2024 Season Bickering and Moaning

[Sevach]

Yep. Mentioned a the flexi wings and blown diffusers above forgot about those others. RBR were the kinds of fineing loopholes around the flexiwing rules back then and modifications they made. Renault did very well too with the blown diffuser - which I can't quite recall all the details on between the hot and cold blown but recall it wasn't an easy task controlling how much the exhaust'blew' off and on throttle some tricky engine mapping etc.

The tyre wars were a shot at Ferrari's dominance too iircc. The FIA has a long history here on many teams don't think they single anyone out if found using too grey an area of the rules.

There was a TD in the middle of 2021 that slowed Honda. It was said to then hurt the way Honda was managing the electrical power.

That was just from the top of my head, i'm sure i missed some...

Now that i'm stopping to think about it, i belive there was also some clarifications made about Red Bull having a flexible tea tray/bib at some point.
Everything in a Red Bull car has been accused of flexing at least once, front and rear wings, front of the floor, back of the floor, edges of the floor...

And the exhaust blowing, multiple attempts to stop it, one can right a book about this saga...
First version EBD(RB6 i think) blew on the floor and entered the diffuser through a mouse hole, mouse holes were banned for 2011(now they are legal again), in response Red Bull came up with elongated oval exhausts that blew right in the space between the diffuser and the rear wheels.
Sometime between early 2011 and 2012, there was the off-throttle clampdown.

For 2012, exhausts had to be round and placed at a certain height off the floor and they also couldn't be aimed down(at least not directly), that should do it right?
Think again, may i present you the Coanda bridge to guide the exhaust plume back where it needs to go lol.

I think 2013 was the only season where the FIA and rival teams were like, "you know what let them have this, we need to think about 2014 anyway".

[DChemTech]

FIA gave this on a silver platter to RBR. We've seen how many times Merc innovations were called back. Haven't seen any with RB.

Because there are no obvious things to target with technical directives on the Red Bull?

If some come to light, I'm sure they will be addressed. As it is, it just seems to be a better optimised car than rival cars.

One solution there could be a full budget cap that includes all staff and driver salaries - then teams also have to choose between having a top driver but less development money

Would Ferrari accept that? Ferrari will be spending more on drivers ($60m p/a Leclerc + $100m p/a Hamilton) than the entire budget cap.

Surely Ferrari would veto such an idea?

Maybe it's about time f1 stops letting itself be held hostage by Ferrari. And perhaps it's also time to stop handing such ridiculous salaries to sportspeople (or whatever job in general).
In any case, when salaries are included, the height of the cap should of course be increased. Its now 135 million without salaries of drivers + 3 staff right? Let's say make it 170-180, thereabouts.

[dialtone]

FIA gave this on a silver platter to RBR. We've seen how many times Merc innovations were called back. Haven't seen any with RB.

Because there are no obvious things to target with technical directives on the Red Bull?

If some come to light, I'm sure they will be addressed. As it is, it just seems to be a better optimised car than rival cars.

One solution there could be a full budget cap that includes all staff and driver salaries - then teams also have to choose between having a top driver but less development money

Would Ferrari accept that? Ferrari will be spending more on drivers ($60m p/a Leclerc + $100m p/a Hamilton) than the entire budget cap.

Surely Ferrari would veto such an idea?

Maybe it's about time f1 stops letting itself be held hostage by Ferrari. And perhaps it's also time to stop handing such ridiculous salaries to sportspeople (or whatever job in general).
In any case, when salaries are included, the height of the cap should of course be increased. Its now 135 million without salaries of drivers + 3 staff right? Let's say make it 170-180, thereabouts.

Thinking that the sport is somehow being held hostage by Ferrari is peak hate.

The only team around for a billion years in the sport and yet routinely effed on an yearly basis by FIA rules or decisions. It would really be peak FIA to retroactively change rules on budgets to add drivers after they signed a driver with a price tag justified for mostly marketing reasons. Especially the year after FIA's incompetence caused multiple millions of dollars in damages to Ferrari, obviously to be covered within the budget cap, EDIT: after a british team violated the budget rules by millions of pounds (gosh) only to be reprimanded by a strongly worded letter.

Imagine hating on the one team that made the sport what it is today. Just look at WEC, almost collapsing with 2 manufacturers just a few years ago, one year after Ferrari arrives there are 19 other cars on the grid.

[DChemTech]

Thinking that the sport is somehow being held hostage by Ferrari is peak hate.

The only team around for a billion years in the sport and yet routinely effed on an yearly basis by FIA rules or decisions. It would really be peak FIA to retroactively change rules on budgets to add drivers after they signed a driver with a price tag justified for mostly marketing reasons. Especially the year after FIA's incompetence caused multiple millions of dollars in damages to Ferrari, obviously to be covered within the budget cap, EDIT: after a british team violated the budget rules by millions of pounds (gosh) only to be reprimanded by a strongly worded letter.

Imagine hating on the one team that made the sport what it is today. Just look at WEC, almost collapsing with 2 manufacturers just a few years ago, one year after Ferrari arrives there are 19 other cars on the grid.

Maybe not try to accuse people of having all kinds of motivations without asking them first why they say something? This has nothing to do with Ferrari hate.

I want f1 to be a sports. That means equal conditions for all teams, teams accepting the rules as they are set by the sporting body (and if they don't, leave), and admissions of new teams being judged solely by the sporting body rather than by other teams. Simple as that. If you let decisions be strongly influenced by teams (and some big teams more than others), hand out money to teams based on legacy value, and hand out veto rights, you are not a sport but an entertainment and marketing series. That is not to say that Ferrari did not do a lot for F1 (and got a lot of name recognition for their brand in return, its not just altruism from their side...), it is simply the question of do you want F1 to be a sports competition, and what would that require. The reason I mentioned Ferrari specifically here, and not another team, was, well (drumroll), because I was RESPONDING to a post about the ferrari veto.

And about "Ferrari just having bought two drivers and then...", you do know new regs typically come with a certain prior notice? And perhaps with a transition period where they do not need to be fully adhered to? There is nothing 'retroactive' there. IF they would make such a change to the budget cap (and let's be clear, there is no talk of this, it is just what I personally think they should do), it would take at least 3 and probably 5 years before being enforced.

So take a breath, the world is not ending.

[Jdn1327]

The cars are way too heavy and clumsy in the new regulations. You have drives like Verstappen and Le Clerc that have the ability to make a car do amazing things on a single lap...but you don't see that anymore. Even when Verstappen is pushing a qualifying lap. There is no fighting the car (like Saudi 2021). He was about to do the best qualifying lap ever. But it was exciting to watch. Budget caps and technical directives aside...just make the cars lighter and things will start to close up.

[PlatinumZealot]

Ever since refueling was banned the cars have been like buses. They need to bring back refuelling and change the weight limits back to 600Kg, put new crash test requirments and put fuel limit per race to 110kg. Allow the teams to choose how they get there.

[JordanMugen]

They need to bring back refuelling and change the weight limits back to 600Kg, put new crash test requirments and put fuel limit per race to 110kg

Lower crash requirements? The minimum weight was already 640kg in 2012. Adding a halo (20kg) and the extra crash safety (another 40kg worth) brings it up to at least 700kg even if they were V8 cars with the narrow 13" tyres.

You suppose structural optimisation should be the main battleground for F1?

"How to acheive 2024 crash test passes with a 600kg minimum weight"?

The old F2 car weighed 755kg in 2019-2023 and the new 2024 F2 car now weighs 795kg to comply with 2022-on crash testing which is more strict than the old crash tests. Obviously the roll hoop crash test severity was increased for 2024 based on Zhou's crash in 2023.

Obviously F1 cars now have crashworthiness similar to Indycars. In the past, they did not. You suppose it is possible to cheat physics and make a tub with equal strength to an Indycar that only weighs 60kg like past un-robust Grand Prix cars, instead of ~150kg like the current and past Indycar tubs and current F1 & F2 tubs?

[Seanspeed]

Ever since refueling was banned the cars have been like buses. They need to bring back refuelling and change the weight limits back to 600Kg, put new crash test requirments and put fuel limit per race to 110kg. Allow the teams to choose how they get there.

No. No no no no. Banning refueling was one of the best things F1 has ever done and it would be a travesty to bring it back.

Pre-2014 cars still looked extremely light on their feet and nothing like the boats of the current era. It's not just weight, either. The 2017 Ferrari was class of the field in slower corners, being clearly more agile than the Mercedes, and the reason was almost entirely its shorter wheelbase. But this was ultimately a disadvantage over the course of a season, and the long wheelbase was the way to go, for aerodynamic reasons. Basically, the aero regs simply favored a long wheelbase solution, even if a shorter one was still allowed.

But the weight absolutely is a big thing at this point. The bigger wheels, wider+longer cars, increased safety regulations, ERS and whatnot - it's all ballooned weight quite a bit. Obviously full-race fuel did as well, but this alone was not enough to get where we are now, and it improved the spectacle and competition in so many ways that we cant go back.

I think if we were to make one change to make cars more agile again, it should be to shorten and narrow the cars again. It would not only make the cars more reactive again, but it would also be a great aerodynamic and packaging challenge for teams.

[Watto]

Yep. Mentioned a the flexi wings and blown diffusers above forgot about those others. RBR were the kinds of fineing loopholes around the flexiwing rules back then and modifications they made. Renault did very well too with the blown diffuser - which I can't quite recall all the details on between the hot and cold blown but recall it wasn't an easy task controlling how much the exhaust'blew' off and on throttle some tricky engine mapping etc.

The tyre wars were a shot at Ferrari's dominance too iircc. The FIA has a long history here on many teams don't think they single anyone out if found using too grey an area of the rules.

There was a TD in the middle of 2021 that slowed Honda. It was said to then hurt the way Honda was managing the electrical power.

That was just from the top of my head, i'm sure i missed some...

Now that i'm stopping to think about it, i belive there was also some clarifications made about Red Bull having a flexible tea tray/bib at some point.
Everything in a Red Bull car has been accused of flexing at least once, front and rear wings, front of the floor, back of the floor, edges of the floor...

And the exhaust blowing, multiple attempts to stop it, one can right a book about this saga...
First version EBD(RB6 i think) blew on the floor and entered the diffuser through a mouse hole, mouse holes were banned for 2011(now they are legal again), in response Red Bull came up with elongated oval exhausts that blew right in the space between the diffuser and the rear wheels.
Sometime between early 2011 and 2012, there was the off-throttle clampdown.

For 2012, exhausts had to be round and placed at a certain height off the floor and they also couldn't be aimed down(at least not directly), that should do it right?
Think again, may i present you the Coanda bridge to guide the exhaust plume back where it needs to go lol.

I think 2013 was the only season where the FIA and rival teams were like, "you know what let them have this, we need to think about 2014 anyway".

Yeah, quick look things like Renault mass damper in the mid 2000s etc.

F1 is littered with cleaver tricks being banned over the years.Don't think anyone can say its targeted one team specifically. Too many fans tall into the trap though of thinking their favorite team/driver is unfairly targeted happens all too often in sport.

[PlatinumZealot]

They need to bring back refuelling and change the weight limits back to 600Kg, put new crash test requirments and put fuel limit per race to 110kg

Lower crash requirements? The minimum weight was already 640kg in 2012. Adding a halo (20kg) and the extra crash safety (another 40kg worth) brings it up to at least 700kg even if they were V8 cars with the narrow 13" tyres.

You suppose structural optimisation should be the main battleground for F1?

"How to acheive 2024 crash test passes with a 600kg minimum weight"?

The old F2 car weighed 755kg in 2019-2023 and the new 2024 F2 car now weighs 795kg to comply with 2022-on crash testing which is more strict than the old crash tests. Obviously the roll hoop crash test severity was increased for 2024 based on Zhou's crash in 2023.

Obviously F1 cars now have crashworthiness similar to Indycars. In the past, they did not. You suppose it is possible to cheat physics and make a tub with equal strength to an Indycar that only weighs 60kg like past un-robust Grand Prix cars, instead of ~150kg like the current and past Indycar tubs and current F1 & F2 tubs?

Nope. Same crash safety. Lighter cars need lighter crash structures and lighter safety devices. I still stand firm at 600kg.

[PlatinumZealot]

Ever since refueling was banned the cars have been like buses. They need to bring back refuelling and change the weight limits back to 600Kg, put new crash test requirments and put fuel limit per race to 110kg. Allow the teams to choose how they get there.

No. No no no no. Banning refueling was one of the best things F1 has ever done and it would be a travesty to bring it back.

Pre-2014 cars still looked extremely light on their feet and nothing like the boats of the current era. It's not just weight, either. The 2017 Ferrari was class of the field in slower corners, being clearly more agile than the Mercedes, and the reason was almost entirely its shorter wheelbase.

No just no. lol. The cars were big old tankers that had nothing close to the agility of 2008 cars and prior. I won't even count 2009 because they were still getting to grips with the new rules.

[deadhead]

Ever since refueling was banned the cars have been like buses. They need to bring back refuelling and change the weight limits back to 600Kg, put new crash test requirments and put fuel limit per race to 110kg. Allow the teams to choose how they get there.

I like that a lot

[PlatinumZealot]

I mean you are pretty much screwed for the season if your rival is at 650kg and you are at 680kilos.. but who knows you might have a beast of a car for Monza. Did I mention that fuel flow rate is unrestricted in these rules? Yeah only then will we see the real drivers on the edge of their wits.

[JordanMugen]

Nope. Same crash safety. Lighter cars need lighter crash structures and lighter safety devices. I still stand firm at 600kg.

Do you have data to show it would be possible to meet Indianapolis Motor Speedway 370kph crash requirements with a 600kg car?

Alpine already failed with efforts to lightweight their 2024 monocoque while meeting 2024 crash test requirements:

The weight problem is primarily down to the monocoque failing the side-impact test.

The monocoque was designed with weight-saving measures incorporated in the internal structure where there is an amount of empty space among the carbon fibre. Simulations said the design was strong enough, but it’s understood the monocoque failed the test emphatically.

As a result, it has been reinforced - and that has come at a significant weight cost.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/why- ... yet-again/

Your notion seems dubious IMO, as surely there is a reason Indycars weighed 150kg more than Grand Prix cars in 1993 and for why they now they weigh about the same with more aligned crash safety levels (no more F399 MSC broken legs for the most part)?



Is Mansell wildly mistaken about the need for things to be "strong" and "solid" when a lightweight car would offer the same speedway and superspeedway crash safety (which F1 now duplicates for the most part even though F1 does not race on superspeedways)?

It's not a matter of crumple zones. It is matter of the monocoque and roll hoop now needing to remain intact no matter what you hit and how fast you hit it, which is the not the case for F1 in the past -- be it monocoques snapping in half in Schumacher's era or Zhou's roll hoop shearing off, this is all unacceptable now.

The monocoque needs to be virtually indestructible like an Indycar now, no?

If that was possible at 600kg, would not Indycar have done so? Would not F1 have added things like the halo with no increase in minimum weight?

Your implication seems to be that "same crash safety" = lower force in crash test to account for lighter car & lower momentum, not the same force (so the SAME crash safety) but just make your car lighter and good luck with that?

Surely Zhou's failed roll hoop, however, shows that F1 teams are not to be trusted? It did not have any reserve margin beyond a now outdated roll hoop test.

The inability to trust F1 teams to overbuild crash structures is why the halo and side impact structures are control parts, no? Why the front, rear and side impact tests should be as severe as possible to prevent subpar designs like the Alpine, NOT scaled down in line with reduced momentum of a lower minimum weight?

[DChemTech]

Let's flip it - why do we need a weight limit at all?

Why not:
- set clear, measurable safety standards
- have an all-encompassing budget cap
- have all the size & shape regulation boxes a design has to meet (IMO there can be more room there as well, but that's another story)

and then just let teams roll with it? As long as they can meet all requirements above, they can make the car as light as they want.