Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 2 votes

2014 F1 regulations and proposed changes [Merged]


  • Please log in to reply
335 replies to this topic

#1 DutchQuicksilver

DutchQuicksilver
  • Member

  • 1,920 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 28 June 2013 - 15:19

Couldn't find a similar topic yet, but there's more news on the 2014 regulations.


FIA approves Formula 1 testing revamp for 2014

Following approval by Formula 1's Sporting Working Committee in Canada, the FIA World Motor Sport Council approved the tweak, as well as the return of in-season testing.

A statement issued by the governing body said: "Four two-day track tests will be allowed in season in place of the current eight one-day promotional days and the three-day young driver test.

"These will take place at tracks in Europe on the Tuesday and Wednesday after a race in order to ensure minimal additional resources are necessary.

"Track testing will now also be permitted in January 2014 in order to allow earlier testing of the new power units."


No more stepped nose

FIA bans stepped nose designs on Formula 1 cars from 2014
By Jonathan Noble Friday, June 28th 2013, 14:42 GMT

Romain Grosjean, Lotus, Canadian GP 2013, MontrealStepped noses on Formula 1 cars will no longer be permitted next year, after the FIA approved a change to the 2014 technical regulations.


Good news on the banning of the stepped nose :)

Advertisement

#2 Cool Beans

Cool Beans
  • Member

  • 1,553 posts
  • Joined: June 06

Posted 28 June 2013 - 15:34

One thing that stood out for me was this:

Only one engine can be homologated during the homologation period, which runs from 2014-2020. Changes are permitted for installation, reliability or cost-saving reasons.


Do the engines have to be homologated before they're allowed to be raced? Ie. does Mercedes have to homologate their engine next year but Honda can keep working on theirs until 2015 when they enter the sport?

Edited by Cool Beans, 28 June 2013 - 15:35.


#3 PokePoke

PokePoke
  • Member

  • 145 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 28 June 2013 - 17:17

Electronic control of the rear brake circuit is permitted in order to ensure consistent braking whilst energy is being recovered.

It's back :rolleyes:

#4 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 10,526 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 28 June 2013 - 22:28

Nice summary
http://www.espn.co.u...ory/113019.html

#5 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,837 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 09 July 2013 - 06:15

"First Look" by Scarbs

#6 ali.unal

ali.unal
  • Member

  • 3,281 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 09 July 2013 - 08:23

Two interesting changes:

"Any use of an additional complete power unit will result in that driver having to start the race from the pit lane."
"Gearboxes to have 8 forward ratios, those ratios are fixed for the season."

#7 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 10,526 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 09 July 2013 - 08:43

"First Look" by Scarbs

narrow front wing :up:
lower front, no step noses :up:
single rear exhaust :up:
these cars will be nice looking

#8 EvanRainer

EvanRainer
  • Member

  • 1,364 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 09 July 2013 - 09:11

Wait, fixed gear ratios for the whole season?

#9 Scotracer

Scotracer
  • Member

  • 2,698 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 09 July 2013 - 09:12

690kg minimum weight and peak power of 750BHP. They really are getting slower.



#10 Shiroo

Shiroo
  • Member

  • 4,012 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 09 July 2013 - 10:19

Wait, fixed gear ratios for the whole season?

This gonna be hilarious. Same gear ratio on Monza and Monaco oh jesus.

Some teams can just set up for Monaco, and they should win there

Edited by Shiroo, 09 July 2013 - 10:20.


#11 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,389 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 09 July 2013 - 10:31

Couldn't find a similar topic yet, but there's more news on the 2014 regulations.


FIA approves Formula 1 testing revamp for 2014



No more stepped nose


Good news on the banning of the stepped nose :)


Why? Is there a safety reason for banning them? I don't like them, but banning something for aesthetic reasons is stupid.

#12 maverick69

maverick69
  • Member

  • 4,568 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 09 July 2013 - 10:32

690kg minimum weight and peak power of 750BHP. They really are getting slower.


A shedload more torque though. That will more than off-set any weight gain.

#13 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,389 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 09 July 2013 - 10:34

One thing that stood out for me was this:



Do the engines have to be homologated before they're allowed to be raced? Ie. does Mercedes have to homologate their engine next year but Honda can keep working on theirs until 2015 when they enter the sport?


Yes. That's the same way the rule currently works. Full homologation doesn't kick in until 2018 and the teams will be allowed to make changes up to then, but the permitted changes decrease each season.

#14 toofast

toofast
  • Member

  • 463 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 09 July 2013 - 11:20

690kg minimum weight and peak power of 750BHP. They really are getting slower.


According to scarbs, they will be only few tenths slower. I honestly don't see how is that possible then again I'm not exactly an F1 engineer.

#15 sheepgobba

sheepgobba
  • Member

  • 1,097 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 09 July 2013 - 11:26

According to scarbs, they will be only few tenths slower. I honestly don't see how is that possible then again I'm not exactly an F1 engineer.


I heard the cars would be seconds slower next year :confused:

Hopefully the cars are at the same pace as this year at least. Don't want it any slower to be honest

#16 wrighty

wrighty
  • Member

  • 3,617 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 09 July 2013 - 11:31

This gonna be hilarious. Same gear ratio on Monza and Monaco oh jesus.

Some teams can just set up for Monaco, and they should win there


with 8 forward gears it's likely the teams will run 1-6 for Monaco and 2-8 (or even 3-8) for somewhere like Monza or Spa - the point is the ratios will be calculated to cover all parameters from daft hairpins (Lowes) to the top end of DRS-assisted top speed i assume.

Why? Is there a safety reason for banning (high noses)? I don't like them, but banning something for aesthetic reasons is stupid.


wasn't the concern about T-bone impacts? (and the fact that the cars never seem to stay on the floor during crashes, hence the concern of the high nose tip)

Edited by wrighty, 09 July 2013 - 11:33.


#17 Alexis*27

Alexis*27
  • Member

  • 759 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 09 July 2013 - 11:34

You won't notice a couple of seconds. They'll probably be back up to speed in 2015 or 2016 anyway.

#18 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,389 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 09 July 2013 - 11:43

with 8 forward gears it's likely the teams will run 1-6 for Monaco and 2-8 (or even 3-8) for somewhere like Monza or Spa - the point is the ratios will be calculated to cover all parameters from daft hairpins (Lowes) to the top end of DRS-assisted top speed i assume.



wasn't the concern about T-bone impacts? (and the fact that the cars never seem to stay on the floor during crashes, hence the concern of the high nose tip)


That was why they mandated the lower nose and the step was due to the way the rule was implemented. But I'm curious why the step itself would be banned. Doesn't sound like it's being done on safety grounds.




#19 JHSingo

JHSingo
  • Member

  • 1,189 posts
  • Joined: June 13

Posted 09 July 2013 - 11:49

You won't notice a couple of seconds. They'll probably be back up to speed in 2015 or 2016 anyway.


I just find it depressing that Formula One cars are slower and slower, year on year. Surely, going slower is not considered progress in any form of racing.

I personally believe that if anything (with most lap records for old tracks dating from 2004/2005) that we should be going FASTER and not slower.

Because right now, the way things are, LMP1 cars turn lap times that are not really that far adrift from F1 cars. That is staggering when you consider how much heavier a P1 car is than an F1 car. At this rate, it won't be long before Formula One cars are no longer the fastest circuit racing cars on the planet.

I don't know why the FIA constantly feels it has to reduce the challenge involved in the sport, whether it is with neutered tracks, slower cars and buttons to overtake, but hey, that's their prerogative I guess.

Edited by JHSingo, 09 July 2013 - 11:49.


Advertisement

#20 wrighty

wrighty
  • Member

  • 3,617 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 09 July 2013 - 11:52

That was why they mandated the lower nose and the step was due to the way the rule was implemented. But I'm curious why the step itself would be banned. Doesn't sound like it's being done on safety grounds.


my apologies i'd interpreted your post as being about the high nose not the step :blush: . I'm not sure whether the step is being banned or just 'engineered out'.....if it was being banned, especially on aesthetic grounds it would be easier to just introduce a rule along the lines of 'when viewed in profile from the side of the car, the nose from distances x forward of the front axle centre line to y behind the FACL should be a predominantly uniform curve with a maximum deviation of x from points x to y' or something.



I hope they've banned it specifically for aesthetic reasons, it looks fcukin horrible :D

#21 Brandz07

Brandz07
  • Member

  • 3,180 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 09 July 2013 - 11:53

I just find it depressing that Formula One cars are slower and slower, year on year. Surely, going slower is not considered progress in any form of racing.

I personally believe that if anything (with most lap records for old tracks dating from 2004/2005) that we should be going FASTER and not slower.

Because right now, the way things are, LMP1 cars turn lap times that are not really that far adrift from F1 cars. That is staggering when you consider how much heavier a P1 car is than an F1 car. At this rate, it won't be long before Formula One cars are no longer the fastest circuit racing cars on the planet.

I don't know why the FIA constantly feels it has to reduce the challenge involved in the sport, whether it is with neutered tracks, slower cars and buttons to overtake, but hey, that's their prerogative I guess.


Really?

Silverstone:

LMP1: 1:48.021
F1: 1:29.607

I get your point but that's a massive exaggeration, I don't see there being a 20 second swing any time soon.

Edited by Brandz07, 09 July 2013 - 11:53.


#22 JHSingo

JHSingo
  • Member

  • 1,189 posts
  • Joined: June 13

Posted 09 July 2013 - 11:59

Really?

Silverstone:

LMP1: 1:48.021
F1: 1:29.607

I get your point but that's a massive exaggeration, I don't see there being a 20 second swing any time soon.


Take it from Allan McNish.

"It's very odd the way it is in Formula One now," McNish chuckles. "I was looking at the lap times from the Bahrain GP and noticed that they were basically the same as our race lap times there - for a car that is 300kg lighter. So, if we chopped 300kg off our cars then we'd be massively fast."


http://www.huffingto..._medium=twitter

Edited by JHSingo, 09 July 2013 - 12:00.


#23 Andrew Hope

Andrew Hope
  • Writer of 2013's Best Opening Post

  • 7,054 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 09 July 2013 - 12:03

I'd rather have cars that top out at 180mph at Monza but produce good racing than cars that can do 240 but can't pass each other.

#24 Brandz07

Brandz07
  • Member

  • 3,180 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 09 July 2013 - 12:04

Take it from Allan McNish.

http://www.huffingto..._medium=twitter


LMP1: 1:45.814
F1: 1:32.422

:/

Anyway, getting off-topic here.

Edited by Brandz07, 09 July 2013 - 12:04.


#25 JHSingo

JHSingo
  • Member

  • 1,189 posts
  • Joined: June 13

Posted 09 July 2013 - 12:11

LMP1: 1:45.814
F1: 1:32.422

:/

Anyway, getting off-topic here.


RACE lap times, not qualifying.

Fastest race lap time from Bahrain in F1 was a 1:36.961...

 ;)

#26 Dauemannen

Dauemannen
  • Member

  • 50 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 09 July 2013 - 12:12

Regarding gear ratios, I think I read somewhere that the ratios between the gears are fixed for the season, but the teams are free to adjust final drive ratios. That is, if they gear for a top speed of 280 km/h in Monaco, they'll simply have all the gears 1/4 longer for a 350 km/h top speed in Monza. I'm no expert, but shouldn't adjusting the final drive ratio be a lot easier than adjusting each of the gears individually, like they do today? I can't remember where I read it, and it might be complete and utter bollocks, but it at least makes sense to my untrained mind.

If they have to race the exact same 8 gears for the entire season, it's perfectly concievable that a team like Red Bull, who do badly at Monza anyway, will choose shorter ratios to benefit them at other tracks, completely sacrificing Monza. A midfield team which happens to have a lower downforce and drag package (Force India in 2009, Toro Rosso) could single out Monza and and win it because of their tailored ratios, while being completely off the pace on the more typical 300-320 km/h top speed circuits. You could also have someone optimizing for Monaco and Singapore, while being hopelessly off the pace anywhere else. Now I might be overvaluing the power of gear ratios, but the lengths teams go to in order to optimize them now, tells me I might be on to something.

#27 GlenP

GlenP
  • Member

  • 3,403 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 09 July 2013 - 12:22

There is no need to use all of the gears at all tracks - that is the mistake most people seem to be making. You may well have a tall 8th gear that is not used for half the races for example.

#28 JHSingo

JHSingo
  • Member

  • 1,189 posts
  • Joined: June 13

Posted 09 July 2013 - 12:24

I'd rather have cars that top out at 180mph at Monza but produce good racing than cars that can do 240 but can't pass each other.


"Pinnacle of motorsport" is often a term we hear related to Formula One, so if that is the case, if it really is the pinnacle, the cars should reflect that.

They should be the fastest, most technologically advanced, most challenging cars to drive. Right now, there is no arguing that they are not as fast as they once were, certainly aren't the most technologically advanced, and it is debatable about whether these days they are the most challenging to drive any more either.

Formula One has resembled the world's most expensive spec series for far too long. I had hoped the 2014 regs would change that, but it doesn't look like they will. Shame.

#29 toofast

toofast
  • Member

  • 463 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 09 July 2013 - 12:29

I heard the cars would be seconds slower next year :confused:

Hopefully the cars are at the same pace as this year at least. Don't want it any slower to be honest


I'm not so sure too but that's what scarbs told me when I asked him.

#30 toofast

toofast
  • Member

  • 463 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 09 July 2013 - 12:30

I'd rather have cars that top out at 180mph at Monza but produce good racing than cars that can do 240 but can't pass each other.


So, you prefer GP2/3 over F1? :cat:

Edited by toofast, 09 July 2013 - 12:31.


#31 mclara

mclara
  • Member

  • 113 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 09 July 2013 - 12:43

Didnt they widen the front wings and narrowing the rear wings in 2009 to make it easier for cars to follow each other??
So by narrowing the front wing next year won't they make it harder to follow the car in front?

#32 GlenP

GlenP
  • Member

  • 3,403 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 09 July 2013 - 13:00

Didnt they widen the front wings and narrowing the rear wings in 2009 to make it easier for cars to follow each other??
So by narrowing the front wing next year won't they make it harder to follow the car in front?

By changing the potential to get the floor working (different nose regs, no sealing the diffuser with exhaust) this might be not so much of a problem - the cars will be less aero dependent. Plus, slimming the front wing a little bit gives a bit more wiggle-room for wheel-to-wheel racing without knocking the end plate off or giving the other guy a puncture.

#33 GlenP

GlenP
  • Member

  • 3,403 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 09 July 2013 - 13:02

"Pinnacle of motorsport" is often a term we hear related to Formula One, so if that is the case, if it really is the pinnacle, the cars should reflect that.

They should be the fastest, most technologically advanced, most challenging cars to drive. Right now, there is no arguing that they are not as fast as they once were, certainly aren't the most technologically advanced, and it is debatable about whether these days they are the most challenging to drive any more either.

Formula One has resembled the world's most expensive spec series for far too long. I had hoped the 2014 regs would change that, but it doesn't look like they will. Shame.

Er - did they not go faster last weekend? I thought I heard to commentators saying that they were faster than the 3l V10s?

A lot of the features you would like to see would just kill F1 through cost - even with spec tyres, strict engine and gearbox regs etc etc they are already unsustainable.

#34 Scotracer

Scotracer
  • Member

  • 2,698 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 09 July 2013 - 13:05

A shedload more torque though. That will more than off-set any weight gain.


That's not how it works...



#35 dau

dau
  • Member

  • 4,569 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 09 July 2013 - 13:28

RACE lap times, not qualifying.

Fastest race lap time from Bahrain in F1 was a 1:36.961...

;)

Fastest race lap time in WEC was a 1:47.140. That's several seconds outside the 107%.

"Pinnacle of motorsport" is often a term we hear related to Formula One, so if that is the case, if it really is the pinnacle, the cars should reflect that.

They should be the fastest, most technologically advanced, most challenging cars to drive. Right now, there is no arguing that they are not as fast as they once were, certainly aren't the most technologically advanced, and it is debatable about whether these days they are the most challenging to drive any more either.

Formula One has resembled the world's most expensive spec series for far too long. I had hoped the 2014 regs would change that, but it doesn't look like they will. Shame.

For most of it's history, F1 never had the fastest, most technologically advanced or most challenging cars to drive. It also bears no resemblance to a spec series, even though there are spec parts like the SECU or the tyres. I have no idea why that stuff is repeated over and over - a spec series has SPEC cars and/or SPEC engines, not cars and engines designed and built by teams to more or less restrictive Technical Regulations. If anything, F1 was much closer to what you guys would call a spec series in the Golden Era, when half the grid was on DFVs.

#36 JHSingo

JHSingo
  • Member

  • 1,189 posts
  • Joined: June 13

Posted 09 July 2013 - 13:47

A lot of the features you would like to see would just kill F1 through cost - even with spec tyres, strict engine and gearbox regs etc etc they are already unsustainable.


And who's fault is that? :lol:

Fastest race lap time in WEC was a 1:47.140. That's several seconds outside the 107%.


Still not bad to say they're much heavier.  ;)

For most of it's history, F1 never had the fastest, most technologically advanced or most challenging cars to drive. It also bears no resemblance to a spec series, even though there are spec parts like the SECU or the tyres. I have no idea why that stuff is repeated over and over - a spec series has SPEC cars and/or SPEC engines, not cars and engines designed and built by teams to more or less restrictive Technical Regulations. If anything, F1 was much closer to what you guys would call a spec series in the Golden Era, when half the grid was on DFVs.


Oh come on. Of course it is pretty much a spec series. All the cars look the same (if you painted them all white, your average fan wouldn't be able to tell which was which), sound the same, and go the same. Any and all innovation is swiftly banned like the f-duct, exhaust blown diffuser, etc, etc. Back in the 70s and 80s, not only did all the cars look different, but they were fundamentally different under the skin too. That is what Formula One is missing today.

#37 GlenP

GlenP
  • Member

  • 3,403 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 09 July 2013 - 13:51

And who's fault is that? :lol:

What are you laughing at? You are laughing as if my answer proved your point - which it absolutely does not… it makes your suggestions impossible, unless there were some sort of total budget cap.

We now have most of what we need - great racing with a variety of different winners, a little bit of room for ingenuity, and speeds that are great to watch without drivers passing out or getting killed. I fail to see your problem.

#38 Obi Offiah

Obi Offiah
  • Member

  • 8,634 posts
  • Joined: November 04

Posted 09 July 2013 - 13:51

I don't understand why they didn't attempt to reduce the height of the chassis, that in itself should provide a marked reduction in aero and the cars would look better.

#39 GlenP

GlenP
  • Member

  • 3,403 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 09 July 2013 - 13:53

I don't understand why they didn't attempt to reduce the height of the chassis, that in itself should provide a marked reduction in aero and the cars would look better.

Eh? The chassis is already only as high as the wheels. The teams could make it lower if the driver would still fit in and the crash protection was adequate, but they want the high front to make the floor work properly.

Advertisement

#40 V8 Fireworks

V8 Fireworks
  • Member

  • 5,475 posts
  • Joined: June 06

Posted 09 July 2013 - 13:57

This gonna be hilarious. Same gear ratio on Monza and Monaco oh jesus.

Some teams can just set up for Monaco, and they should win there

That's why there is 8 gears? I'm sure it will be fine. It is a daft rule, I agree. But what can you do?

#41 One

One
  • Member

  • 6,527 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 09 July 2013 - 13:58

Got very curious about the black rubbers...!?

#42 V8 Fireworks

V8 Fireworks
  • Member

  • 5,475 posts
  • Joined: June 06

Posted 09 July 2013 - 14:00

The teams could make it lower if the driver would still fit in and the crash protection was adequate, but they want the high front to make the floor work properly.

Seconded the driver sits with their legs in the air for aerodynamic reasons.

It's feasible to lower the cockpit, but the teams would not agree as they have the power to control the regulations and do not want to redesign everything.

#43 dau

dau
  • Member

  • 4,569 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 09 July 2013 - 14:02

Oh come on. Of course it is pretty much a spec series. All the cars look the same (if you painted them all white, your average fan wouldn't be able to tell which was which), sound the same, and go the same. Any and all innovation is swiftly banned like the f-duct, exhaust blown diffuser, etc, etc. Back in the 70s and 80s, not only did all the cars look different, but they were fundamentally different under the skin too. That is what Formula One is missing today.

If you painted F1 cars from other eras white, i'm pretty sure your average fan would fail to distinguish between them either. Same for LMP cars, btw.

Also, not "any and all" innovation is banned. Think passive DRS, interlinked suspension, Coanda exhausts and all the other aero stuff that most of the media doesn't care about. And 'innovation' that was just clever circumvention of the rules was banned in the great days of yesteryear as well. Like the fancar, watercooled brakes, TMDs or McLaren's brake steering. Or what about stuff like the X-wings, wing mirrors, movable aero, ground effect or six-wheelers? Was F1 missing something in those days as well?

#44 dau

dau
  • Member

  • 4,569 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 09 July 2013 - 14:14

I don't understand why they didn't attempt to reduce the height of the chassis, that in itself should provide a marked reduction in aero and the cars would look better.

They did lower the front bulkhead from max. 550mm to max 525mm.

#45 dexter311

dexter311
  • Member

  • 518 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 09 July 2013 - 14:25

I was under the impression that the 8 gear ratios were fixed, but the final drive ratio could be altered to suit the circuit (similar to other series like V8 Supercars)? If not, then locking in the right ratios at the start of the year will be EXTREMELY important.

#46 Scotracer

Scotracer
  • Member

  • 2,698 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 09 July 2013 - 14:46

Didnt they widen the front wings and narrowing the rear wings in 2009 to make it easier for cars to follow each other??
So by narrowing the front wing next year won't they make it harder to follow the car in front?


It was found it didn't make a big difference, in reality. The majority of the issue came from the diffuser and the rear wing in combination. With the removal of the beam wing and the severe limitation of the diffuser since 2011 it should be okay.



#47 Rubens Hakkamacher

Rubens Hakkamacher
  • Member

  • 1,567 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 09 July 2013 - 14:55

Do the engines have to be homologated before they're allowed to be raced? Ie. does Mercedes have to homologate their engine next year but Honda can keep working on theirs until 2015 when they enter the sport?


One thing that is totally daft about F1 in 2014 is this idea:

"We're switching to small displacement fuel limited V6 turbos because it's more relevant to road car technology (vis-a-vis fuel economy/efficiency)"

.... BUT....

"....to save money we're not going to allow engine development".


So, the fans get smaller, weaker engines. The motor industry doesn't really get anything relating to real fuel economy/efficiency in road cars - how does a V6 make sense if you're talking fuel efficiency? And the gestalt of F1 is ruined by eliminating competition IN DEVELOPMENT.


I hate the 21st century.

#48 Obi Offiah

Obi Offiah
  • Member

  • 8,634 posts
  • Joined: November 04

Posted 09 July 2013 - 14:58

Eh? The chassis is already only as high as the wheels. The teams could make it lower if the driver would still fit in and the crash protection was adequate, but they want the high front to make the floor work properly.

Exactly, if the rules mandated a lower chassis, then the floor would be less effective (downforce reduction).

#49 Obi Offiah

Obi Offiah
  • Member

  • 8,634 posts
  • Joined: November 04

Posted 09 July 2013 - 15:01

Seconded the driver sits with their legs in the air for aerodynamic reasons.

It's feasible to lower the cockpit, but the teams would not agree as they have the power to control the regulations and do not want to redesign everything.

Yes this is what I mean.

#50 DutchQuicksilver

DutchQuicksilver
  • Member

  • 1,920 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 09 July 2013 - 15:01

Why? Is there a safety reason for banning them? I don't like them, but banning something for aesthetic reasons is stupid.

It's purely the looks why the FIA banned them.