Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Bring back in-season testing? (Merged)


  • Please log in to reply
75 replies to this topic

#1 pacificquay

pacificquay
  • Member

  • 5,363 posts
  • Joined: March 07

Posted 01 September 2022 - 21:29

If a team wants to use some budget on track testing, then why not? They’d have to take it from inside their cost cap allowance, so it seems there’s no justification now for restrictions.



Advertisement

#2 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 23,573 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 01 September 2022 - 21:35

Ferrari own their circuit. The others would have to rent. Not fair.

So let’s say Ferrari can’t test at Fiorano….

Problem solved?

Edited by ARTGP, 01 September 2022 - 21:36.


#3 Fonzey

Fonzey
  • Member

  • 618 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 01 September 2022 - 21:35

Good question, I'd personally love to see testing come back but I feel it would be heavily weighted towards those with their own circuit...



#4 New Britain

New Britain
  • Member

  • 5,948 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 01 September 2022 - 21:51

Good question, I'd personally love to see testing come back but I feel it would be heavily weighted towards those with their own circuit...

There could be a standard cost allocated to a test day, regardless of the actual out-of-pocket expense to the team.



#5 jonpollak

jonpollak
  • Member

  • 39,065 posts
  • Joined: March 00

Posted 01 September 2022 - 21:56

YES

Good idea.

Jp



#6 JHSingo

JHSingo
  • Member

  • 8,332 posts
  • Joined: June 13

Posted 01 September 2022 - 21:56

I'd be in support. I've thought for a while that maybe F1 should look at introducing the MotoGP "concessions" system, giving teams that are uncompetitive a chance to catch up with opportunities to test - and, eventually, when you start getting better results, you lose the concessions. 



#7 jonpollak

jonpollak
  • Member

  • 39,065 posts
  • Joined: March 00

Posted 01 September 2022 - 21:57

Wait no...

Bad Idea.

 

for the racing at least.

 

Jp



#8 FLB

FLB
  • Member

  • 24,623 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 01 September 2022 - 22:42

Ferrari own their circuit. The others would have to rent. Not fair.

So let’s say Ferrari can’t test at Fiorano….

Problem solved?

Why would the fact that Enzo Ferrari was a visionnary be 'unfair'?

 

 

Every single issue the Scuderia has been facing has its root in the capital they squandered when they gave up Fiorano.



#9 William Hunt

William Hunt
  • Member

  • 10,237 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 02 September 2022 - 00:15

If a team wants to use some budget on track testing, then why not? They’d have to take it from inside their cost cap allowance, so it seems there’s no justification now for restrictions.

 

No there is justification because on track testing is better as wind tunnel hours and if teams went testing more they could bypass the wind tunnel limitations.

 

Personally I'd rather see new rules alowing test drivers to get mileage (in current cars).



#10 HP

HP
  • Member

  • 19,498 posts
  • Joined: October 99

Posted 02 September 2022 - 03:37

Ferrari own their circuit. The others would have to rent. Not fair.

So let’s say Ferrari can’t test at Fiorano….

Problem solved?

McLaren had a shop near Barcelona in those days, other teams too. So there are practical solutions possible.



#11 w1Y

w1Y
  • Member

  • 9,822 posts
  • Joined: March 16

Posted 02 September 2022 - 03:59

It's not just the track costs is it. Its the PU and the rest of the car. Wouldn't work if they had to do it within current part use allowances or face penalties.

#12 AustinF1

AustinF1
  • Member

  • 18,277 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 02 September 2022 - 04:04

If a team wants to use some budget on track testing, then why not? They’d have to take it from inside their cost cap allowance, so it seems there’s no justification now for restrictions.

I've been saying this for a while now. It makes no sense for in-season testing to be banned when you can budget CFD and tunnel time into your cap. Let the teams decide how best to spend that money. It would also open up opportunities to get young drivers some real seat time before they come up to the big team.



#13 JeePee

JeePee
  • Member

  • 5,485 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 02 September 2022 - 05:22

It's not just the track costs is it. Its the PU and the rest of the car. Wouldn't work if they had to do it within current part use allowances or face penalties.

It would be outside the allowances. They have multiple PU's on the test bench already.

#14 RedRabbit

RedRabbit
  • Member

  • 1,459 posts
  • Joined: August 12

Posted 02 September 2022 - 06:58

Wait no...
Bad Idea.

for the racing at least.

Jp


Disagree - since the testing ban we have had sustained periods of domination like never before, first Red Bull and then Mercedes.

F1 is the least competitive its been for over a decade.

#15 mcjohnson

mcjohnson
  • Member

  • 1,496 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 02 September 2022 - 07:04

Ferrari own their circuit. The others would have to rent. Not fair.

So let’s say Ferrari can’t test at Fiorano….

Problem solved?

 

That's easily remedied within the accounting, as you'd have similar challenges with arrangements for wind tunnels and other facilities based on ownership.  From an accounting perspective you could use a generic, notional rate (based on the actual costs that teams have historically paid) and apply this to all teams' budgets.  This could be done for any facilities.

 

You would also have to bar teams from utilising revenue from renting out such facilities as revenues within their sporting budgets to prevent unfairness the other way.



#16 BoDarvelle

BoDarvelle
  • Member

  • 861 posts
  • Joined: March 22

Posted 02 September 2022 - 07:05

I've been saying this for a while now. It makes no sense for in-season testing to be banned when you can budget CFD and tunnel time into your cap. Let the teams decide how best to spend that money. It would also open up opportunities to get young drivers some real seat time before they come up to the big team.

 

I've felt Mag's fifth at the first race of the year was simply due to the team being able to get the car dialed in better because of the pre season testing at the same track. I've read that they have the old Ferrari stimulator (and also claims that they have no sim at all) so between that and the fact that CFD and 60% wind tunnels are not 100% perfect, on track testing will always give better setup results. 



#17 mcjohnson

mcjohnson
  • Member

  • 1,496 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 02 September 2022 - 07:08

It's not just the track costs is it. Its the PU and the rest of the car. Wouldn't work if they had to do it within current part use allowances or face penalties.

 

I'd assumed testing (along with Free Practice) they are not bound by the allowances component, are they? it is simply what's bolted to the car when Q1 starts.  The bigger question is budgets, designing and manufacturing additional, testing components within the current cost-cap.



#18 sketchy2001

sketchy2001
  • Member

  • 477 posts
  • Joined: June 19

Posted 02 September 2022 - 07:19

Dunno, I kinda like the unbound optimism that a team brings with their new updates ...only to find they don't work as expected.

 

I also don't think opening up testing woud do anything to level the playing field.

On-track testing would let the big teams ensure better correlation between their CFD and wind tunnel process, saving them money over the longer term.

The small teams barely have enough to bring 2 cars to every round as it is.



#19 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 14,936 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 02 September 2022 - 07:40

If a team wants to use some budget on track testing, then why not? They’d have to take it from inside their cost cap allowance, so it seems there’s no justification now for restrictions.

 

This applies to pretty much all restrictions that they have put in place for cost-saving over the years. Now there's a cost cap, which limits the teams abilities to spend wildly, there's no reason to restrict anything, as all will be naturally restricted by each teams budget allocations (within the cap).

 

On the other hand, if the restriction is there for reasons other than cost-saving, then that's a different matter.


Edited by pdac, 02 September 2022 - 07:42.


Advertisement

#20 Jackmancer

Jackmancer
  • Member

  • 3,187 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 02 September 2022 - 08:00

Ferrari own their circuit. The others would have to rent. Not fair.

So let’s say Ferrari can’t test at Fiorano….

Problem solved?

 

Red Bull though?



#21 pUs

pUs
  • Member

  • 2,910 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 02 September 2022 - 08:06

If a team wants to use some budget on track testing, then why not? They’d have to take it from inside their cost cap allowance, so it seems there’s no justification now for restrictions.

In theory, yeah. If a team wants to spend money out of their budget to go testing, then why not? Unrestricted it will inevitably give Ferrari quite an advantage though, so I guess any testing where you rent time at an external track would be OK..



#22 pUs

pUs
  • Member

  • 2,910 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 02 September 2022 - 08:08

Red Bull though?

I don't think it matters much, travelling to Austria with all the equipment needed would probably be as expensive as renting Silverstone.. but I'm guessing.



#23 absinthedude

absinthedude
  • Member

  • 5,177 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 02 September 2022 - 08:18

I'd be in favour. Teams would still limit the amount of testing due to use of PU's and money spent on running. Testing isn't cheap even when you do own your own circuit. That does need to be addressed....maybe Ferrari host a "free" test for any team willing to participate?

 

Though with the calendar expanding, when is there time to test? Can't afford to have engineers, mechanics and truckies purely for testing these days. 



#24 Dunc

Dunc
  • Member

  • 882 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 02 September 2022 - 09:44

I agree with bringing testing back though I do think people should put down the rose-tinted spectacles. 

Testing helped teams with a bad car at the start of the season improve it as the season progressed. It also though allowed those with a good car to make it even better. There's no guarantee of a more competitive grid by bringing it back.



#25 Beri

Beri
  • Member

  • 8,075 posts
  • Joined: January 14

Posted 02 September 2022 - 10:02

If a team wants to use some budget on track testing, then why not? They’d have to take it from inside their cost cap allowance, so it seems there’s no justification now for restrictions.

 

Im all for it. But I suspect something with carbon neutrality and showing the world how good F1 is, unlimited testing simply doesnt fit into this.



#26 Fonzey

Fonzey
  • Member

  • 618 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 02 September 2022 - 10:09

Disagree - since the testing ban we have had sustained periods of domination like never before, first Red Bull and then Mercedes.

F1 is the least competitive its been for over a decade.

 

I agree with you, typically in any form of performance the leaders inevitably run into diminishing returns, which gives a natural "catch up bias" to those chasing. The problem with F1 of late, is that the catch up teams have no mechanisms available to exploit that. They can't test, and as a result - performance generally gets "locked in" either for a season or worse, a formula generation.

 

Obviously there are exceptions to this, but generally if you allowed chasing teams to get some test mileage in - the opportunities to "become the exception" would grow, the leaders will get faster too of course but they'll likely be gaining hundreds and thousandths, not tenths.



#27 Sardukar

Sardukar
  • Member

  • 676 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 02 September 2022 - 10:09

Ferrari own their circuit. The others would have to rent. Not fair.

So let’s say Ferrari can’t test at Fiorano….

Problem solved?

 

Make Ferrari pay whatever the usual rental and running costs would be if they want to test there.



#28 AlexK

AlexK
  • Member

  • 79 posts
  • Joined: August 22

Posted 02 September 2022 - 10:10

I've been saying this for a while now. It makes no sense for in-season testing to be banned when you can budget CFD and tunnel time into your cap. Let the teams decide how best to spend that money. It would also open up opportunities to get young drivers some real seat time before they come up to the big team.

 

This makes a lot of sense. I don't see how wind tunnel/CFD time is different to track time. But logic hasn't always been the forte of the FIA 


Edited by AlexK, 02 September 2022 - 10:26.


#29 AlexK

AlexK
  • Member

  • 79 posts
  • Joined: August 22

Posted 02 September 2022 - 10:12

I agree with you, typically in any form of performance the leaders inevitably run into diminishing returns, which gives a natural "catch up bias" to those chasing. The problem with F1 of late, is that the catch up teams have no mechanisms available to exploit that. They can't test, and as a result - performance generally gets "locked in" either for a season or worse, a formula generation.

 

Obviously there are exceptions to this, but generally if you allowed chasing teams to get some test mileage in - the opportunities to "become the exception" would grow, the leaders will get faster too of course but they'll likely be gaining hundreds and thousandths, not tenths.

 

Of course you can also have different track time available depending on your current WCC/WDC position 



#30 Beri

Beri
  • Member

  • 8,075 posts
  • Joined: January 14

Posted 02 September 2022 - 10:13

Ferrari own their circuit. The others would have to rent. Not fair.

So let’s say Ferrari can’t test at Fiorano….

Problem solved?

 

(thinking ahead towards 2026 and its then rumored manufacturers) Mercedes, Audi, Honda and Porsche all own a test track. I believe Renault even does too. So I cant say it will be much of an issue. But Ferrari has the advantage of having it close by where the cars are being manufactured. Which is different to the other teams.



#31 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 42,516 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 02 September 2022 - 10:14

Ferrari own their circuit. The others would have to rent. Not fair.

So let’s say Ferrari can’t test at Fiorano….

Problem solved?

 


Ferrari made an investment in building their test track. Is it fair they can't use it for F1?

#32 kensaundm31

kensaundm31
  • Member

  • 441 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 02 September 2022 - 10:22

Why not allot testing time on a Manufacturers Championship basis. As in the lower down the table you are, the more testing time you get? What all the fans want is the teams close to each other in perfomance.

 

edit, oh someone else has made the same point previously. So get it done FIA.


Edited by kensaundm31, 02 September 2022 - 10:25.


#33 Myrvold

Myrvold
  • Member

  • 14,389 posts
  • Joined: December 10

Posted 02 September 2022 - 10:24

Why not allot testing time on a Manufacturers Championship basis. As in the lower down the table you are, the more testing time you get? What all the fans want is the teams close to each other in perfomance.


This is already in place for CFD and Wind Tunnels.

#34 Shade

Shade
  • Member

  • 1,421 posts
  • Joined: February 17

Posted 02 September 2022 - 10:26

Why not allot testing time on a Manufacturers Championship basis. As in the lower down the table you are, the more testing time you get? What all the fans want is the teams close to each other in perfomance.

Ferrari used that in 2020 to prepare for 2022. They finished 5th so they had much more time allocated than Merc or RB.



#35 AlexK

AlexK
  • Member

  • 79 posts
  • Joined: August 22

Posted 02 September 2022 - 10:29

Ferrari made an investment in building their test track. Is it fair they can't use it for F1?

 

I guess it depends who and how made the investment, if the track was built outside of F1 funds then any F1 teams wanting to use it, should be paying "rent" on an arm length basis. If its the F1 team that made the investment then the capex cost will likely be amortized over a long period of time 



#36 PlatenGlass

PlatenGlass
  • Member

  • 3,813 posts
  • Joined: June 14

Posted 02 September 2022 - 10:42

I'd allow testing. For one thing, in what other sport are participants not allowed to properly practise what they do? Also to give more opportunities to new drivers, rather than just the one or two drivers a team might have "owned" for the last 15 years. It needs opening up more.



#37 BoDarvelle

BoDarvelle
  • Member

  • 861 posts
  • Joined: March 22

Posted 02 September 2022 - 10:48

I'd allow testing. For one thing, in what other sport are participants not allowed to properly practise what they do? Also to give more opportunities to new drivers, rather than just the one or two drivers a team might have "owned" for the last 15 years. It needs opening up more.

 

Actually Nascar has severely restricted testing as well. Kimi wasn't able to drive his actual car before the race weekend at The Glen. He ran some laps in a Nascar owned test mule crewed by a hired IMSA team iirc for a few laps at VIR and that was it.



#38 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 42,516 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 02 September 2022 - 10:55

If testing were allowed then they could make it just one day at the end of a GP weekend. This would keep the costs down a bit, and no extra travelling required.

#39 Risil

Risil
  • Administrator

  • 52,378 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 02 September 2022 - 11:22

I'd allow testing. For one thing, in what other sport are participants not allowed to properly practise what they do?

 

Boxing, arguably? I mean it's not not allowed, but you don't want to take 12 rounds of punches to the head and body unless you absolutely need to.



Advertisement

#40 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 42,516 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 02 September 2022 - 11:22

Boxing, arguably?

 


Sparring.

#41 cbo

cbo
  • Member

  • 509 posts
  • Joined: September 21

Posted 19 September 2022 - 08:10

Ed Straw argues for bringing back in-season testing to get more track-time for potential F1-drivers.

If in-season testing was under the cost cap, then the argument for banning it in the first place is perhaps no longer valid - i.e. the wealthy teams cannot just throw money at in-season testing to solve problems.



https://the-race.com...ing-up-with-it/

Edited by cbo, 19 September 2022 - 08:12.


#42 Jackmancer

Jackmancer
  • Member

  • 3,187 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 19 September 2022 - 08:12

something abt Ferrari having its private track next to its factory etc



#43 Beri

Beri
  • Member

  • 8,075 posts
  • Joined: January 14

Posted 19 September 2022 - 08:15


Ed Straw argues for bringing back in-season testing to get more track-time for potential F1-drivers.
 
If in-season testing was under the cost cap, then the argument for banning it in the first place is perhaps no longer valid - i.e. the wealthy teams cannot just throw money at in-season testing to solve problems.
 
 
 
Even looking past the money issues and the obvious "Ferrari has a test track, so it costs less for them" debate that will be thrown up, it also doesnt fit in the carbon neutral aims of F1 to run cars even more. So that wont happen any time soon.


#44 Rumblestrip

Rumblestrip
  • Member

  • 853 posts
  • Joined: December 20

Posted 19 September 2022 - 08:15

I've always been in favour of keeping in-season testing. At the moment the teams with the best CFD/windtunnel/simulation tools are always going to be significantly ahead of their rivals, and that baked-in infrastructure advantage isn't going away with the budget cap. On-track testing at least gives the "poorer" teams a bit of parity.



#45 noikeee

noikeee
  • Member

  • 22,288 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 19 September 2022 - 08:28



Even looking past the money issues and the obvious "Ferrari has a test track, so it costs less for them" debate that will be thrown up, it also doesnt fit in the carbon neutral aims of F1 to run cars even more. So that wont happen any time soon.


Just plant 50 trees for every lap. Or pay a secondary company to offset the carbon emission.

Greenwashing, yay!

#46 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 15,968 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 19 September 2022 - 08:46

 

 
 
Even looking past the money issues and the obvious "Ferrari has a test track, so it costs less for them" debate that will be thrown up, it also doesnt fit in the carbon neutral aims of F1 to run cars even more. So that wont happen any time soon.

 

 

I already thought about this. Why is there still a testing ban while the cost cap should make sure teams stay within budget.

 

 

 

 

 
 
Even looking past the money issues and the obvious "Ferrari has a test track, so it costs less for them" debate that will be thrown up, it also doesnt fit in the carbon neutral aims of F1 to run cars even more. So that wont happen any time soon.

 

 

You can have a token amount of money reduced from your budget per testing day that should be enough to rent the track and run a current car, if you own a track or not. 

 

Just plant 50 trees for every lap. Or pay a secondary company to offset the carbon emission.

Greenwashing, yay!

 

Or cancel 5 GP's.



#47 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • Racing Sims Forum Host

  • 38,033 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 19 September 2022 - 08:47

What ever happened to the in-season tests taking place the days following a Grand Prix that were introduced a few years ago? Wasn't that a thing?

 

Also, it seems like the ban on in-season testing sort of falls apart when teams can do almost whatever they want with a two-year old car. Those costs still exist.

 

It seems with the cost cap a lot of restrictions could be lifted and it could allow the teams to use their money as they see fit, while a couple of official tests in season would be a useful thing. Perhaps still have a mileage limit for each team?



#48 onewingedangel

onewingedangel
  • Member

  • 1,451 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 19 September 2022 - 09:03

They could run testing following a race weekend for minimum extra transport miles.

Invite students to promote STEM subjects, and have free/low cost tickets for locals to get those who either wouldn't or could afford to see F1 live a chance to experience it.

#49 AlcidioG

AlcidioG
  • Member

  • 848 posts
  • Joined: July 16

Posted 19 September 2022 - 09:05

I already thought about this. Why is there still a testing ban while the cost cap should make sure teams stay within budget.

 

 

 

 

You can have a token amount of money reduced from your budget per testing day that should be enough to rent the track and run a current car, if you own a track or not. 

 

 

Or cancel 5 GP's.

 


Just view those 5 GP's as in season testing

#50 Nemo1965

Nemo1965
  • Member

  • 7,256 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 19 September 2022 - 09:11

My answer would be: no, because the limit of testing is excellent for separating the wheat from the chaff, drivers-wise. I can't remember a period in which drivers had to dive so quickly into the deep end and that's good. Yeah, Latifi, but he will be gone next year (I think), while in ye old days of endless testing, he would be still here in 2027, because a.his backers would pay all the testing, b. he would fool some teams after millions of miles he is sort of okayish...