2023 Italian Grand Prix - Monza, Sep 01 - 03

[TFSA]

I also think refueling would mix up the races more. Many detest the thought however...

For good reason. It doesn't add any spice. It makes most overtakes happen in the pits.

[Just_a_fan]

Does it seem like tire deg is very low this year? All of the top ten drivers this race did a one stopper. To create more strategic opportunities and excitement in the race, hopefully next year’s compounds/tires are developed and selected to make a one stopper more the exception and only viable when starting on the hardest compound in a dry race. That should create a more stark tradeoff between hanging long for a safety car/one stopper and a two stopper with softer tires to get a better start off the line

The teams have a way of racing to the life of the tyre. They will always do this unless the degradation or cliff costs more than a pitstop. (24 seconds). And Pirelli cannot go too soft for safety reasons and worse they cannot increase pressures too high because the drivers don't like the feel of it.

I proposed a solution to this problem... To make pitstops attractive by giving opportunities thru refuelling.

Why the desire for pitstops at all? Is it inherently good to have pitstops?

[Stu]

Historically pit stops were a disadvantage, until Brabham introduced the concept of refuelling. Although that was re-introduced later, the concept of putting for tyres remained. Presumably there was a push towards the softer tyre compounds that would make this quicker.
Unfortunately, the huge amount of live data from the cars now available makes targeting no pit stops a ‘dead duck’ of an idea; the only way to get it back would be to ban the live transmission of data between cars & pits (not the huge jump that many would imagine - data transfer in the other direction was banned many years ago).

At the risk of being called a Luddite, I think that this would be a good direction to follow, it hands more of the strategic choices back to the driver.

[djones]

2021 was a good year for racing. Well, other than the last race which was criminal, overall it was a good season in terms of fun to watch.

If they had just left the rules as they were it would have continued to be fun to watch. Now we have a team that spent more money than everybody else (facts are facts) and dominates every single race. It's an utter bore fest with no hope of 2024 being much better due to the cost caps that others strictly follow.

It's sad that there has to be talk of refuelling and things to mix it up when the fundamental problem is there to see.

[aMessageToCharlie]

2021 was a good year for racing. Well, other than the last race which was criminal, overall it was a good season in terms of fun to watch.

If they had just left the rules as they were it would have continued to be fun to watch. Now we have a team that spent more money than everybody else (facts are facts) and dominates every single race. It's an utter bore fest with no hope of 2024 being much better due to the cost caps that others strictly follow.

It's sad that there has to be talk of refuelling and things to mix it up when the fundamental problem is there to see.

2021 was only competitive due to a short notice, unforseen, COVID related change. The decision for new regs was made long before that, during the 7 years of Merc dominating every single season because they had spent more money than everybody else in the build up to 2014. Therefore it wouldnt have been an option to stick with 2021 regs.

[Juzh]

Does it seem like tire deg is very low this year? All of the top ten drivers this race did a one stopper. To create more strategic opportunities and excitement in the race, hopefully next year’s compounds/tires are developed and selected to make a one stopper more the exception and only viable when starting on the hardest compound in a dry race. That should create a more stark tradeoff between hanging long for a safety car/one stopper and a two stopper with softer tires to get a better start off the line

The teams have a way of racing to the life of the tyre. They will always do this unless the degradation or cliff costs more than a pitstop. (24 seconds). And Pirelli cannot go too soft for safety reasons and worse they cannot increase pressures too high because the drivers don't like the feel of it.

I proposed a solution to this problem... To make pitstops attractive by giving opportunities thru refuelling.

Why the desire for pitstops at all? Is it inherently good to have pitstops?

In my opinion yes. Alternative is rock hard tyres with no drop off and 0 overtaking. Qualifying would decide the grid in 99% of cases and that would be it. Count me out.

[Big Tea]

Historically pit stops were a disadvantage, until Brabham introduced the concept of refuelling. Although that was re-introduced later, the concept of putting for tyres remained. Presumably there was a push towards the softer tyre compounds that would make this quicker.
Unfortunately, the huge amount of live data from the cars now available makes targeting no pit stops a ‘dead duck’ of an idea; the only way to get it back would be to ban the live transmission of data between cars & pits (not the huge jump that many would imagine - data transfer in the other direction was banned many years ago).

At the risk of being called a Luddite, I think that this would be a good direction to follow, it hands more of the strategic choices back to the driver.

The advantage Bernie gained with the pit stop was being able to run the car on very low fuel in the hope of getting enough 'lead time' to to re enter the race in front without the bunching which happens early in the race. Getting to chose tyres was a side bonus. I think today it is not such a good choice as not only is there no refueling allowed but cars have to met a minimum start weight and fuel is a smaller % of total weight

[TFSA]

Historically pit stops were a disadvantage, until Brabham introduced the concept of refuelling. Although that was re-introduced later, the concept of putting for tyres remained. Presumably there was a push towards the softer tyre compounds that would make this quicker.
Unfortunately, the huge amount of live data from the cars now available makes targeting no pit stops a ‘dead duck’ of an idea; the only way to get it back would be to ban the live transmission of data between cars & pits (not the huge jump that many would imagine - data transfer in the other direction was banned many years ago).

At the risk of being called a Luddite, I think that this would be a good direction to follow, it hands more of the strategic choices back to the driver.

Won't work the way F1 cars are right now. Teams need to be able to monitor reliability issues or problems (anything from temperatures to punctures etc.), as well advice drivers on setup adjustments. That's not something you can expect the driver to accomplish.

Prevent teams from doing that, and you'll see a lot of DNFs, including crashes, engines blowing up and cars on fire.

[ringo]

2021 was a good year for racing. Well, other than the last race which was criminal, overall it was a good season in terms of fun to watch.

If they had just left the rules as they were it would have continued to be fun to watch. Now we have a team that spent more money than everybody else (facts are facts) and dominates every single race. It's an utter bore fest with no hope of 2024 being much better due to the cost caps that others strictly follow.

It's sad that there has to be talk of refuelling and things to mix it up when the fundamental problem is there to see.

The shrinking cost cap doesnt help. I think its down to 135 million next year. I do not see any team closing the gap to redbull. Even after 2026. Redbull can use this years car with slight tweaks till 2025 and focus on 2026 by next year.
The cost cap need to be relooked at. I think driver and a wider description of staff salaries should be outside the cap. Say 50 more key people.

[organic]

Why do people think that a larger cost cap would help teams close the gap to RB?

[Farnborough]

Historically pit stops were a disadvantage, until Brabham introduced the concept of refuelling. Although that was re-introduced later, the concept of putting for tyres remained. Presumably there was a push towards the softer tyre compounds that would make this quicker.
Unfortunately, the huge amount of live data from the cars now available makes targeting no pit stops a ‘dead duck’ of an idea; the only way to get it back would be to ban the live transmission of data between cars & pits (not the huge jump that many would imagine - data transfer in the other direction was banned many years ago).

At the risk of being called a Luddite, I think that this would be a good direction to follow, it hands more of the strategic choices back to the driver.

Won't work the way F1 cars are right now. Teams need to be able to monitor reliability issues or problems (anything from temperatures to punctures etc.), as well advice drivers on setup adjustments. That's not something you can expect the driver to accomplish.

Prevent teams from doing that, and you'll see a lot of DNFs, including crashes, engines blowing up and cars on fire.

And why would that happen ?

More than ever before the onboard data acquisition and parameters to run the power units with very strict operational practice have developed during extended life of engine gearbox etc. That would still exist in onboard system as it does now but with out the ability or need of a team of "strategists" to then massage the technical performance. Just down to driver to sort it out or use the car more sparingly.

Failure in these should be mostly prevented from bding realised during use, but if there's genuine problems that cause a reduction of performance, then that's part and parcel of driving reliability for any team in their performance profile.

[chrisc90]

Why do people think that a larger cost cap would help teams close the gap to RB?

I don’t think it would, it would have the opposite effect.
How many of the smaller teams don’t fully spend the budget at the minute? I bet there is 2 or 3 of them.

A lower cap nerfs the top teams and the ‘big spenders’. Don’t forget, that better staff talent brings a higher wage - so those better designers at top teams means a marginally lower budget to start. Then wage increase and inflation will knock it down aswell.

However - Monza topic here.

[Farnborough]

Why do people think that a larger cost cap would help teams close the gap to RB?

Wondering the same, its the concept thats outperformed the other concepts. That will always happen.

If as people keep wanting to chuck in the pot any cost cap breach, does anyone think that a team given an extra 5 million (let's say for interest, both MB and FER ) in 2022 would have brought them to par with RB ? I just don't think that's the case, theres too many compromise in their base concept to make a difference.

[djones]

I think Redbull have hit the ground running with an excellent concept that can be refined but won't have any big steps within the current regulations.

An increase in budget would give other teams more chance of finding big steps. That's how I suspect it would work if there was more money. But I do not believe that is the solution to fixing the problem we now all face.

F1 will be looking at ways to handicap Redbull. There is no question of this at all because these days more than ever it's about the show. Maybe they will literally bring a handicap in.... Extra ballast that has to be carried or something.

F1 has created this problem for itself though. They should have smashed Redbull so hard for going over the cost cap, but their response was in no way proportional to the advantage gained going into the new generation of technical regulations.

[Just_a_fan]

Why do people think that a larger cost cap would help teams close the gap to RB?

I don’t think it would, it would have the opposite effect.
How many of the smaller teams don’t fully spend the budget at the minute? I bet there is 2 or 3 of them.

A lower cap nerfs the top teams and the ‘big spenders’. Don’t forget, that better staff talent brings a higher wage - so those better designers at top teams means a marginally lower budget to start. Then wage increase and inflation will knock it down aswell.

However - Monza topic here.

The lower cap nerfs the top teams - which are the ones that would have a chance of competing with Red Bull. Reducing the cap each year locks in Red Bull's advantage because lap time improvements cost money - you can't catch up without spending.