont get to watch, and the winning team will be the one who is most efficient at testing and has the deepest pockets. (last year is an exception but can that be attributed to tyres?)
so this year who has done the most testing honda appear decent and fresh out the box have improved over last year. but are we seeing any sport, not while their is so much money involved.
How much would it hurt the sport to get rid of all the manufacturer deals. ban them all, would be difficult with Ferrari and the other manufacturer teams but when they all expect to win, what can you expect.
jellison said:
Ooh and F1 was better when on the beeb - No Qualifying (who cares to watch that crap). All we every needed was the Sunday 2hours tune in (listen to the Fleetwood Mac Chain) here the grid, and lets watch the race. Perfect.
Or staying up late to watch a long haul GP highlights with Murray and James seemingly do the commentry over a bad phone line!
as for cost saving, this is utterly ludicris in F1 unless it goes to an almost spec-class formula. For as long as companies see spending in F1 as a worthwhile way to spend money, they will, regardless of what new song and dance mad max wants the teams to do now.
in regards to making F1 a spec series and taking away TC, electronic aids, gearshifts and all that jazz, is just utter ridiculousness. Formula one has always been on the cutting edge of automotive tech, and that is it's heritage, changing it to a spec formula (like mosley wants to do) would honestly shoot formula one once and for all in its heart.
in regards to making F1 a spec series and taking away TC, electronic aids, gearshifts and all that jazz, is just utter ridiculousness. Formula one has always been on the cutting edge of automotive tech, and that is it's heritage, changing it to a spec formula (like mosley wants to do) would honestly shoot formula one once and for all in its heart.
F1 HAS NOT always been at the cutting edge of motor racing. It is only since the mid 1980s (which might be the beginning of time for some PH members I realise) that it has assumed this role. In earlier decades, sports car racing has often been way ahead of F1 when it came to trying out new technology.
Nearly every major advance in motor racing since WW2 appeared in a sports car first.
I actually now believe that allowing unfettered technology in racing cars is no longer possible, or necesssary. The technology is now so advanced that the whole point of F1 is reigning in the designers, not giving them a free hand. What they should do is change the basic F1 regulations RADICALLY EVERY YEAR. That would keep the designers on their toes, ensure that a large chunk of the available budgets went on design and NOT testing (which to me is the biggest bane of modern F1 - there is just too much of it).
They should also encourage investment in radical new technologies - like hydrogen fuel, diesels, hybrids etc.
>> Edited by Eric Mc on Sunday 19th March 17:34
Nearly every major advance in motor racing since WW2 appeared in a sports car first.
I actually now believe that allowing unfettered technology in racing cars is no longer possible, or necesssary. The technology is now so advanced that the whole point of F1 is reigning in the designers, not giving them a free hand. What they should do is change the basic F1 regulations RADICALLY EVERY YEAR. That would keep the designers on their toes, ensure that a large chunk of the available budgets went on design and NOT testing (which to me is the biggest bane of modern F1 - there is just too much of it).
They should also encourage investment in radical new technologies - like hydrogen fuel, diesels, hybrids etc.
>> Edited by Eric Mc on Sunday 19th March 17:34
No.
They build for the specification - which is a GP race to the F1 formula. Nothing more, nothing less.
There has been no point in motor racing history where engine failures have not been part of the equation. I am currently reviewing my tapes of the 1983 season and engines went bang then at least as frequently as they do today.
Chapman may have been a long time ago (although to me it's not THAT long ago) but the engineering philosophy in F1 has not changed one iota - maximum performance out of existing technology. They are always pushing the performance to the edge. If someone designs an engine that can maintain 15,000 rpm for three hours and 20,000 rpm for two, guess what rpm they'll use for a two hour race?
And if a driver came 10th and explained to the team manager - "It's OK, I only used 15,000 rpm for the whole race so as to save the engine", they'd be out of the team, toute suite.
>> Edited by Eric Mc on Sunday 19th March 21:46
They build for the specification - which is a GP race to the F1 formula. Nothing more, nothing less.
There has been no point in motor racing history where engine failures have not been part of the equation. I am currently reviewing my tapes of the 1983 season and engines went bang then at least as frequently as they do today.
Chapman may have been a long time ago (although to me it's not THAT long ago) but the engineering philosophy in F1 has not changed one iota - maximum performance out of existing technology. They are always pushing the performance to the edge. If someone designs an engine that can maintain 15,000 rpm for three hours and 20,000 rpm for two, guess what rpm they'll use for a two hour race?
And if a driver came 10th and explained to the team manager - "It's OK, I only used 15,000 rpm for the whole race so as to save the engine", they'd be out of the team, toute suite.
>> Edited by Eric Mc on Sunday 19th March 21:46
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff