F1 Chaos

[GrUmPyBoDgEr]

Oh dear, looks like things are really in turmoil now

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsp ... 108488.stm

[twincamman]

CART and INDYCARS all over again ---[but without Mr Mosley's hookers and swastikas ]----- ed

[memnon]

Must be really terrible for the big teams to know that if they can only spend ?40m on the car that they won't win, because one of the teams with smarter engineers will do a better job.

I'm absolutely 100% with the FIA on this, rule freedom and a cost cap are far more sensible than no technical freedom and unlimited funds...

The big teams are trying to take the FIA's football home because they don't want to play anymore.

Let's not forget that last time they threatened a breakaway series they couldn't organise it in 3 years. Now they have 8 months... Good luck!

[GrUmPyBoDgEr]

Yes, I & I guess a load of other ex-BMW employees have an axe to grind regarding F1 costs & their cost cutting in production car development & production.
Quite shocking that they've decided to side with the expensive option let alone continuing on a loosing streak.

John

[twincamman]

WELLLLL------Is not the exercise to determine the best driver in the world firstly and the best constructor secondly ???If so then there should be a closely controlled formula where the cars are constructed in a similar manner kind of like a fast and complex formula vee or formula ford .This would limit the technical advantage of unobtainium this and whim whammy that cutting costs and allowing more teams that means more cars and better racing .This would put the onus back on team car preparation and driver skill and increase the excitement of the racing and even perhaps allow passing . I doubt the average spectator can tell the speed differential of 150 mph and 200 mph without a stopwatch so .at the risk of sounding like a wimp . it would be safer for the drivers and super exciting for the spectator . F1 is really a show biz activity and the spectator pays a large portion of the show with demographics for the sponsors and his pocket money for the ticket shirts hats etc --F1 has become an engineering exercise first and a driver showcase second -but I can remember the same arguments against ground effects ----sadly I cannot attend the show in England so I off to watch it on the tube ----ed

[memnon]

Ahh,

Thats called GP2...

Since the mid 90's F1 has got more and more predictable, with the team that spends the most (Except for Toyota, who don't have the fundamental flair for F1) winning

Before this point Engineers could make a difference and cars would suit certain tracks better than others, which meant drivers could make a difference...

My view is that the engineers are no longer allowed to be clever and inventive, becaue of a set of rules that push them down smaller channels of innovation. Most of this is aerodynamic which has precious little practicle use outside of motorsport.

Remember Chapman's innovations? Engine as a stressed component, first car to run the DFV, ground effects, Sponsorship, twin chassis....

These were allowed in the rules at the time the rules were written, and that is part of what F1 should be.

I have to say I have been lucky enough to go to several GP's and watching F3 cras which do probably 150 are bl**** slow compared to the F1 cars, I don't mean a bit slower, if you ever get chance to go and watch, do, you can't prepare yourself for the speed difference. As for it being a showcase, maybe, but the cars are the best in the world, and after a racing driver has driven one they won't ever drive anything like it anywhere else, except another F1 car.

I think that at the amount of money the drivers are being paid , the cars are quite safe enough, the fastest circuits don't have dangerous unforgiving structures in the way and cars are slowed by the circuit saftey to the safer speeds. besides I have seen more drivers killed in other machines going slower than in F1.

[memnon]

Ahh,

Thats called GP2...

Since the mid 90's F1 has got more and more predictable, with the team that spends the most (Except for Toyota, who don't have the fundamental flair for F1) winning

Before this point Engineers could make a difference and cars would suit certain tracks better than others, which meant drivers could make a difference...

My view is that the engineers are no longer allowed to be clever and inventive, becaue of a set of rules that push them down smaller channels of innovation. Most of this is aerodynamic which has precious little practicle use outside of motorsport.

Remember Chapman's innovations? Engine as a stressed component, first car to run the DFV, ground effects, Sponsorship, twin chassis....

These were allowed in the rules at the time the rules were written, and that is part of what F1 should be.

I have to say I have been lucky enough to go to several GP's and watching F3 cars which do probably 150 are bl**** slow compared to the F1 cars, I don't mean a bit slower, but a lot! If you ever get chance to go and watch, do, you can't prepare yourself for the speed difference. As for it being a showcase, maybe, but the cars are the best in the world, and after a racing driver has driven one they won't ever drive anything like it anywhere else, except another F1 car.

I think that at the amount of money the drivers are being paid , the cars are quite safe enough, the fastest circuits don't have dangerous unforgiving structures in the way and cars are slowed by the circuit saftey to the safer speeds. besides I have seen more drivers killed in other machines going slower than in F1.