Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 27 of 27
  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    To the right of the left
    Posts
    3,596
    Like
    3
    Liked 84 Times in 70 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Bagwan View Post
    Removing the MGU-H , a complicated bit , removes a major cost to start with .
    Making some parts standard is an attempt to have different engines easier to adapt to , as well as having set costing for various other bits which would normally have to be built in-house .

    Most importantly , though , entry is made easier by making a new formula for all to start fresh , as starting in with all the incumbents well versed in how this car works is a steep hill to climb , and thus , not attractive at all .

    They simply , all need to have a drive train they can promote as relevant to a car platform they produce .
    Then , they need to have a chance to win .
    Well, as the saying goes, the proof will be in the pudding. I remain skeptical about new entries arriving, but would love to be proven wrong.
    "Old roats am jake mit goats."
    -- Smokey Stover

  2. Likes: steveaki13 (8th November 2017)
  3. #22
    Senior Member steveaki13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Chelmsford, Essex, United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,387
    Like
    674
    Liked 593 Times in 464 Posts
    I doubt it too Starter. Likewise I would love it too. F1 could really use some more new blood. People really enjoyed Hispania, Virgin & Lotus when they entered in 2010. Just a shame they lacked development or progression. Still had some good racing between them.
    Its not crashing it's drifting with style

  4. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    To the right of the left
    Posts
    3,596
    Like
    3
    Liked 84 Times in 70 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by steveaki13 View Post
    I doubt it too Starter. Likewise I would love it too. F1 could really use some more new blood. People really enjoyed Hispania, Virgin & Lotus when they entered in 2010. Just a shame they lacked development or progression. Still had some good racing between them.
    Yes, and that's why I'm skeptical. It costs a lot of $$$ to field a team. The rule about teams only getting money if they've scored points seems like a good idea on first glance as it could spur development. But in real life it really is a Catch 22. Fi has priced itself out of the reach of any but manufacturers and not all that many of them are interested.
    "Old roats am jake mit goats."
    -- Smokey Stover

  5. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    7,427
    Like
    21
    Liked 287 Times in 241 Posts
    They had meetings with many manufacturers attending and , presumably , that was to agree on rules which would spur on new entries .

    As such , one might assume the rules have been made more attractive .

    It must be difficult , as without , there is no allure at all .
    But , it must not be near impossible , as it was under Bernie , where new entries were mere pawns .

    I'm maybe less of an optimist , and more of an anti-pessimist on this , because I really want it to work out for the better .

  6. #25
    Senior Member journeyman racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    830
    Like
    196
    Liked 88 Times in 66 Posts
    A weakness of whatever tech regs they want to choose. Is that the sporting regs have been terrible since 1994. Because of mandatory pit stops, you don't get to see the see the pattern of racing, or what kind of tactics can be applied over a 300km distance. So no one see the true effect of the tech regs.

    As far as more entries are concerned? The only way I can this happen, is for F1 to take a long term view. As in, expand to 2,3,4 series and have promotion/relegation. I don't see how any other way will work.

  7. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Greenwich, London UK
    Posts
    905
    Like
    0
    Liked 170 Times in 138 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    I can't help thinking they are sacrificing some good decisions from previous years for the entertainment factor of F1. The focus seem to be about increasing the noise at whatever cost. The proposed engine would consume more fuel, it would have more pronounced turbo lag and l fail to see how they would be able to achieve tightening the fuel consumption regulation with increased engine revolutions.

    To be honest, l have got used to the sound of these hybrid engines and with a little tweak, l am sure they can be made to sound louder. I don't think F1 should ignore its responsibility to the climate or lose its relevance to the roadcar. When l sit in my car, l could easily see all the things that have their origin from F1. From paddle shifters on the steering wheel to ABS breaks to braking energy recovery to turbos to crash structures and list goes on and on.
    I think this is the first stab at the problem and would need further embellishment and refinement to get to the optimum solution.
    Last edited by Nitrodaze; 28th November 2017 at 11:56.
    Better a witty fool than a foolish wit.
    William Shakespeare

  8. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Cowtown, Canada
    Posts
    13,785
    Like
    23
    Liked 72 Times in 58 Posts
    This is all moot to me. I’ve been following F1 for over 20 years now but my interest has deteriorated exponentially in the last few years and "improving the sound" or "tightening up fuel restrictions" will not improve it.

    This upcoming season's introduction of the "halo" is more than likely the nail in the coffin for me, as it is IMO the most embarrassing imposition that the sport has ever introduced.

    As has been mentioned, eliminate the gimmicks such as DRS and energy recovery systems which, let’s face it, are nothing more than “push-to-pass” functions that are designed to artificially “improve racing”.

    If the FIA / Liberty want to solicit more teams into the sport, they could start by renegotiating the Concorde Agreement with the teams, allowing a more equitable sharing of the sport’s revenue thereby making it more financially attractive to new teams.

    Continued mucking about with both technical and sporting regulations, not to mention the barrage of embarrassing gimmicks is all counterproductive in the long run.

    Rant over.
    “If everything's under control, you're going too slow.” Mario Andretti

  9. Likes: Tazio (19th January 2018)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •