2023 Pre-Season Testing - Bahrain International Circuit, Feb 23 - 25

[nico5]

Btw, if RB´s "empire" already comes to an end this year, I wonder if people will still call these new regulations a failure

If anything I would call the budget cap a failure (except in exposing Merc as an overbudgeted, weaker team than it looked), especially if you don't enforce it properly.
The rules were meant to allow cars to follow closer and in many tracks behind <1.0s was actually beneficial for pace for the first time in the DRS-era. Two examples: Max behind Charles in France, dropped his pace after he lost DRS and was forced to pit before losing the chance to undercut; Charles in GB, was slower after they did the swap with Sainz.
Regardless of gaps between teams, which are mostly infrastructural and technological, I'd call it a success.

[AR3-GP]

Ferrari took 9 double titles 2000-2008? First I heard .....

I agree with literally everything you said there. I used the term empire losely, because it was a metaphor used by our other fellow member.

Empires are never equal, each has it´s own peculiarities. Btw, if RB´s "empire" already comes to an end this year, I wonder if people will still call these new regulations a failure

It will be a failure so long as one team....oh never mind. I'm behaving

[mendis]

Btw, if RB´s "empire" already comes to an end this year, I wonder if people will still call these new regulations a failure

If anything I would call the budget cap a failure (except in exposing Merc as an overbudgeted, weaker team than it looked), especially if you don't enforce it properly.
The rules were meant to allow cars to follow closer and in many tracks behind <1.0s was actually beneficial for pace for the first time in the DRS-era. Two examples: Max behind Charles in France, dropped his pace after he lost DRS and was forced to pit before losing the chance to undercut; Charles in GB, was slower after they did the swap with Sainz.
Regardless of gaps between teams, which are mostly infrastructural and technological, I'd call it a success.

I haven't heard anyone other than Mercedes fans calling the new regulations a failure. I infact like the budget restrictions now while I thought it was rubbish when the initial noises about implementing it started. It's making teams profitable entities, bringing real interest from new teams, increased sponsorship and overall a healthy financial atmosphere. Big Teams find it difficult as they were used to throwing money at the problem than efficiency (relatively speaking).

[avantman]

It will be impossible in Jeddah, but here in Bahrein, if they don't fix their balance stuff, they'll run through the tire and lose traction out of the corner like Ferrari in Miami last year out of T16.

I don't think traction was Ferrari problem in Miami. Front graining on starting compound on Leclerc car was. When he cleared it, he was as fast as Max pretty much all race. He was actually even faster on hards after the SC, but not enough to pass by.

But when you are close behind you also benefit, enormously, from tow.

Yes, of course. This is literally how Max won in Jeddah driving slightly slower race car.
What I believe happened to Charles in Miami was that he pushed way too much on the first few laps right from the start of the race in those fast right handers. He overheated tire tread quickly not warming up inner part, which normally causes graining. He had similar issue in Imola. Ferrari together with Charles made adjustments in how they introduce the tyres from the start and we could already see how they fixed it in France. Charles wasn't pushing in the fast corners first several laps(this is why Max was close behind hoping to attack), but then engineer literally told him 'tyres are ready' several laps into the stint, and very soon Charles started opening up a gap by 0,3s per lap. The gap has increased to 2 seconds and Red bull were forced to pit Max first to have a chance for undercut.
Ferrari simply did their homework. They were not slower car neither in Miami nor in Imola I believe.
They had strategical disadvantage in top speed, this is why Charles could not overtake Checo in Imola(being faster behind him all race) and Max in Miami after the late SC. Ferrari lacked top speed, but they were not slower on race pace.
Verstappen with the aid of GP(all his whole team of engineers) simply looked after their tyres better. This is why we can often hear on Lewis's radio Bono instructing Lewis where to push and where to manage more based on what Versrappen does in particular corners. I've never heard GP instructing Max based on what Charles does in the corners.

[101FlyingDutchman]

Btw, if RB´s "empire" already comes to an end this year, I wonder if people will still call these new regulations a failure

If anything I would call the budget cap a failure (except in exposing Merc as an overbudgeted, weaker team than it looked), especially if you don't enforce it properly.
The rules were meant to allow cars to follow closer and in many tracks behind <1.0s was actually beneficial for pace for the first time in the DRS-era. Two examples: Max behind Charles in France, dropped his pace after he lost DRS and was forced to pit before losing the chance to undercut; Charles in GB, was slower after they did the swap with Sainz.
Regardless of gaps between teams, which are mostly infrastructural and technological, I'd call it a success.

I haven't heard anyone other than Mercedes fans calling the new regulations a failure. I infact like the budget restrictions now while I thought it was rubbish when the initial noises about implementing it started. It's making teams profitable entities, bringing real interest from new teams, increased sponsorship and overall a healthy financial atmosphere. Big Teams find it difficult as they were used to throwing money at the problem than efficiency (relatively speaking).

Hear hear. These rules will come good. I feel more positive about the direction F1 is taking than I’ve ever done.

[f1jcw]

Btw, if RB´s "empire" already comes to an end this year, I wonder if people will still call these new regulations a failure

If anything I would call the budget cap a failure (except in exposing Merc as an overbudgeted, weaker team than it looked), especially if you don't enforce it properly.
The rules were meant to allow cars to follow closer and in many tracks behind <1.0s was actually beneficial for pace for the first time in the DRS-era. Two examples: Max behind Charles in France, dropped his pace after he lost DRS and was forced to pit before losing the chance to undercut; Charles in GB, was slower after they did the swap with Sainz.
Regardless of gaps between teams, which are mostly infrastructural and technological, I'd call it a success.

Thats a bit of a curious statement about Mercedes when the team that won the championship was also the team that coincidentally illegally broke the budget cap, and I agree with "especially if you don't enforce it properly." which is what has happened.

[f1jcw]

If anything I would call the budget cap a failure (except in exposing Merc as an overbudgeted, weaker team than it looked), especially if you don't enforce it properly.
The rules were meant to allow cars to follow closer and in many tracks behind <1.0s was actually beneficial for pace for the first time in the DRS-era. Two examples: Max behind Charles in France, dropped his pace after he lost DRS and was forced to pit before losing the chance to undercut; Charles in GB, was slower after they did the swap with Sainz.
Regardless of gaps between teams, which are mostly infrastructural and technological, I'd call it a success.

I haven't heard anyone other than Mercedes fans calling the new regulations a failure. I infact like the budget restrictions now while I thought it was rubbish when the initial noises about implementing it started. It's making teams profitable entities, bringing real interest from new teams, increased sponsorship and overall a healthy financial atmosphere. Big Teams find it difficult as they were used to throwing money at the problem than efficiency (relatively speaking).

Hear hear. These rules will come good. I feel more positive about the direction F1 is taking than I’ve ever done.

ofcourse you would, like merc fans with 2014

[f1jcw]

Btw, if RB´s "empire" already comes to an end this year, I wonder if people will still call these new regulations a failure

If anything I would call the budget cap a failure (except in exposing Merc as an overbudgeted, weaker team than it looked), especially if you don't enforce it properly.
The rules were meant to allow cars to follow closer and in many tracks behind <1.0s was actually beneficial for pace for the first time in the DRS-era. Two examples: Max behind Charles in France, dropped his pace after he lost DRS and was forced to pit before losing the chance to undercut; Charles in GB, was slower after they did the swap with Sainz.
Regardless of gaps between teams, which are mostly infrastructural and technological, I'd call it a success.

I haven't heard anyone other than Mercedes fans calling the new regulations a failure. I infact like the budget restrictions now while I thought it was rubbish when the initial noises about implementing it started. It's making teams profitable entities, bringing real interest from new teams, increased sponsorship and overall a healthy financial atmosphere. Big Teams find it difficult as they were used to throwing money at the problem than efficiency (relatively speaking).

Like the budget restrictions even though the winning team was able to blow the budget with little real consequence.
Its all very well teams being able to follow but makes little point if they are several seconds apart and are restricted in development to catch up.

Increased sponsorship, is that factual?

[nico5]

Btw, if RB´s "empire" already comes to an end this year, I wonder if people will still call these new regulations a failure

If anything I would call the budget cap a failure (except in exposing Merc as an overbudgeted, weaker team than it looked), especially if you don't enforce it properly.
The rules were meant to allow cars to follow closer and in many tracks behind <1.0s was actually beneficial for pace for the first time in the DRS-era. Two examples: Max behind Charles in France, dropped his pace after he lost DRS and was forced to pit before losing the chance to undercut; Charles in GB, was slower after they did the swap with Sainz.
Regardless of gaps between teams, which are mostly infrastructural and technological, I'd call it a success.

Thats a bit of a curious statement about Mercedes when the team that won the championship was also the team that coincidentally illegally broke the budget cap, and I agree with "especially if you don't enforce it properly." which is what has happened.

By "overbudgeted" I meant that having the most money to spend before budget cap came in might have made them look better chassis-makers then they were. Maybe.

[avantman]

Thats a bit of a curious statement about Mercedes when the team that won the championship was also the team that coincidentally illegally broke the budget cap, and I agree with "especially if you don't enforce it properly." which is what has happened.

They had the biggest cost of damage amongst top three teams(not counting HAAS and Williams) through no fault of their own. Because of that, no way they could spend more money on design and development their 2022 car than either Ferrari or Mercedes. These financial regulations are still not really fair in that regard. You can't treat equally costs of damages(especially huge damages) caused by own and someone else's fault. Yes, rules are rules etc, I know, but If anything, Red bull had all the moral right to overspend a bit. Quite clearly that wasn't a reason behind their success neither in 2021 nor in 2022 season.

[Spoutnik]

Thats a bit of a curious statement about Mercedes when the team that won the championship was also the team that coincidentally illegally broke the budget cap, and I agree with "especially if you don't enforce it properly." which is what has happened.

They had the biggest cost of damage amongst top three teams(not counting HAAS and Williams) through no fault of their own. Because of that, no way they could spend more money on design and development their 2022 car than either Ferrari or Mercedes. These financial regulations are still not really fair in that regard. You can't treat equally costs of damages(especially huge damages) caused by own and someone else's fault. Yes, rules are rules etc, I know, but If anything, Red bull had all the moral right to overspend a bit. Quite clearly that wasn't a reason behind their success neither in 2021 nor in 2022 season.

I agree with you that it's not fair to include cost of damage.
But... the "moral right theory" I mean it's like saying there's a moral right to kill someone if he hurt you, there's a moral right to invade a country cause x y z...
F1 should be governed by rules, and that's with this kind of reasoning we end up with farce like the races at the end of 2021.

[SiLo]

Thats a bit of a curious statement about Mercedes when the team that won the championship was also the team that coincidentally illegally broke the budget cap, and I agree with "especially if you don't enforce it properly." which is what has happened.

They had the biggest cost of damage amongst top three teams(not counting HAAS and Williams) through no fault of their own. Because of that, no way they could spend more money on design and development their 2022 car than either Ferrari or Mercedes. These financial regulations are still not really fair in that regard. You can't treat equally costs of damages(especially huge damages) caused by own and someone else's fault. Yes, rules are rules etc, I know, but If anything, Red bull had all the moral right to overspend a bit. Quite clearly that wasn't a reason behind their success neither in 2021 nor in 2022 season.

I agree with you that it's not fair to include cost of damage.
But... the "moral right theory" I mean it's like saying there's a moral right to kill someone if he hurt you, there's a moral right to invade a country cause x y z...
F1 should be governed by rules, and that's with this kind of reasoning we end up with farce like the races at the end of 2021.

Red Bull had the moral right to abide by the rules they agreed to. Plenty of other teams had costs associated with crashes or repairs, and they were all under the budget cap.

[avantman]

I agree with you that it's not fair to include cost of damage.
But... the "moral right theory" I mean it's like saying there's a moral right to kill someone if he hurt you, there's a moral right to invade a country cause x y z...
F1 should be governed by rules, and that's with this kind of reasoning we end up with farce like the races at the end of 2021.

I think the real farce started in Brazil when Mercedes were allowed to use their ridiculous 'spicy engine' on Lewis Hamilton's car exclusively (not even his own teammate had the same engine, as actually prescribed by the rules), utilizing severe and obvious loophole in the regulations and inability of the FIA to control such things. It wasn't racing anymore, it became a massacre, but some fans even applauded that farce. They say it's all fine, you can change engines every second race in expense of the 5 place grid penalty, all team agreed with that rule and that penalty. Mercedes even were smart to do so. So, Mercedes deliberately violate rules(using more engines than allowed by regulations) and get prescribed penalty - it's all fine. But at the same time, when Red bull deliberately or not violate financial rules and get prescribed penalty, suddenly they become cheaters and all that....even if all teams agreed, that minor overspending(again, prescribed in the rules) will be penalized with minor penalty. No one ever meant, that the team should get DSQ from the Championship by spending half a million more.

[avantman]

Red Bull had the moral right to abide by the rules they agreed to. Plenty of other teams had costs associated with crashes or repairs, and they were all under the budget cap.

Don't you think Mercedes had the moral right to abide by the rules on the number of PU components allowed for the season, that they agree to. For some reason. they've chosen no to, they decided to obliterate these rules in order to get competitive advantage over their rivals, in expense of minor penalty, which was prescribed in regulations.

[SiLo]

Red Bull had the moral right to abide by the rules they agreed to. Plenty of other teams had costs associated with crashes or repairs, and they were all under the budget cap.

Don't you think Mercedes had the moral right to abide by the rules on the number of PU components allowed for the season, that they agree to. For some reason. they've chosen no to, they decided to obliterate these rules in order to get competitive advantage over their rivals, in expense of minor penalty, which was prescribed in regulations.

Yes, they raced to the rules like everyone else. Red Bull had this option open to them as well as every other team on the grid. F1 is not just racing on the track, it's racing in the regulations too.