Thoughts on current F1 Regulations

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nitrodaze

The fact of the matter is, it is incredibly tough getting anything new into F1 at the moment due to the overly restrictive nature of the current regulations which places an unfair burden o innovation coupled with an attempt to restrict spending or reduce cost. It is difficult to innovate without spending a great deal of money. It is also impossible to innovate out of an architectural flaw in a design without re-architecting the design. This essentially is where Renault and Honda find themselves, as such stuck between a rock and a hard place as they say.

---

I feel that Honda have an ace card up their sleeve that no-one could do anything about.

What would happen if the 2016 Honda Gold Wing touring bike is released with a 1.6L V6? Honda could deny that it is the Honda RA615H... couldn't they? It wouldn't be the same power plant, it would be in a bike :D

It´s tough to compete in F1. I don´t want it to be a spec serie.

As long as F1 continues to attract the best drivers and continues to race on (some of) the world's greatest tracks, I will continue to be glued to the set. Even if Bernie devises a way to make me put coins into my TV set to watch (which I'm pretty much already having to do), I'll still watch. I do love it so. There are some serious financial issues facing F1 right now. And IMO, that started as the tobacco money was forced to leave global sports. The decision to move to ultra complex, ultra expensive "green" engines simply made it worse. I'm into turbos, but I feel that too much focus has been placed on technology that fans either don't understand, can't relate to or generally don't care that much about. The type of person that this green tech most appeals to probably doesn't watch F1 to begin with. I think that most people watch F1 for the drivers, the glamour and the spectacle. And these power units are so expensive and so complex that I don't see a way to get a smaller independent to develop and produce competitive customer engines. That, I don't like.

But generally, I admit that I'm a happy camper right now mostly because "my guy" is whooping butt. But even including the Hamilton/Mercedes domination, which is not so different from the dominant eras of the past, I just don't see anything so wrong with F1 that it can't be fixed. It's going to take deep thought and proper planning. And there are risks ahead. If Red Bull and Toro Rosso end up leaving, I think that's going to be a very hard hit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior

As long as F1 continues to attract the best drivers and continues to race on (some of) the world's greatest tracks, I will continue to be glued to the set. Even if Bernie devises a way to make me put coins into my TV set to watch (which I'm pretty much already having to do), I'll still watch. I do love it so.

---

I hope F1 fans continue their unwavering support for the series. It still is one of the best motorsport in the world and l hope it continues forever. As long as an F1 car turns a wheel, l shall always watch it and head for he nearest circuit to see it first hand. That said, one cannot help to observe and wonder at the current state of affairs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nitrodaze

I hope F1 fans continue their unwavering support for the series. It still is one of the best motorsport in the world and l hope it continues forever.

---

I don't necessarily agree with that, If viewing figures are or good, there is no need to change anything.

If enough people tune out (at least stop paying for watching F1) the business model for 400 million/year budgets starts to disappear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior

As long as F1 continues to attract the best drivers and continues to race on (some of) the world's greatest tracks, I will continue to be glued to the set.

---

You mean like Pastor Maldonado, Sergio Perez, Will Stevens, Roberto Merhi, Markus Eriksson, Felipe Nasr? While people like Vandoorne, Abt, Wehrlein, Lynn, Dixon, Vergne and others sit on the sidelines?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rollo

re 5: Yes.

Formula One is expensive yes, but keeping a lid on engine development basically ensures that whoever does not have access to the best engine, remains crap. I think Honda have already learned that even if they have a horrible engine, they may as well just give up altogether because the regs don't really allow them to throw the whole engine away and start again.
In a number of races we've seen that Mercedes engines are the best and if you don't have them, even if you're developing you're own, then it sucks to be you.

---

This does seem to be a significant problem. I understand that the idea was to keep engine costs down, but that obviously isn't working, so maybe it's time for a rethink...

Although I can't figure out what's stopping McLaren just announcing that they're scrapping their engine supply contact with Honda and signing a new one with Acura, who are going to be developing a new engine for them for next season. How do the rules prevent that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duncan

This does seem to be a significant problem. I understand that the idea was to keep engine costs down, but that obviously isn't working, so maybe it's time for a rethink...

---

How do you police a team like Ferrari which as an SpA can shift development projects within the building and has access to test anything they feel like without even having to ask permission to borrow someone else's circuit? Same with Mercedes-Benz.
Ferrari owns Fiorano, Mercedes-Benz owns Stuttgart-Unterturkheim, Honda owns Suzuka Circuit. The point is that all three of these companies could test anything they jolly well like and it would be incumbent on the FIA to prove that what they were testing was for F1. These companies can always plead plausible deniability.

It's just that at the moment, M-B is chucking more money into R&D than Ferrari.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dj_bytedisaster

You mean like Pastor Maldonado, Sergio Perez, Will Stevens, Roberto Merhi, Markus Eriksson, Felipe Nasr? While people like Vandoorne, Abt, Wehrlein, Lynn, Dixon, Vergne and others sit on the sidelines?

---

Where would you put Robin Frijns on that list?

While "engine freeze" is not ideal, I am unsure this is really the key issue. When Red Bull dominated, the development of aerodynamics was 'free', but RBR was still never caught and in 2013 they actually increased their advantage.

Mind you, Mercedes would win anyway, regardless of whether the rules were open or not. Just like RBR in aerodynamics with A. Newey at helm, I believe they have simply mastered this era.

The real problem is that the power units are so damn expensive, which means 3 things:

- only very few manufacturers can afford it. If even Honda fails, how many chances do others have?

- big gap between team performances, even greater than in so-called Red Bull era. Underfunded midfield teams have now no chance unlike 2012, because more budget goes to paying for the engines, and less money for car development...

- being a 'works team' counts a lot. Because as the engines are so expensive and complicated, 'integration' with PU counts far more. With previous V8's you could do like Brawn did in 2009, and win as a customer team, because integration was far easier and a customer could perform on as good level as the works team, provided the chassis was good enough.