3999 replies to this topic

[Ar558]

As Mercedes dominance continues it is looking much more likely that we will see another rules change in 2017 (tweaks may come for 2016 but anything major will need more lead time). What do you want to see in terms of changes? I would prefer a significant cut in Aero (properly 50% ish is need) a return to the larger rear tyres of the early 90's, nose regulations that force a continuous join at the front like most cars had pre 95).

[mongo580]

V12s and Manual gearboxes. Only one button on the steering wheel!

[Myrvold]

V12s and Manual gearboxes. Only one button on the steering wheel!

 

Two?
1.Start Engine
2.Drink

[RacingDuck]

Two?
1.Start Engine
2.Drink

1. Drink
2. Boost

[MattPete]

- $2mil cap on engine expenses.

- no entry bonds

- Teams can have from 1-3 cars

- teams do not need to be manufacturers

- quality controlled by 107% rule

- profits split evenly among all teams that start 100% of the races in the previous year.

Edited by MattPete, 20 March 2015 - 02:15.

[917k]

Use of one-year old chassis permitted....we need more cars.

[Peter0Scandlyn]

V12s and Manual gearboxes. Only one button on the steering wheel!

 

Ahhh. That'd be for the horn?

[RealRacing]

No fuel limits.

Tyres that allow close to 100% pushing for their operating window.

No mandatory use of compounds.

No parc ferme rules.

Narrower, simpler front wings.

Reduced turbulence behind cars.

No brake by wire.

No DRS.

One tyre set per race (maybe).

Ban TOs again.

Spare cars.

Restart race completely if more than 4 cars out due to crash within first x laps. Allow spare car use of course.

No podium interviews.

No fixed rules within teams of pit order or whatever. Driver calls his own strategy.

Grass or walls instead of concrete in run-off areas.

Either agree to reduce costs, distribute income equally or allow big teams three cars and forget about small teams.

107% rule or similar.

Qualy is one hour, everybody can run as many times as they want, use whatever tyres they want.

Any engineer, TP or other who tells the driver over the radio, "save fuel, tyres, engine, gearbox or any other" is shot.

[mongo580]

Fan boost!

[Darren1]

No fuel limits.

Tyres that allow close to 100% pushing for their operating window.

No mandatory use of compounds.

No parc ferme rules.

Narrower, simpler front wings.

Reduced turbulence behind cars.

No brake by wire.

No DRS.

One tyre set per race (maybe).

Ban TOs again.

Spare cars.

Restart race completely if more than 4 cars out due to crash within first x laps. Allow spare car use of course.

No podium interviews.

No fixed rules within teams of pit order or whatever. Driver calls his own strategy.

Grass or walls instead of concrete in run-off areas.

Either agree to reduce costs, distribute income equally or allow big teams three cars and forget about small teams.

107% rule or similar.

Qualy is one hour, everybody can run as many times as they want, use whatever tyres they want.

Any engineer, TP or other who tells the driver over the radio, "save fuel, tyres, engine, gearbox or any other" is shot.

And the term "Qually" is banned, and people who use it are shot with the engineers   

[Donkey]

Ballast and reduced fuel limit depending on position in championship.

[cokata]

Ballast and reduced fuel limit depending on position in championship.

Ewww, worst idea ever. Keep that BOP BS in GT cars. F1 is not and will never be a spec series.

[SenorSjon]

Ballast and reduced fuel limit depending on position in championship.

 

Ah succes ballast and more fuel saving. Just no.

[oetzi]

Ban pit to car radio. Replace with two big lights, one for 'pit' and one for 'park it now'.

Edited by oetzi, 20 March 2015 - 08:50.

[SenorSjon]

You all know this will end up in rules regarding the font size of dials on the steering wheel and that they won't agree on anything else?

[B3ndy]

Just a few ideas from me, I'm trying to be realistic so won't be listing things such as '100% prize fund distribution' or 'stop racing in swamps', thats just not going to happen by 2017.

 

Cost Saving

• Basic spec cars available off the shelf, but you can't buy this and go racing, it would be tub, transmission etc, just the basics, teams would have to bolt on aero but...
• Reduced aero, everywhere. Someone did mention the price of a new front wing on this forum once, insane for tiny gains. The goal is to try and de-escalate the aero arms race, allow the teams a number of aero mods per year.
• You want to be an engine manufacturer in F1? Thats nice, costs have to be reduced. Needs more thought as to how this can be achieved but needs attention.
• 1, 2 or 3 car teams, who cares.

Improving Racing

• More mechanical grip, its cheaper, looks good.
• Keep DRS, make it more effective, but limit its use. This turns DRS into something that can be saved up until that important moment. Adds excitement, but anyone can use DRS in the DRS zone, not just the chasing car.
• Quali is a single season, right now its a complete turn off for people new to the sport. People just don't really understand it.
• Simplify tyres, a racing slick, a inter and wet, thats it. You have to use two sets of racing slicks in a race.
• Spare cars, if your car blows up, you can run back to the pits and get into the spare, get back out there! Problem with something, hop in the spare, the change over would be great to watch and the time penalty of changing cars would be bad enough.
• If the engine manufactures can't reduce their costs then at least allow in season testing for engines. Right now it costs a fortune and you might end up with a steaming pile of crap, I understand why Red Bull are annoyed.

Improving The Show

• One day FOM will realise that they can make a FORTUNE by controlling their own distribution. Put it on Pay-Per-View if you want, but make it available as apps on the Xbox, Playstation, iPad, YouTube, smart TVs, a little like the NBA. Sell season passes.
• Highlights everywhere for free, increasing coverage increases eyes on sponsors both on cars and pre and post roll ads on the stream. Give the next generation of fans access.
• Garage 56 experimental car, a team can run an experimental car at a number of events. It starts at the back and only the driver gets the points. So Nissan want to come in to F1, let them showcase what they think they can do and let innovation drive the regs.
• Arnie interviewing, all of the time.
• Break the season into three sections, Europe, Asia, ROW. There would still be an overall champion but individual series can also be won. Teams just want to enter 1 or 2 series, well thats ok as well.

I'm sure I can think of more, some of this is no doubt crazy.

Edited by B3ndy, 20 March 2015 - 09:29.

[alfa1]

For 2017, I want to see more new threads started asking people what rule changes they'd make if they were in charge.

We never have them.

Ever.

 

Edit - oh wait, there are 9 of them on the first two pages.

Edited by alfa1, 20 March 2015 - 10:06.

[CountDooku]

Keep the current formula. The racing is the best it's been for years. A few tweaks though for aesthetics and to make the cars more challenging:

-Increase the fuel allowance per race by 20%
-Increase the fuel flow limit by 20%. Also allow the peak flow to only be accessed at 15k RPM. This will force the engines to rev higher.
-6 engines and gearboxes per season. Align their cycles but keep the current format that allows components to be changed race by race.
-Wider rear tyres. Make all tyres slightly softer.
-Lower and slightly wider rear wing, for better interaction with the diffuser. Also looks better.
-Force waste gates to vent separately from the exhaust in a chimney behind the roll hoop. Whoooosh.
-Ban Christian Horner.

Simples!

[PaulMeoff]

Just a few ideas from me, I'm trying to be realistic so won't be listing things such as '100% prize fund distribution' or 'stop racing in swamps', thats just not going to happen by 2017.

 

Cost Saving

• Basic spec cars available off the shelf, but you can't buy this and go racing, it would be tub, transmission etc, just the basics, teams would have to bolt on aero but...
• Reduced aero, everywhere. Someone did mention the price of a new front wing on this forum once, insane for tiny gains. The goal is to try and de-escalate the aero arms race, allow the teams a number of aero mods per year.
• You want to be an engine manufacturer in F1? Thats nice, costs have to be reduced. Needs more thought as to how this can be achieved but needs attention.
• 1, 2 or 3 car teams, who cares.

Improving Racing

• More mechanical grip, its cheaper, looks good.
• Keep DRS, make it more effective, but limit its use. This turns DRS into something that can be saved up until that important moment. Adds excitement, but anyone can use DRS in the DRS zone, not just the chasing car.
• Quali is a single season, right now its a complete turn off for people new to the sport. People just don't really understand it.
• Simplify tyres, a racing slick, a inter and wet, thats it. You have to use two sets of racing slicks in a race.
• Spare cars, if your car blows up, you can run back to the pits and get into the spare, get back out there! Problem with something, hop in the spare, the change over would be great to watch and the time penalty of changing cars would be bad enough.
• If the engine manufactures can't reduce their costs then at least allow in season testing for engines. Right now it costs a fortune and you might end up with a steaming pile of crap, I understand why Red Bull are annoyed.

Improving The Show

• One day FOM will realise that they can make a FORTUNE by controlling their own distribution. Put it on Pay-Per-View if you want, but make it available as apps on the Xbox, Playstation, iPad, YouTube, smart TVs, a little like the NBA. Sell season passes.
• Highlights everywhere for free, increasing coverage increases eyes on sponsors both on cars and pre and post roll ads on the stream. Give the next generation of fans access.
• Garage 56 experimental car, a team can run an experimental car at a number of events. It starts at the back and only the driver gets the points. So Nissan want to come in to F1, let them showcase what they think they can do and let innovation drive the regs.
• Arnie interviewing, all of the time.
• Break the season into three sections, Europe, Asia, ROW. There would still be an overall champion but individual series can also be won. Teams just want to enter 1 or 2 series, well thats ok as well.

I'm sure I can think of more, some of this is no doubt crazy.

This is great, can't really fault any of it.

[CountDooku]

Oh and it might be a good thing to get rid of DRS (complicated and expensive) and give following cars within the 1 second window an extra 25-50bhp boost from the MGU-K in designated zones.

Edited by CountDooku, 20 March 2015 - 10:25.

[chrisPB15]

Manual gearchange

No pit radio

Wider tyres

Adjustable wings but have 3 different fixed basic designs to choose from

Widen the circuits (raising the grandstands so cars can run off underneath)

Allow all electric motors with battery changing to compete, perhaps in a separate constructors championship

Edited by chrisPB15, 20 March 2015 - 10:28.

[Jerem]

- standard hybrid engine using bio-fuel

- drivers electrically shocked if they are going too fast

- safety car every 10 laps to improve the show

- drs+fan boost+mushrooms

- FOM-operated, car-mounted oil sprinklers 

- tokens for in-season helmet design changes

[HoldenRT]

Are they already planning ahead for the 2020 regs, in order to fix the screw-ups that will happen in the 2017 changes?  Because this happens everytime.

 

And what will happen if they do hit a sweet spot and everyone is happy?  Will they leave them, or change them again and screw it up again or go backwards?

 

It's like there is an obsessive compulsive need to always be changing things.  Sometimes things that don't even need changing (just for the sake of it).  It'd be funny if one day, they went back to grooved tyres.  Or enabled traction control again.

 

The drivers have a stressful and busy year and are the stars that do the job on track, the reason why people watch in the first place.  The teams are busy working on the cars, especially in the factories but for the FIA and Charlie, it's like they always need to be changing or regulating something in order to feel like they are actually doing a job.  That they are a part of it.  Sitting in a tower and hitting a button at the start of the race can only get you so far.

 

I'm not against change, but there's a lot of silly things.  One really easy example..

 

They try to cut costs.  They are always planning and preparing ahead of the next set of rules, or trying to fix or bandaid the ones they've changed that already don't work.

 

What do constant rule changes do?  They cost more money.

 

FIA doesn't decide the rules on their own, there is big inputs from the teams.  The teams all operate out of self interest.  When one team gets ahead, the others gang up and find ways to chop the others down.  Fuelling even more changes.  Even if they did find a sweet spot of great regulations, and everyone was happy, they'd probably change them again just for competitive reasons.  In some ways it's good to see things 'reset' every few years in order to spice things up, but there's a lot of contradictions and overall it's a bit like an out of control circus where they are all their own worst enemy.  And everyone is so short sighted.  It's a culture that becomes contagious.  For example, even if a new team came in with the best of intentions.. within a few years they'd have to become the same way or they'd be swallowed up.

 

Ferrari is the biggest name in F1, and gets special handouts just for being Ferrari and it was said in the last year or two, they didn't even make a profit.  How embarrassing is that?

[B3ndy]

This is great, can't really fault any of it.

 

Thanks, Bernie, JT, if you are reading I accept the job offer. I better get started soon.

[Geizterfahrer]

As I said earlier in another thread:

 

1. Get rid of the Qualifying. If you have the fastest car at the front and the slowest car at the back, you can't have that much "action" on the track.

 

2. Let the drivers start in reverse order of WDC standings. No one will complain about a dominating team if the drivers have to win every race from the back of the grid.

 

3. Forget about cost caps or ressource restrictions. It's your right to spend as much as you want when you're forced to overtake the whole field for your race win.

 

4. Extend Friday to a proper testing day without engine limit. Teams are at the track anyway. More track testing means less need for expensive wind tunnel testing (small teams can save money).

 

5. Make Saturday afternoon (after another 3 or 4 hour test and the support races) a 2 or 3 hour rookie and test driver practice. Every team is allowed to start with one car, driven by anyone who isn't one of the two regular drivers. No super license required to start. The fastest 3 or 5 drivers get some points for the FIA's new super license system (being in the Top 3 for the whole season should show that you're prepared for F1). Teams like Mercedes could give their seat to drivers like Wehrlein to get some points for their license (he's in DTM which is worth 0 points) and the small teams could sell their seats to rich kids who hope to get into F1 (extra income).

 

That's it. Any changes to the technical regulations are completely optional.

Edited by Geizterfahrer, 20 March 2015 - 11:10.

[SealTheDiffuser]

Ballast and reduced fuel limit depending on position in championship.

 

I see how you got your name.

[noikeee]

Any changes in the coming years should be about damage limitation and cost reduction, rather than reinventing the formula. This means at most some tweaks to the aero and the engines, never scrapping them completely which would force giant investments to start everything from scratch.

 

Maybe increase the number of tokens so that the engine manufacturers that are badly behind can at least catch up, but at the same time force a maximum price tag on providing these engines to the customer teams, whilst also stating that each engine manufacturer must be available to at least provide 3 teams (3 teams x 4 manufacturers = a full grid of 12). F1 can't afford to lose any privateers right now, and several of these teams are on the verge of it, keeping them around and bringing in new teams must be priority #1.

 

Ideally I'd like a few slight changes to the engine formula to increase power (maybe just increase the fuel flow limit), wider cars and tyres, and further simplified aero with further freedom for teams to sell technology to each other, therefore less areas that must be developed by each individual team. The goals would be to make the cars more appealing/aggressive, and to diminish the level of investment necessary to keep a team going at a competitive level, whilst still keeping a in-house development aspect to each team. Problem is any rule change in terms of engines, aero, car dimension, tyre dimensions, even if it saves costs in the long-term, means a substantial initial investment for the first iteration so they need to be really careful with it.

 

Also, here's a bit of a wackier idea. Instead of handicapping teams with success ballast or BOP or whatever other unsporting idea, why not hand out 1 extra testing day for each position in the WCC? So you'd get 1 extra day if you finished 2nd, 2 extra days if you finished 3rd etc, up to maybe 10 days if you're a new team (and maybe a further extra few days if you're a brand new engine manufacturer - to get more of them in). It's still a form of handicapping and the smaller teams wouldn't afford to run those extra days anyway, but at least it's still a very indirect way of handicapping (a week of extra testing guarantees absolutely nothing if you don't do your work well), and it makes it less daunting for any parties new to the sport, or who have failed with their car/engine design horribly in 1 season.

[ANF]

Qualifying: Two sessions instead of three
Tyres: All drivers may start on and use whichever set and compounds they like – no mandatory stops
DRS: Abolished (alternatively, keep the zones but scrap the 1-second-gap rule and allow a limited number of DRS uses)
Aero: Reduced number of front wing elements
Data analysis: Restriction of data transfer between the circuit and team headquarters

[Knowlesy]

First and foremost, a cost cap combined with more of the sport's income being pumped into the teams, equally, with a separate tiered prize fund.

 

Then free up the regs on chassis, engines and testing. Do as much as you want, but don't overspend.

Edited by Knowlesy, 20 March 2015 - 12:19.

[David1976]

1) Mandatory limit on power unit cost.

 

2) Fairer distribution of revenues.  Not communism but at least fairer!

 

3) Wider, grippier tyres.

 

4) 1100hp with driver operated overboost as opposed to DRS.

 

 

[V8 Fireworks]

My thoughts...

 

Chassis

Return to 2.0m width

Rear tyres increased to 18", to improve mechanical grip

 

Aero

Strict aero regulations: two-element front wing, two-element rear wing

Strict restrictions on surface complexity (the cars should have a simple, smooth shape with most vanes, bargeboards etc prohibited)

Flat floor to include the nose cone (i.e., raised nose is banned; four-surface nose extending to front of car)

Increased underbody aero following strict dimensions, with restrictions on surface complexity (simple flat sides to the diffuser)

Return to full-width rear wing for aesthetics

Narrower front wing to improve aesthetics

Removal of DRS (silly band-aid rule)

 

Engine

2.2L Indycar specification twin turbo V6 (to be used for at least four seasons)

Control XTRAC 6-speed semi-automatic gearbox with capped price

Engine lease price to be capped at affordable level

Control hybrid KERS unit to be used (for marketing) - again with capped price (no electrically assisted turbochargers)

 

Pitstops

Refuelling permitted BUT control gravity-fed apparatus must be used

 

Common-sense measures 

Edited by V8 Fireworks, 20 March 2015 - 12:36.

[itsgreen84]

Starter motor inside the car would be nice...

[Jvr]

Making it economically feasible for teams to participate and develop the car is the most important one. Now can this be done through cost cutting rather than through more rightful Concorde Agreement can be debated.

 

Doing away a lot of silly regulation that is currently there supposedly to cut the costs but actually is really hindering the competition. List includes PU and Geabox penalties and limits of use, engine homologation, ban of track testing, limits on gear ratio changes over the season, wind tunnel and CFD restrictions and many more. Also performance limiting restrictions such as amount and consumption rate of fuel as well as energy harvesting limits are in the way of faster more spectacular races.

 

Not sure why people want tougher Aero limitations, more important in my opinion would be to strike a good balance between engine, aero and driver contributions while finding the competitiveness. Too aero dependent formula is bad, too engine dependent formula is bad, driver dependent is always the preferred one.

 

Stop stupid media limitations of publishing videos on social media and on line. Making all history of F1 videos available online with proper search tools.

 

I am not against current hybrid engines as such but the cost of development as well as expenses to the teams are currently astronomical. Perhaps changing the system so that engine manufacturers must bid from FIA the right to make engines available for the non works teams at certain much reasonable cost. Works teams still allowed such as Merc and Ferrari but the customer engine offering is mandatory as well as the cost must be very competitive. Third party engine manufacturers such as Cosworth encouraged to participate to the bidding through subsidies for engine development from the media right holders (Bernie and pals) with the condition they offer the engines on to the market at capped market price.

[Fastcake]

Starter motor inside the car would be nice...

Why would you want that? It'll just add a few more kgs of weight for no purpose.

[Jvr]

Why would you want that? It'll just add a few more kgs of weight for no purpose.

Don't they actually already have MGU-K inside that is a 160 hp starter motor...

[itsgreen84]

Why would you want that? It'll just add a few more kgs of weight for no purpose.

 

I have seen way to many people drop out of races, because the car couldn't be started... could be easily avoided...

 

Also would like teams to designs that can have parts replaced much quicker. It often happens that a problem in FP1 escalates into FP2. What if the FIA demanded that the team must be able to replace certain parts within a certain time and they get tested on that.

 

Replace an ECU in 20 minutes or something, 60 minutes to swap an engine etc etc 

 

Probably not a popular idea, but I like it

[RealRacing]

And the term "Qually" is banned, and people who use it are shot with the engineers   

Especially the term "qually".

[RealRacing]

• More mechanical grip, its cheaper, looks good.
• Keep DRS, make it more effective, but limit its use. This turns DRS into something that can be saved up until that important moment. Adds excitement, but anyone can use DRS in the DRS zone, not just the chasing car.
• Simplify tyres, a racing slick, a inter and wet, thats it. You have to use two sets of racing slicks in a race.

If dependence on aero is reduced and reliance on mechanical grip increased, DRS will probably no longer be needed.

 

Why mandatory use of tyres? Let every team/driver use what's best for them. If someone is able to go a race distance on one set, let them. Make more compounds available per race instead, give them the chance to maximize the strengths of their drivers and their cars.

[Fastcake]

Don't they actually already have MGU-K inside that is a 160 hp starter motor...

 

Do they? I can't say I know whether or not it can be used as a a starter.

 

I have seen way to many people drop out of races, because the car couldn't be started... could be easily avoided...

 

Also would like teams to designs that can have parts replaced much quicker. It often happens that a problem in FP1 escalates into FP2. What if the FIA demanded that the team must be able to replace certain parts within a certain time and they get tested on that.

 

Replace an ECU in 20 minutes or something, 60 minutes to swap an engine etc etc 

 

Probably not a popular idea, but I like it

 

I can't think of many situations where the cause of retirement was a stalled engine. Doesn't seem that big a problem.

[Jvr]

Do they? I can't say I know whether or not it can be used as a a starter.

 

Well, at least due to the technical regulations it is mechanically connected to the crank and with 160 hp at hand, I cannot see why not to use that to start the engine if there is a suitable SW setting available and power in ES to do that.

[B3ndy]

If dependence on aero is reduced and reliance on mechanical grip increased, DRS will probably no longer be needed.

 

Why mandatory use of tyres? Let every team/driver use what's best for them. If someone is able to go a race distance on one set, let them. Make more compounds available per race instead, give them the chance to maximize the strengths of their drivers and their cars.

 

 

I think its important to keep strategy options alive, the undercut for example provides great racing. Plus pit stops are fun, there is occasionally drama, hence my idea for a minimum of two sets to be used in a race.

 

I really didn't like the days of Ferrari and Bridgestone working together to build tyres for MSC's world title defences, it was a dull time in F1. Much better with a single supplier, but scrap the various sets, just keep a race slick that lasts so the drivers can push.

[northanmonkee2]

Given the way the sport is governed regarding rule changes , it's highly unlikely that any major changes
Will take place re finance , different engines , tyre supplier as it takes almost a unanimous decision to change the toilet paper in circuit toilets.
. The big 4 teams will veto any restructuring of finance , Renault , merc , and Honda will want to keep
Hybrid engines , ect ect

Edited by northanmonkee2, 20 March 2015 - 16:33.

[RealRacing]

I think its important to keep strategy options alive, the undercut for example provides great racing. Plus pit stops are fun, there is occasionally drama, hence my idea for a minimum of two sets to be used in a race.

 

I really didn't like the days of Ferrari and Bridgestone working together to build tyres for MSC's world title defences, it was a dull time in F1. Much better with a single supplier, but scrap the various sets, just keep a race slick that lasts so the drivers can push.

Ok, first point. Forcing drivers to use two compounds as it is today, or forcing them to pit stop even if it's a standard tyre limits strategy options instead of keeping them alive. It's when you offer alternatives, i.e., different compounds AND the option of choosing either many stops or no stops at all, that more strategic options effectively arise and are used. In any case, giving the option of no stops doesn't mean everybody will use it and pit stops will still be there. Undercuts IMO are not great racing but a way to avoid racing on track.

 

If you favor a standard tyre, one type only per race, and at least one forced pit stop, maybe a better solution would be to have just one set per race, so no stops. Then everybody would be forced to pass on-track with tyres with roughly the same level of degradation, so the cars would be evenly matched, more than cars with different strategies anyway. Maybe they can even come up with a very hard tyre that allows to push for a race distance. That would improve the racing.

[Spillage]

- Bigger tyres

- Less aerodynamic grip

- Bigger, noisier engines. I've sneered at people who complain about the new noise, but last night I was watching highlights from the 2014 season and man, they sounded so much better. 

 

Those are all technical rules, but the most important thing F1 can do is to equally distribute prize money among teams, a la the NFL. Otherwise we'll be heading in to 2017 with only three manufacturers actually affected by any rule changes.

[Foyle]

3L V12's 13000rpm rev limit, based on 1000cc sports bike engines. No pneumatic valves, minimum weight limits on pistons valves and rods and piston pin and bearing journal diameters as well as a max bore limit and generous minimum weight limit and no direct injection.  All to prevent bleeding edge low mass engine components - and make them durable enough to survive multiple weekends, but allow ring, and occasional valve and bearing replacement (not expensive).  Will restore fantastic sound of V8's with 600hp 1100Hz scream, but will cost a tiny fraction of what they did - perhaps just 1-2 million per car per season.  Keep gearbox rules (8 speed, ratios fixed for season).

 

Ban carbon carbon brakes - use something cheaper and heavier.

 

No fuel saving engine modes allowed.  All cars to start race with a mandated fuel load sufficient for them to go hard all race (no high fuel burn modes allowed).  Removes benefit of fuel saving.

 

at least 3 sets of tyres to be used per race, but revert to tyres that don't drop off so can race hard all race.

 

Add 200hp KERS to keep manufacturers happy with 'road relevant' technology, no per lap use limit, helps to keep fuel load down so that don't need refuelling.

 

Single element front and rear wings.  No concavities on wings or on their end plates - make them bigger to give same down force.  Massively cheaper to develop and build.

 

No concavities on underbody, no rear diffusers - again reduce costs on parts that are frequently damaged.

 

Perhaps mount a big wing on top of airbox pivoted at leading edge with spring loading to provide consistent down force (or less downforce reduction) when following in wake of other cars - could be tweaked to strike right balance between favoring attacker or defender.

 

Allow testing, but only with non-racing drivers less than 25 years old.

 

All of this would still leave some room for development, but the big teams would probably find best value in buying the best drivers.

[B3ndy]

 

 

If you favor a standard tyre, one type only per race, and at least one forced pit stop, maybe a better solution would be to have just one set per race, so no stops. Then everybody would be forced to pass on-track with tyres with roughly the same level of degradation, so the cars would be evenly matched, more than cars with different strategies anyway. Maybe they can even come up with a very hard tyre that allows to push for a race distance. That would improve the racing.

 

Thats a great point, I like that idea.

[sabjit]

Just a few ideas from me, I'm trying to be realistic so won't be listing things such as '100% prize fund distribution' or 'stop racing in swamps', thats just not going to happen by 2017.

 

Cost Saving

• Basic spec cars available off the shelf, but you can't buy this and go racing, it would be tub, transmission etc, just the basics, teams would have to bolt on aero but...
• Reduced aero, everywhere. Someone did mention the price of a new front wing on this forum once, insane for tiny gains. The goal is to try and de-escalate the aero arms race, allow the teams a number of aero mods per year.
• You want to be an engine manufacturer in F1? Thats nice, costs have to be reduced. Needs more thought as to how this can be achieved but needs attention.
• 1, 2 or 3 car teams, who cares.

Improving Racing

• More mechanical grip, its cheaper, looks good.
• Keep DRS, make it more effective, but limit its use. This turns DRS into something that can be saved up until that important moment. Adds excitement, but anyone can use DRS in the DRS zone, not just the chasing car.
• Quali is a single season, right now its a complete turn off for people new to the sport. People just don't really understand it.
• Simplify tyres, a racing slick, a inter and wet, thats it. You have to use two sets of racing slicks in a race.
• Spare cars, if your car blows up, you can run back to the pits and get into the spare, get back out there! Problem with something, hop in the spare, the change over would be great to watch and the time penalty of changing cars would be bad enough.
• If the engine manufactures can't reduce their costs then at least allow in season testing for engines. Right now it costs a fortune and you might end up with a steaming pile of crap, I understand why Red Bull are annoyed.

Improving The Show

• One day FOM will realise that they can make a FORTUNE by controlling their own distribution. Put it on Pay-Per-View if you want, but make it available as apps on the Xbox, Playstation, iPad, YouTube, smart TVs, a little like the NBA. Sell season passes.
• Highlights everywhere for free, increasing coverage increases eyes on sponsors both on cars and pre and post roll ads on the stream. Give the next generation of fans access.
• Garage 56 experimental car, a team can run an experimental car at a number of events. It starts at the back and only the driver gets the points. So Nissan want to come in to F1, let them showcase what they think they can do and let innovation drive the regs.
• Arnie interviewing, all of the time.
• Break the season into three sections, Europe, Asia, ROW. There would still be an overall champion but individual series can also be won. Teams just want to enter 1 or 2 series, well thats ok as well.

I'm sure I can think of more, some of this is no doubt crazy.

 

Whilst if you asked me to vote on this motion as a whole in an F1 commision meeting I wouldn't pass it, there are a few ideas here I agree with. Reducing Aero more, spec parts available cheaply for lower teams, reform DRS and FOM using Social Media and technology more.

[sabjit]

 

- drivers electrically shocked if they are going too fast

 

Do you have any idea what you have just done? You have just made the best suggestion for solving the track limits problem!

[TF110]

Why would anyone want even less aero grip? That will lead to teams making extra complicated front wings and flow conditioners above the radiator inlets like they are now. If they allow a wider car and open up some areas for interpretation, the cars may actually look different and cool. Wider front and rear tires are another thing they should allow. And increase to 15 or 16" wheel diameter. Not this 13" crap currently. Slightly lower profile tires would go a long way for looks.

[MortenF1]

No fuel limits. 

(…..)

Agree with almost everything, but I want loud V8's or V10's back. 

I understand that some form of hybrid technology is probably here to stay, and F1 would look foolish if they went away from it now. There's a limit to how out of touch with the current ideals you can be.

The sports format should go back to basics in plenty of areas, like you've listed - one hour free for all qualifying, no ****ing **** tires designed for the show, that has to be run to a delta time. No delta times in F1 period! 

I would also like sunday warm-up back. Perhaps a 2.8-3 litre V8 would work, 'cause I understand that we can't go back to using engines unlimited, but an engine with relatively large displacement would produce power, AND last several GP-weekends.

I'm undecided on low profile tires, but they would require the teams to develop new suspension lay-outs, completely, and that pushes costs.