2008 Vs 2009 cars

[truefan72]

seems to me on average the 2008 cars are 2 seconds faster than the 2009's

so I guess no more track records for the foreseeable future.

I am still no fan of the 2009 cars and will remain a skeptic until I see the same kind of jousting that I saw in Spa between Kimi and Lewis in what the folklore deemed difficult to pass cars.

I always believed that the combination of narrower tracks, stiffer oversight by the marshals and less innovative driving by the drivers had more to do with lack of passing than the actual cars themselves.

Yes there is more turbulence in the wake of the 2008 cars, but many passes were made and on average didn't seem any less than at any other time I watched F1. I do remind people that in the past there have been some really crappy cars and some really good cars, sorta inflating the passing statistics. When all cars run within 2 seconds of each other and the top 10 within less than a second between them ,then such parity will inevitably account for closer driving.

I think F1 is taking a step backwards for nothing.

[Shifter]

It's a good arguement, but I think the new regs are there to make an investment in the future. Right now, a couple teams are going to get it right and others wrong, which will stratify the field a bit. However, when the development cycle completes (as best as development ever really completes in F1), the racing over the course of the season just might wind up better. I can say that getting rid of the grooved tyres is a definite huge step FOWARD, and the cars are going to be more exciting to watch because of it.

[ioan]

seems to me on average the 2008 cars are 2 seconds faster than the 2009's

so I guess no more track records for the foreseeable future.

I wouldn't be so pessimistic.
When they went from V10s to v8s it was the same.

I believe that the use of slicks might spring a few surprises.

[wedge]

I am still no fan of the 2009 cars and will remain a skeptic until I see the same kind of jousting that I saw in Spa between Kimi and Lewis in what the folklore deemed difficult to pass cars.

More to do with the amount of wet/dry/wet races we had last year and the unique character traits of teams' cars.


I always believed that the combination of narrower tracks.

There's more wide tracks than narrow ones thanks to Tilke

[nigelred5]

I think he was referring to when they narrowed the track width of the car and instituted grooved tires, not the racing surface

[Tallgeese]

seems to me on average the 2008 cars are 2 seconds faster than the 2009's

so I guess no more track records for the foreseeable future.

I am still no fan of the 2009 cars and will remain a skeptic until I see the same kind of jousting that I saw in Spa between Kimi and Lewis in what the folklore deemed difficult to pass cars.

I always believed that the combination of narrower tracks, stiffer oversight by the marshals and less innovative driving by the drivers had more to do with lack of passing than the actual cars themselves.

Yes there is more turbulence in the wake of the 2008 cars, but many passes were made and on average didn't seem any less than at any other time I watched F1. I do remind people that in the past there have been some really crappy cars and some really good cars, sorta inflating the passing statistics. When all cars run within 2 seconds of each other and the top 10 within less than a second between them ,then such parity will inevitably account for closer driving.

I think F1 is taking a step backwards for nothing.


I don't disagree, although I think that the FIA/FOM regulations appear to want to solve everything (from lack of over-taking to ultra-high costs) but the problem is that they are not addressing the main issues. As fans, we want to see more wheel to wheel action & risks being taken by racers that may (or may not) pay off. Whether cost cuts achieve this or not is questionable, but I think that the two need to be looked at separately.

The guy to blame is Michael Schumacher for being too dominant, & although the pointing system was amended it didn't solve the problem but merely made it worse as winning counted for much, much less. If you ask me, a reversion to the top-six pointing system (10-6-4-3-2-1) should have been implemented in 2007 or 2008. I don't know about changing the aerodynamic regulations, but personally I think that no need would have been there as aerodynamics R&D represent a mere 10-15% of the budget of top teams versus 50% or more for engines.

[Tallgeese]

The main difference is that the 2008 & 2009 cars are that the former cost a lot more to manufacture, maintain & test where the latter would be cheaper in all those aspects even without the testing restrictions. That coupled with further rules on engine distances (increasing 50%) mean that engine acquisition costs should also decline.

Odd thing is, rather than one engine for every three races, it's more like one engine to be used on three consecutive days on the weekend. If I remember correctly only qualifying & race-day required the same engine be used, but now engines must last two whole weekends (from Friday-to-Sunday). Personally I don't know if a driver will want to push knowing that he may foul up the engine for the next race. Unless super reliability is attained no body wants to risk destroying the engine.

[ioan]

The guy to blame is Michael Schumacher for being too dominant,

The guy to blame is Bernie Ecclestone for changing the points system as knee jerk reaction.

[Ranger]

The main difference is that the 2008 & 2009 cars are that the former cost a lot more to manufacture, maintain & test where the latter would be cheaper in all those aspects even without the testing restrictions. That coupled with further rules on engine distances (increasing 50%) mean that engine acquisition costs should also decline.

Odd thing is, rather than one engine for every three races, it's more like one engine to be used on three consecutive days on the weekend. If I remember correctly only qualifying & race-day required the same engine be used, but now engines must last two whole weekends (from Friday-to-Sunday). Personally I don't know if a driver will want to push knowing that he may foul up the engine for the next race. Unless super reliability is attained no body wants to risk destroying the engine.

The problem is that quite a large proportion of an F1 teams spending is in R&D, and for a completely different formula these costs would be huge. Even in making the engines last longer, there is a large R&D cost, not just cutting 1000rpm.

Manufacturing costs will go down but with R&D costs I'm not sure. Less testing would equal more money spent research and development, would it not?

[Ranger]

The guy to blame is Bernie Ecclestone for changing the points system as knee jerk reaction.

Bernie can have his influence but only the FIA can do that.

[ioan]

Bernie can have his influence but only the FIA can do that.

Most of the sporting regulations changes are implemented at Bernie's express request in order to improve the show. There might be an agreement or something that states that the FOM can have sporting rules changed in order to improve the sport's popularity and health.

The FIA has 100% control only over the technical regulations.

[Dave B]

The FIA decides the sporting regulations. Whether Bernie or anybody else has influence is a matter of debate, but the final decision to change the scoring system was made by the FIA.

[waitey]

actually there won't be as much difference as you think. I think you are forgetting that the 2008 cars that are still testing (STR) are using slick tyres. Buemi and Bourdais etc will be gaining 1-2 seconds on the 2008 package from using slick tyres so that's why they were always going to be ahead on the time sheets during testing. If they were running grooved tyres it wouldn't be much different.

Looking at the Bahrain times they aren't too bad looking at the 2008 times and of course they have much less grip testing now than there will be come the Bahrain GP and of course performance will increase.

To be honest I think they will only be 5 tenths a lap off on average at the start of the year and claw that back.

[wmcot]

I think F1 is taking a step backwards for nothing.

Actually they're taking a step backwards for Billions $$$$ !