Cost Cutting in F1

[Ponty]

Firstly, thank fewk the rumour about cutting staff by 75% was just that, a rumour..

 

Here's the FIA/FOTA/WMSC approved list of changes to F1 over the next couple of years.

 

http://www.fia.com/en-GB/mediacentre/pressreleases/wmsc/wmsc08/Pages/wmsc_121208.aspx

[stevegrant]

2010 - ban on refuelling?!

 

Surely that takes away a bit of the "competition" in terms of the pit-stop/fuel load strategies?

[CabbageFace]

How about stop paying drivers excessive amounts of money?

[Evil Monkey]

Diesel engines?

[St Landrew]

2010 - ban on refuelling?!

 

Surely that takes away a bit of the "competition" in terms of the pit-stop/fuel load strategies?

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7779168.stm

 

Had to be done Steve. Not only is it cost cutting, but it puts the emphasis of winning a race on great driving and overtaking. For too long, F1 races have been won and lost in the strategic pit-stop, rather than out on the track. Some people won't realise what it was like before strategic pit-stops became the real race winner. As I've said before, something that should be classed as quite interesting has become the fantastic in F1. That's not right. Here's to overtaking and real competition.

[Saint in Paradise]

Diesel engines?

 

Good idea but perhaps a bit to radical for consideration for the next 7 years or so but after that

well it might happen I think.

[Ponty]

More likely a V6 or In-Line 4 Cyl. 1.8 turbocharged bioethanol/bio petrol engine in 2013, than a diesel, running alongside a 50% KERS system.

 

As for refuelling, it's only been compulsory since 1994 so the majority of F1 has seen either no refuelling at all, or voluntary (back in the day when it wasn't an advantage to have to pit for fuel).

 

I quite like the idea of no refuelling but overall these changes are going to put a lot of people out of work, which is never good.

[Sheaf Saint]

I quite like the idea of no refuelling but overall these changes are going to put a lot of people out of work, which is never good.

 

I take your point Ponty, especially as you or the people you work with would be directly affected by this, but if the cost-cutting stops big players like Honda from withdrawing from the series completely then surely that is an overall positive?

[TopGun]

I take your point Ponty, especially as you or the people you work with would be directly affected by this, but if the cost-cutting stops big players like Honda from withdrawing from the series completely then surely that is an overall positive?

 

Wouldn't standard or limited engines do that anyway?

Edited 12 December, 2008 by TopGun

[Patrick Bateman]

2010 - ban on refuelling?!

 

Surely that takes away a bit of the "competition" in terms of the pit-stop/fuel load strategies?

 

Thank god, finally! F1 days before refuelling was introduced was much better and I remember (probably rose-tinted of course) better racing, more overtaking etc etc etc.

 

I hate watching now and wondering if x is faster than y and z because they have much less fuel and not thinking it's driving talent, or indeed a better car.

 

Great move.

[stevegrant]

Thank god, finally! F1 days before refuelling was introduced was much better and I remember (probably rose-tinted of course) better racing, more overtaking etc etc etc.

 

I hate watching now and wondering if x is faster than y and z because they have much less fuel and not thinking it's driving talent, or indeed a better car.

 

Great move.

I agree that it would be a great move if we ever actually saw any overtaking on the track...

[cambsaint]

It's a balance, you want good racing like it was when I used to watch a lot of motor racing, but you certainly dont want great drivers killed.

 

You want overtaking and tailgating again, imo aerodynamics are largely to blame for the uncompetitiveness, you used to slipstream to overtake, now it just ruins your handling.

 

The expense must be curbed but the technological advances have beeb massive-who twenty to thirty years ago would have imagined the advances. The safety advances have been the most useful.

 

A lot of the advances have dripped down to comparatively humble cars- good braking and safety, handling that was unthinkable a decade or so ago, excellent fuel economy, and probably most important tyres, brakes and electronic stability safety features.

 

The only problem is that they have made cars too fast for the abilities of most drivers-but that's another thread.

 

We will have to see what comes but never underestimate the ingenuity of the very cleverest engineers to defeat the best intentions of the rule book!

[Ponty]

I take your point Ponty, especially as you or the people you work with would be directly affected by this, but if the cost-cutting stops big players like Honda from withdrawing from the series completely then surely that is an overall positive?

It appears unlikely that the current financial climate is the actual reason for Honda's departure considering they were suffering least from the recession of any manufacturer aside of Ferrari/Fiat. I would stick my neck on the line and suggest that 8th followed by 9th in the constructors' championship, at massive cost, is closer to the actual reason.

[TopGun]

Subaru out of WRC now.

[Ponty]

And Suzuki.

 

Mind you, standard engines and g-boxes was NEVER the way to go in WRC. That's just obvious. I'm not even sure the Scoob could've been modified for that anyway, given its natural, low-slung Boxer engine configuration.