F1 regulations to dumbed down and restrictive?

[Knock-on]

Newey believes so and it may encourage him to leave F1.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/73261

[BDunnell]

It is one of the great conundrums in motorsport today - to allow freedom within the regulations, and thus risk someone stealing a march on everybody else, boredom in terms of the level competition and soaring costs as other teams try and catch up, or to be restrictive and keep costs down and the sport interesting. Personally, I'm in favour of allowing innovation within a restricted budget, which ought to be possible in some way. Cost has to be the major concern now and in the future if F1 is to remain relevant.

[Dave B]

It seems that even Max agrees that the rules may have gone too far. From the article linked above:

"It's a fault with the regulations," explained Mosley. "They have constricted the areas where they can work to keep speeds and costs under control to the point where you get the best returns by endlessly refining every single component of the car."

He added: "People like (Colin) Chapman, (John) Cooper or (Keith) Duckworth would be lost in modern F1. We have this culture of minimal innovation and endless refinement."

I'm all for reducing costs, but we're getting dangerously close to F1 becoming a spec series, which would be a disaster.

Newey's right to be concerned.

[ArrowsFA1]

This kind of discussion always brings to mind for me Colin Chapman's comment made after the 'twin chassis' Lotus 88 had failed to get through scrutineering at the 1981 Argentine GP, for the third race in succession.

"When this is over, I shall seriously reconsider whether or not grand prix racing is still what it purports to be: the pinnacle of sport and technological achievement. Unfortunately, this appears to be no longer the case, and if it is not cleaned up, Formula 1 will end up in a quagmire of plagiarism, chicanery and petty rule interpretation, manipulated by people for whom the word 'sport' has no meaning."

[Knock-on]

I have always had the utmost respect for CC (I am after all building his everyday sports car ) but I never realised he was a Prophet? How accurate his words are.

To be fair to Max, and as identified by Ben, he does have an almost impossible job but one of his own making to a degree.

How do you free up innovation while helping to control costs? How do you promote close racing while not creating a near spec series?

Lastly, is it possible to re-invent F1 in it's current form while still retaining it's identity.

Perhaps what is needed is a radical rethink of the regs. Put forward a few simple parameters and let the teams interperet them and innovate as they see fit.

Sure, one season, a team might dominate but so what. It will sonn equal out.

Where is the next Colin Chapman or Adrian Newey going to come from at the moment if they cannot shine?

[BDunnell]

I have always had the utmost respect for CC (I am after all building his everyday sports car ) but I never realised he was a Prophet? How accurate his words are.

But where does one draw the line? For instance, I believe that the inevitable onward march of technical development has wrecked world rallying twice, once with the Group B 'supercars' and again now. It will probably happen again unless very restrictive technical and cost rules are imposed on whatever replaces the current formula. I am sure the same will be the case for F1.

[ShiftingGears]

Where is the next Colin Chapman or Adrian Newey going to come from at the moment if they cannot shine?

Sportscars, it would seem.

[ShiftingGears]

But where does one draw the line?

That's the question where noone can agree on a common answer. The FIA has a hard job trying to make F1 survive through tough economic times without killing the essence of F1 which is technical innovation. And that's ignoring the safety aspect of it.

[Knock-on]

That's the question where noone can agree on a common answer. The FIA has a hard job trying to make F1 survive through tough economic times without killing the essence of F1 which is technical innovation. And that's ignoring the safety aspect of it.

Agreed.

However, I would rather that they concentrate their efforts on this rather than silly nit picking F1 race manipulation scandles.

There is a rule and spirit of those rules. Wouldn't it be nice if we could claw a little of the sport back into this business?

[Mark]

You have to ask yourself what F1 is? Is it an engineering excercise or a sport?

You have teams spending a fortune developing new technologies (*cough*KERS*cough*) just for all the teams to do the same and then end up idenitical again, nobody wins.

I've always thought that F1 cars should be simple beasts at heart, not much aerodynamics, not that much grip, but engines so powerful that if you press the throttle too hard it sends you back in time mokin: