60 replies to this topic

[HUMBERMAN]

 'Someone' continues to make easydosh out of F1 and wants to do things his way in spite of us fans witnessing its slow and inevitable death.

 

 How can we be in a situation where the likes of Alonso is an 'also ran’ and Button a great racer is tail end charlie?

Completely insane engine supply problems, no development allowed during the season...what’s happening here?  How can this be the pinnacle of RACING when the drivers are instructed to slow down because of fuel loads and tyre limitations. Hello.....is anyone listening ????

 

How about a brand new formula; FORMULA PLUS, so long as the car has 4 wheels they can use whatever tyres, engines, fuel, aerodynamics etc etc they like. How I would love the see racing like that but of course it will never happen, sadly.

[Volcano70]

I agree on the final sentence 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000.99 times

not the sadly though

Edited by Volcano70, 28 September 2015 - 21:18.

[Seanspeed]

HUMBERMAN, on 28 Sept 2015 - 21:12, said:

How can we be in a situation where the likes of Alonso is an 'also ran’ and Button a great racer is tail end charlie?

McLaren gambled and it failed miserably.

HUMBERMAN, on 28 Sept 2015 - 21:12, said:

Completely insane engine supply problems, no development allowed during the season...what’s happening here?  How can this be the pinnacle of RACING when the drivers are instructed to slow down because of fuel loads and tyre limitations. Hello.....is anyone listening ????

Listening yes.

These were also factors during the so-called 'golden age' in the 80's, just to remind you.
 

HUMBERMAN, on 28 Sept 2015 - 21:12, said:

How about a brand new formula; FORMULA PLUS, so long as the car has 4 wheels they can use whatever tyres, engines, fuel, aerodynamics etc etc they like. How I would love the see racing like that but of course it will never happen, sadly.

For one, that name sounds like a brand of diaper.

Two, there would be no quicker way to kill F1 than open regulations. Ever since the big recession hit, the economic market just hasn't been the same and F1 has been suffering for it ever since even with all the measures they've introduced to reduce costs.

I get your sentiment, but we have to live in a real world, not a fantasy one, unfortunately.

Edited by Seanspeed, 28 September 2015 - 21:27.

[Imperial]

HUMBERMAN, on 28 Sept 2015 - 21:12, said:

Hello.....is anyone listening ????

Yes, they are. They're in the dozens of other existing threads discussing the exact same things.

[scheivlak]

HUMBERMAN, on 28 Sept 2015 - 21:12, said:

 How can we be in a situation where the likes of Alonso is an 'also ran’ and Button a great racer is tail end charlie?

 

Take a look at e.g. Bruce McLaren and Dan Gurney in 1966, Jack Brabham in 1968, Jody Scheckter, Gilles Villeneuve and Mario Andretti in 1980, Jacques Villeneuve in 1999.

[scheivlak]

HUMBERMAN, on 28 Sept 2015 - 21:12, said:

 

How about a brand new formula; FORMULA PLUS, so long as the car has 4 wheels they can use whatever tyres, engines, fuel, aerodynamics etc etc they like. 

 

And have a look at CanAm 1972-1973 and the end.

[johnmhinds]

Quote

 

 

How about a brand new formula; FORMULA PLUS, so long as the car has 4 wheels they can use whatever tyres, engines, fuel, aerodynamics etc etc they like.

 

 

I don't think you know what the word "Formula" means in motor racing.

 

A series with no regulations would not be described as a formula racing series.

Edited by johnmhinds, 28 September 2015 - 23:17.

[917k]

johnmhinds, on 28 Sept 2015 - 23:14, said:

I don't think you know what the word "Formula" means in motor racing.

 

A series with no regulations would not be described as a formula racing series.

 

A series with no regs. would be Formula; None...

Edited by 917k, 28 September 2015 - 23:36.

[RealRacing]

Listening, yes.

 

Open is not viable. They just have to fix certain things. It's relatively easy. They can't or won't.

 

F 1.2 would be great and if anyone ever was going for it, now would be a good moment, strategy wise. If the rules are sound and they manage to include some decent teams and drivers I'll be the first to watch and support.

[Lotusseven]

HUMBERMAN, on 28 Sept 2015 - 21:12, said:

 

 'Someone' continues to make easydosh out of F1 and wants to do things his way in spite of us fans witnessing its slow and inevitable death.

 

 How can we be in a situation where the likes of Alonso is an 'also ran’ and Button a great racer is tail end charlie?

Completely insane engine supply problems, no development allowed during the season...what’s happening here?  How can this be the pinnacle of RACING when the drivers are instructed to slow down because of fuel loads and tyre limitations. Hello.....is anyone listening ????

 

How about a brand new formula; FORMULA PLUS, so long as the car has 4 wheels they can use whatever tyres, engines, fuel, aerodynamics etc etc they like. How I would love the see racing like that but of course it will never happen, sadly.

 

 

I agree that the current F1 is outworn in many aspects. I was actually thinking about a brand new "Formula 1GP Top Notch" but with another CEO yesterday (and close to do a tread about it, but for some strange reasons when I do a new topic to discuss things if often ends like a parody, piffle and locked.)

 

I think we will have a new  "Formula 1 GP Top Notch"  in the future (2020 - 2025) with very diffrent cars from today. I´m sure you have seen all the concept F1 cars.

[SR388]

Let's fix F1 by making it 10x more expensive. Let's solve the issue of lack of parity by removing all parity.

The ideas presented make no sense.

[Radoye]

johnmhinds, on 28 Sept 2015 - 23:14, said:

I don't think you know what the word "Formula" means in motor racing.

 

A series with no regulations would not be described as a formula racing series.

 

 

917k, on 28 Sept 2015 - 23:36, said:

A series with no regs. would be Formula; None...

 

Formula Libre

[RottenAli]

Bring back the 3 litre rule and the DFV. Only configuration V8, V10 and V12. No turbos. Maximum 200 litres of fuel. Only steel disc brakes. Gearboxes with maximum 5 forward gears and a reverse. Slim down the rule book on aero restrictions by half. Cap each teams' on-circuit staff to about 30 persons. Allow teams to enter as either one, two or three car teams. Maximum 18 races, all having to be at least 200 miles distance (including the parade lap)

[Mat13]

HUMBERMAN, on 28 Sept 2015 - 21:12, said:

'Someone' continues to make easydosh out of F1 and wants to do things his way in spite of us fans witnessing its slow and inevitable death.

How can we be in a situation where the likes of Alonso is an 'also ran’ and Button a great racer is tail end charlie?
Completely insane engine supply problems, no development allowed during the season...what’s happening here? How can this be the pinnacle of RACING when the drivers are instructed to slow down because of fuel loads and tyre limitations. Hello.....is anyone listening ????

How about a brand new formula; FORMULA PLUS, so long as the car has 4 wheels they can use whatever tyres, engines, fuel, aerodynamics etc etc they like. How I would love the see racing like that but of course it will never happen, sadly.

WEC.

[KOMORI]

Start a new series with 1.7L, TWIN turbo V7 engines! Also using an MGU-H, K and a revolutionary MGU-A, run by a propeller mounted above the roll hoop. We could run two drivers per car but when a driver is not in the car he's got to ride a stationary bike: the harder he works the more electrickery he's allowed when behind the wheel...

Just jokes of course. Bernie owns F1, and will until he retires/dies. So we watch it and put up with it I guess..

[drionita]

RottenAli, on 29 Sept 2015 - 05:09, said:

Bring back the 3 litre rule and the DFV. Only configuration V8, V10 and V12. No turbos. Maximum 200 litres of fuel. Only steel disc brakes. Gearboxes with maximum 5 forward gears and a reverse. Slim down the rule book on aero restrictions by half. Cap each teams' on-circuit staff to about 30 persons. Allow teams to enter as either one, two or three car teams. Maximum 18 races, all having to be at least 200 miles distance (including the parade lap)

 

Why can't we bring back good old BenHur chariots and their spectacular head2head racing?

Just jokin' but hey, let's move on. Every formula we've seen in the last 30-40 years was reflecting (following or anticipating) the automotive zeitgeist. In the 70s we were descovering turbocharged engines and its excicting peaks of power, and so F1. By the half of 80s we turned to n/a engines for safety reasons, and the automotive world turned to all those petrol 16 valve engine, alomost leaving the turbos for diesels. We enjoyed a long n/a era, but lately small turbo engines were springing again in the ranges of many car manufacturers. Join this with the "green line" and hybrid novelties and you have what F1 uses nowadays. I too hate the overruling but righteous safety issues and showbiz laws request this kind of habit. We cannot guess what F1 will be like in the next 50 years but I'm pretty sure that in 2075 someone will be moaning about the lack of show in F1 and "Hey, let's bring back 1,6T-HY engines"

[goldenboy]

Haha even though what you propose may not be possible and is ridiculed, I feel your pain!

[HUMBERMAN]

scheivlak, on 28 Sept 2015 - 22:32, said:

Take a look at e.g. Bruce McLaren and Dan Gurney in 1966, Jack Brabham in 1968, Jody Scheckter, Gilles Villeneuve and Mario Andretti in 1980, Jacques Villeneuve in 1999.

What point are you making?

[beqa16v]

HUMBERMAN, on 28 Sept 2015 - 21:12, said:

 

 'Someone' continues to make easydosh out of F1 and wants to do things his way in spite of us fans witnessing its slow and inevitable death.

 

 How can we be in a situation where the likes of Alonso is an 'also ran’ and Button a great racer is tail end charlie?

Completely insane engine supply problems, no development allowed during the season...what’s happening here?  How can this be the pinnacle of RACING when the drivers are instructed to slow down because of fuel loads and tyre limitations. Hello.....is anyone listening ????

 

How about a brand new formula; FORMULA PLUS, so long as the car has 4 wheels they can use whatever tyres, engines, fuel, aerodynamics etc etc they like. How I would love the see racing like that but of course it will never happen, sadly.

 

You would run out of money in no time. Teams would go bankrupt etc etc. How people fail to understand that more open the competition is, more money it needs. Your proposal would ruin the competition fully, gaps will be huge. But you will not be able to start such series first of all even if you had not F1 at all. Nobody would like to be part of it. We have a crisis here, and in crisis heavier regulations are required, completely opposite to what you suggest. FIA should stop asking teams their opinions all the time because teams opinions are based on their interests, not interests of the sport. I would do the following:

1. Get rid of hybrid bullshit for a while, 1.6 turbos with same power, impose artificial engine parity!

2. Better tires, ones which allow drivers to attack for some time then start to go off, not this progressive degradation.

3. Limit things drivers control from the cockpit to absolute minimum possible for safe running.

4. standard front and rear wings, standard diffusers

5. Keep DRS

6. standard brake systems end many small parts like alternators, ignition, engine control units etc etc.

7. wider cars and artificially impose maximum car and wheelbase length for shorter and more nimble cars thus more exciting racing

8. Ban wind tunnels

9. some testing on selected tracks during the season after racing weekends.

 

It will be cheaper and more exciting racing compared to all out arms race where one team dominates all the time anyway

[HUMBERMAN]

KOMORI, on 29 Sept 2015 - 06:02, said:

Start a new series with 1.7L, TWIN turbo V7 engines! Also using an MGU-H, K and a revolutionary MGU-A, run by a propeller mounted above the roll hoop. We could run two drivers per car but when a driver is not in the car he's got to ride a stationary bike: the harder he works the more electrickery he's allowed when behind the wheel...

Just jokes of course. Bernie owns F1, and will until he retires/dies. So we watch it and put up with it I guess..

We all seem to be taking my Formula plus seriously, surely my point is obvious, F1 is no longer what it should be. What should it be? Well for a start, surely an F1 driver should be 'allowed' to drive hell for leather until he reaches the chequered flag, is that happening, of course it's not, they are being instructed to 'slow down' for goodness sake to conserve tyres, engines, fuel. I wonder what Mansell thinks to today's 'racing?   There's nothing wrong with the drivers, it's the restrictive rules that are making F1 almost unwatchable. I doubt I have missed a race since the 1960's so I have witnessed real racing.  Why can't our furious protestations hit the target?

[HUMBERMAN]

beqa16v, on 29 Sept 2015 - 07:51, said:

You would run out of money in no time. Teams would go bankrupt etc etc. How people fail to understand that more open the competition is, more money it needs. Your proposal would ruin the competition fully, gaps will be huge. But you will not be able to start such series first of all even if you had not F1 at all. Nobody would like to be part of it. We have a crisis here, and in crisis heavier regulations are required, completely opposite to what you suggest. FIA should stop asking teams their opinions all the time because teams opinions are based on their interests, not interests of the sport. I would do the following:

1. Get rid of hybrid bullshit for a while, 1.6 turbos with same power, impose artificial engine parity!

2. Better tires, ones which allow drivers to attack for some time then start to go off, not this progressive degradation.

3. Limit things drivers control from the cockpit to absolute minimum possible for safe running.

4. standard front and rear wings, standard diffusers

5. Keep DRS

6. standard brake systems end many small parts like alternators, ignition, engine control units etc etc.

7. wider cars and artificially impose maximum car and wheelbase length for shorter and more nimble cars thus more exciting racing

8. Ban wind tunnels

9. some testing on selected tracks during the season after racing weekends.

 

It will be cheaper and more exciting racing compared to all out arms race where one team dominates all the time anyway

So no room for development then?

[scheivlak]

HUMBERMAN, on 29 Sept 2015 - 07:43, said:

What point are you making?

Take a guess 

[pdac]

HUMBERMAN, on 28 Sept 2015 - 21:12, said:

 

 'Someone' continues to make easydosh out of F1 and wants to do things his way in spite of us fans witnessing its slow and inevitable death.

 

Things are only easy if people allow it. Easy dosh because people pay up and grumble rather than voting with their pockets.

 

HUMBERMAN, on 28 Sept 2015 - 21:12, said:

How can we be in a situation where the likes of Alonso is an 'also ran’ and Button a great racer is tail end charlie?

Completely insane engine supply problems, no development allowed during the season...what’s happening here?  How can this be the pinnacle of RACING when the drivers are instructed to slow down because of fuel loads and tyre limitations. Hello.....is anyone listening ????

 

That's probably down to having  committies deciding the rules rather than just having a single all-powerful body dictating what will be.

 

HUMBERMAN, on 28 Sept 2015 - 21:12, said:

How about a brand new formula; FORMULA PLUS, so long as the car has 4 wheels they can use whatever tyres, engines, fuel, aerodynamics etc etc they like. How I would love the see racing like that but of course it will never happen, sadly.

 

It would be really nice but, sadly, in reality it's impossible. Too few people do things for the love of the sport now. Everyone wants their cut and everyone is trying to get a bigger cut. The money just would not be there.

[beqa16v]

HUMBERMAN, on 29 Sept 2015 - 07:57, said:

So no room for development then?

We have a crisis at our hands. Development should be limited as development = lots of money.

[V8 Fireworks]

Radoye, on 29 Sept 2015 - 01:01, said:

Formula Libre

 

However such a cars as built by amateurs, cobbled together out of motorcycle bits, tubeframes or bits of old formula racing cars, with low budgets and raced in club competitions.

 

Such a car made by Red Bull Technologies would be something to behold. 

[HUMBERMAN]

beqa16v, on 29 Sept 2015 - 08:52, said:

We have a crisis at our hands. Development should be limited as development = lots of money.

Well I hope we are not pulling in opposite directions too much my friend but I really would like to see some real racing again before I falls of me perch!  Surely if 'development should be limited' because of cash constraints we are not getting full on racing therefore it should not be called formula ONE?

I do understand what you mean but my mantra would be "if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen". If cash is restricting full on racing then.... we are simple not getting 'full on racing'.  I want full blast/skilled Mansell type RACING and not the current yuppie go easy procession, don't you?

[beqa16v]

HUMBERMAN, on 29 Sept 2015 - 16:29, said:

Well I hope we are not pulling in opposite directions too much my friend but I really would like to see some real racing again before I falls of me perch!  Surely if 'development should be limited' because of cash constraints we are not getting full on racing therefore it should not be called formula ONE?

I do understand what you mean but my mantra would be "if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen". If cash is restricting full on racing then.... we are simple not getting 'full on racing'.  I want full blast/skilled Mansell type RACING and not the current yuppie go easy procession, don't you?

What I proposed does not kill hard racing, in fact it will encourage more hard racing on track. What you propose will not be sustainable today. You will run out of teams on the grid.

[Volcano70]

I almost mentioned Formula Libre..

[Lennat]

To be a viable alternative, it would have to be cheaper and more extreme (=exiting) than F1 at the same time.

 

The logical thing would be screaming V10 engines, something like a spec 2005-ish Cosworth would be fine, but scare away all manufacturers, which makes it tricky... No matter what, they would have to be louder and more powerful than anything else.

 

Car wise I would like something resembling a modern version of an early '90s F1 car, wide, light, nimble and fast. 

 

They would HAVE to be faster than the current F1 cars for anyone to care, and make it something else than another GP2/Indycar/Super Formula/whatever.

 

And to really work, they would need top drivers (at least Alonso, Vettel and Hamilton) and Ferrari. 

[beqa16v]

Lennat, on 29 Sept 2015 - 20:30, said:

To be a viable alternative, it would have to be cheaper and more extreme (=exiting) than F1 at the same time.

 

The logical thing would be screaming V10 engines, something like a spec 2005-ish Cosworth would be fine, but scare away all manufacturers, which makes it tricky... No matter what, they would have to be louder and more powerful than anything else.

 

Car wise I would like something resembling a modern version of an early '90s F1 car, wide, light, nimble and fast. 

 

They would HAVE to be faster than the current F1 cars for anyone to care, and make it something else than another GP2/Indycar/Super Formula/whatever.

 

And to really work, they would need top drivers (at least Alonso, Vettel and Hamilton) and Ferrari. 

 

Agree completely for last 3 points. Cars have to be wider and shorter to be nimble, that is easily possible by regulations.

They can lure in retired or closed to retirement F1 stars. ALO, RAI, BUT, MAS, MON.

 

One could implement all these rules in F1 and leave development of other series like formule E

[DampMongoose]

scheivlak, on 28 Sept 2015 - 22:32, said:

Take a look at e.g. Bruce McLaren and Dan Gurney in 1966, Jack Brabham in 1968, Jody Scheckter, Gilles Villeneuve and Mario Andretti in 1980, Jacques Villeneuve in 1999.

 

Add Alan Jones in '83, '85 and '86.  And maybe Lauda in '79.

[Gyno]

Try to get it in your HEADS people.

Teams will spend all the money they can no matter what.

Only thing that will stop them doing it is a Budget Cap.

 

If a current team has 400m to use over a season they will use all of that money.

Another team only has 100m and they will also use every single dime of that money.

No matter if we have open rules or not, or unlimited testing or no limits on engines.

 

They will still find a way to spend that money.

They them self  have admitted to this simple little fact, if they cant spend it anymore on 1 thing then they will spend it on another thing.

 

 

Only Way to limit spending is to Introduce a BUDGET CAP.

[RedBaron]

Formula 1 World Champion.

 

Nothing else would carry such weight as that title. The history, the great names who raced in the past.

 

You could create a new series and it might be exactly that the fans want, but the championship would hold almost no value.  

[Glengavel]

scheivlak, on 28 Sept 2015 - 22:32, said:

Take a look at e.g. Bruce McLaren and Dan Gurney in 1966, Jack Brabham in 1968, Jody Scheckter, Gilles Villeneuve and Mario Andretti in 1980, Jacques Villeneuve in 1999.

 

I think everyone was an also-ran in 1966, meanwhile the expected 'also-ran' waltzed off with the title.

[Henri Greuter]

Lennat, on 29 Sept 2015 - 20:30, said:

To be a viable alternative, it would have to be cheaper and more extreme (=exiting) than F1 at the same time.

 

The logical thing would be screaming V10 engines, something like a spec 2005-ish Cosworth would be fine, but scare away all manufacturers, which makes it tricky... No matter what, they would have to be louder and more powerful than anything else.

 

Car wise I would like something resembling a modern version of an early '90s F1 car, wide, light, nimble and fast. 

 

They would HAVE to be faster than the current F1 cars for anyone to care, and make it something else than another GP2/Indycar/Super Formula/whatever.

 

And to really work, they would need top drivers (at least Alonso, Vettel and Hamilton) and Ferrari. 

 

First of all: going back in time to the V10 doesn't solve a number of issues right now in F1 of which the origins can be found in the era of the V10 because they came into existance because of the V10 performances and have evolved over time well into and over the V8 and current V6 period. Few seem to keep an eye on that other than the blind eye because of that obsession with the V10 noise that needs to come back no matter what.

 

But....

 

This isn't the first post I read in which there is talk about bringing back the V10 and naming Cosworth.

 

Why oh why o why is it that just about every time the begging and insisting for V10s back just about everyone wants that Cosworth and speaks about the Cosworth and does not ask for all the other V10s that once were? WHY COSWORTH and primarily COSWORTH ????  Do people out here have shares and stakes in Cosworth or so?

Or is it because they are the ones that had no factory involvement?

 

Well

If it has to be V10 but also non factory V10 can I then list another long forgotten option?

The Hart V10.....

 

Henri

Edited by Henri Greuter, 30 September 2015 - 11:24.

[AGP]

Think there should of been a budget cap on expenditures for the new engine format beforehand. It's to late to try to rectify the situation after the horse has bolted. Not sure how much Mercedes spent did see one poster say it was over $500mil if that's the case it's crazy there was not cap on this.

Edited by AGP, 30 September 2015 - 11:28.

[Henri Greuter]

Gyno, on 30 Sept 2015 - 09:32, said:

Try to get it in your HEADS people.

Teams will spend all the money they can no matter what.

Only thing that will stop them doing it is a Budget Cap.

 

If a current team has 400m to use over a season they will use all of that money.

Another team only has 100m and they will also use every single dime of that money.

No matter if we have open rules or not, or unlimited testing or no limits on engines.

 

They will still find a way to spend that money.

They them self  have admitted to this simple little fact, if they cant spend it anymore on 1 thing then they will spend it on another thing.

 

 

Only Way to limit spending is to Introduce a BUDGET CAP.

 

 

 

Budget caps won't work either. Factory teams will always find a way around that.

Engine builders can have done research by another company part of the concern they ar part of as an excuse for the proverbal toe-in-the-water.

Think about Alfa doing development opn hybrid technology onto racing engines and sharing the knowledge with Ferrari.

 

Spec series is the only thing that works and even then there are some option left for obtaining "the unfair advantage"......

 

 

 

Henri

[Retrofly]

Drivers have always managed fuel and tires, through all ages of F1.

[TheRacingElf]

RedBaron, on 30 Sept 2015 - 09:46, said:

Formula 1 World Champion.

 

Nothing else would carry such weight as that title. The history, the great names who raced in the past.

 

You could create a new series and it might be exactly that the fans want, but the championship would hold almost no value.  

The first years it probably won't indeed.

But if we take a look at Darts you'll see it can work. Nowadays the unofficial PDC World Championship is ranked way higher than the official BDO World Championship

[Henri Greuter]

AGP, on 30 Sept 2015 - 11:28, said:

Think there should of been a budget cap on expenditures for the new engine format beforehand. It's to late to try to rectify the situation after the horse has bolted. Not sure how much Mercedes spent did see one poster say it was over $500mil if that's the case it's crazy there was not cap on this.

 

 

if I remember my classic correct then I have once read that Honda had spend such an amount of money already back in the mid 80s before they became successful from late 1985 on.....

 

 

Henri

[thegforcemaybewithyou]

Retrofly, on 30 Sept 2015 - 11:29, said:

Drivers have always managed fuel and tires, through all ages of F1.

 

And that's exactly how it should be again. Drivers, not engineers/software!

[Gyno]

Henri Greuter, on 30 Sept 2015 - 11:28, said:

Budget caps won't work either. Factory teams will always find a way around that.

Engine builders can have done research by another company part of the concern they ar part of as an excuse for the proverbal toe-in-the-water.

Think about Alfa doing development opn hybrid technology onto racing engines and sharing the knowledge with Ferrari.

 

Spec series is the only thing that works and even then there are some option left for obtaining "the unfair advantage"......

 

 

 

Henri

 

So Budget caps wont work.

The teams will find loopholes and keep throwing money away.

What they are doing Now doesn't work either.

 

So we are left with, open up the rule book and let the teams Do what ever they want.

Let them keep spending all their money on things they want to spend it on.

introduce Cheap but Powerful engine options supplied by Cosworth or some other engine manufactor.

These could be.

N/A V12's

N/A V10's

V8 with Turbos.

 

Ferrari Mercedes Renault Honda would of course make their own engines and there would be NO regulations on what type of engine they make.

Only Rule would be that you must get the same fuel from a Fuel station.

They could of course just go with a cheap Turbo V8 engine and spend their money on something else instead.

 

This would mean they would come up with something new and they could keep developing it, at the same time the smaller teams could opt for going with a Powerful but Cheap engine.

They would save tons of money on the engine side and could invest it in making the car better and have a chance to actually make it big 1 day.

They could spend it on TESTING the car all year round.

Sure the big teams will outspend them and do it all but now they could actually come up with something groundbreaking and take a leap forward.

Instead of being stuck in back or mid field until they go bankrupt.

 

Only thing that should be limited is the aeroside.

Front and rear wings should be just 1 plane and maybe even supplied by the governing body.

So that all have the same rear and front wings.

Other then that let them do what they want.

[Fisico54]

HUMBERMAN, on 29 Sept 2015 - 07:55, said:

We all seem to be taking my Formula plus seriously, surely my point is obvious, F1 is no longer what it should be. What should it be? Well for a start, surely an F1 driver should be 'allowed' to drive hell for leather until he reaches the chequered flag, is that happening, of course it's not, they are being instructed to 'slow down' for goodness sake to conserve tyres, engines, fuel. I wonder what Mansell thinks to today's 'racing? There's nothing wrong with the drivers, it's the restrictive rules that are making F1 almost unwatchable. I doubt I have missed a race since the 1960's so I have witnessed real racing. Why can't our furious protestations hit the target?

You're describing a mythical F1 that never existed. Even in the glory years of the 80s cars were never driven flat out from lights to flag

[BlinkyMcSquinty]

Over 1,300 HP

 

[Radoye]

Henri Greuter, on 30 Sept 2015 - 11:28, said:

Budget caps won't work either. Factory teams will always find a way around that.

Engine builders can have done research by another company part of the concern they ar part of as an excuse for the proverbal toe-in-the-water.

Think about Alfa doing development opn hybrid technology onto racing engines and sharing the knowledge with Ferrari.

 

Spec series is the only thing that works and even then there are some option left for obtaining "the unfair advantage"......

 

 

 

Henri

 

For a while not i've been pondering an idea of Open Source F1:

 

- There would be a basic standard rolling chassis and engine provided to new teams in year 1 of their participation in the championship for a nominal cost (relatively cheap).

 

- All teams are free to purchase or produce additional copies of the provided chassis / engine combo and its individual components, to modify them any way they like, as much as they like, or develop their own - anything goes. Any modification of an existing component or a newly developed component has to be homologated before being legal to race.

 

- The homologation process would among other things like testing for safety also involve making all blueprints and data related to the homologated part public domain - other competitors are then free to copy and further modify it and adapt it for their own use (after they homologate it as well).

 

- All setup data is publicly shared every time a car leaves the pits and heads to the track. The governing body can randomly choose to scrutinize a car as it returns to the pits to verify the accuracy of the provided setup info.

 

Basically, the rationale here is to have a ruleset as open as possible, to encourage the out-of-box thinking and fresh new ideas. But, on the other hand, making everything immediately public domain and openly shared with all other competitors should somewhat demotivate people from sinking insane amounts of money into R&D - what's the point, when your competition will have access to it pretty much immediately as you do, for zero cost?

Edited by Radoye, 30 September 2015 - 14:58.

[itsgreen84]

The deaths will be glorious...

[KingTiger]

Radoye, on 30 Sept 2015 - 14:57, said:

For a while not i've been pondering an idea of Open Source F1:

 

- There would be a basic standard rolling chassis and engine provided to new teams in year 1 of their participation in the championship for a nominal cost (relatively cheap).

 

- All teams are free to purchase or produce additional copies of the provided chassis / engine combo and its individual components, to modify them any way they like, as much as they like, or develop their own - anything goes. Any modification of an existing component or a newly developed component has to be homologated before being legal to race.

 

- The homologation process would among other things like testing for safety also involve making all blueprints and data related to the homologated part public domain - other competitors are then free to copy and further modify it and adapt it for their own use (after they homologate it as well).

 

- All setup data is publicly shared every time a car leaves the pits and heads to the track. The governing body can randomly choose to scrutinize a car as it returns to the pits to verify the accuracy of the provided setup info.

 

Basically, the rationale here is to have a ruleset as open as possible, to encourage the out-of-box thinking and fresh new ideas. But, on the other hand, making everything immediately public domain and openly shared with all other competitors should somewhat demotivate people from sinking insane amounts of money into R&D - what's the point, when your competition will have access to it pretty much immediately as you do, for zero cost?

 

Big teams won't join a series where they can't spend more to win and must share all of their data. Viewers won't watch motorsport without big names. TV stations won't pick up a race series without big names or fan support. 

 

So such a series will never get anywhere. Besides, most regulations are there for safety reasons, not because the FIA hate designers or anything like that. 

[Fastcake]

Henri Greuter, on 30 Sept 2015 - 11:24, said:

But....

 

This isn't the first post I read in which there is talk about bringing back the V10 and naming Cosworth.

 

Why oh why o why is it that just about every time the begging and insisting for V10s back just about everyone wants that Cosworth and speaks about the Cosworth and does not ask for all the other V10s that once were? WHY COSWORTH and primarily COSWORTH ????  Do people out here have shares and stakes in Cosworth or so?

Or is it because they are the ones that had no factory involvement?

 

Well

If it has to be V10 but also non factory V10 can I then list another long forgotten option?

The Hart V10.....

 

Henri

 

I think there is some sort of belief that if Cosworth were an engine supplier again they would provide engines at a lower cost than any of the manufacturers. However, people seem to have not realised that as Cosworth is an engineering business, not a car manufacturer, they simply do not have the money themselves to put towards a modern-day engine programme for Formula One. They'll likely want to rejoin F1 and make one of course, but someone will have to be picking up the bill, and if you're wanting an open development formula with V10s or whatever, the manufacturers with large budgets to subsidise the engines could provide them to customers at a fraction of the cost.

 

Now a spec engine sure, Cosworth could provide a cheaper V10, but well I don't think many people would want that.

 

Gyno, on 30 Sept 2015 - 12:23, said:

So we are left with, open up the rule book and let the teams Do what ever they want.

Let them keep spending all their money on things they want to spend it on.

introduce Cheap but Powerful engine options supplied by Cosworth or some other engine manufactor.

These could be.

N/A V12's

N/A V10's

V8 with Turbos.

 

Ferrari Mercedes Renault Honda would of course make their own engines and there would be NO regulations on what type of engine they make.

Only Rule would be that you must get the same fuel from a Fuel station.

They could of course just go with a cheap Turbo V8 engine and spend their money on something else instead.

 

So you would be happy then if they all decided to use four-cylinder turbo hybrids? And they easily outpace this standard engine you've got Cosworth to provide? 

 

Since you were talking so much about big V10s and free engine choice, I don't want you to be disappointed when your rules mean they'll never appear.

[KingTiger]

V10s were not cheap at all. You don't get a 3L 10 cylinder engine reving at 19k rpm without spending massive amounts of money on parts such as valves. The biggest reason they moved from V10 to V8 was costs. 

[Dan333SP]

Henri Greuter, on 30 Sept 2015 - 11:24, said:

First of all: going back in time to the V10 doesn't solve a number of issues right now in F1 of which the origins can be found in the era of the V10 because they came into existance because of the V10 performances and have evolved over time well into and over the V8 and current V6 period. Few seem to keep an eye on that other than the blind eye because of that obsession with the V10 noise that needs to come back no matter what.

 

But....

 

This isn't the first post I read in which there is talk about bringing back the V10 and naming Cosworth.

 

Why oh why o why is it that just about every time the begging and insisting for V10s back just about everyone wants that Cosworth and speaks about the Cosworth and does not ask for all the other V10s that once were? WHY COSWORTH and primarily COSWORTH ????  Do people out here have shares and stakes in Cosworth or so?

Or is it because they are the ones that had no factory involvement?

 

Well

If it has to be V10 but also non factory V10 can I then list another long forgotten option?

The Hart V10.....

 

Henri

 

Did you ever hear a Hart V10 in person? I liked the V10s, but not that one. It sounded like imminent failure when off throttle, just crackling with this awful note when I heard it in the back of the '99 Arrows. I'd prefer the Merc V10 from '00-'01 with their unique exhaust config that gave it a shriek, if we're picking engines. I have no particularly fond or negative impression of the Cosworth V10 of that era, just that it never had anything unique to its wail.

Back to the topic- An open formula wouldn't work because engineering and technology progressed past the limits of physical ability at some point in probably the late 80s at the dawn of the electronic age. Telling an engineer that a car must only have 4 wheels and leaving the rest up to them would produce a computer-controlled monster with braking and cornering forces that would cause a driver (if they even need one) to black out. Also think of the danger to spectators if you have hyper-cars hitting 300mph headed into a braking zone. It wouldn't take much contact to send something at that velocity into a crowd.

 

Don't forget as well that if you leave regs open for engines, forgetting everything else I mentioned, manufacturers will go for turbos. They're just more efficient at producing maximum power from a given displacement. Sure, it's possible to get them to make a better sound (I'm thinking CART engines), but no one would build a normally aspirated V12 unless it was mandated in the rules and that seems contrary to the intent of the OP.

Edited by Dan333SP, 30 September 2015 - 16:30.