107% Rule

[xpensive]

On a 100 second lap such as Valencia, 104% would be 4s behind and lapped in 25, which should be reasonable. Bring back pre-qual?

I have never heard Clark, Stewart, Lauda, Prost, Senna, Mansell or Schumacher complain about this. Throughout their career they had slower cars on track and they got on with the business. 107% is appropriate.

How quickly we can forget about the 1989 Hungarian GP, when the lapping of Stefan Johansson in his Onyx decided the race?

Stefan was fastet in pre-Q btw, with a time 104% of Patrese's on pole, you bet that Ayrton complained, WB.

[marcush.]

allow all in even on a race by race basis ,and bring on prequaly !

[xpensive]

Allow anyone to compete, the fastest of pre-Q on friday night will compete with the slowest on Saturday for a place on the grid??

[marcush.]

Allow anyone to compete, the fastest of pre-Q on friday night will compete with the slowest on Saturday for a place on the grid??

ha that would be something!
Bumpday in F1 ...fair and square ..3 laps each ....starting delay of the two cars 50 seconds...and the whole thing at the end of Q3... so the slow cars have a real reason not to be last..

I vote for this!

[xpensive]

Now we're getting somewhere marcush, imagine the interest raised for Fridays and Saturdays, and do allow the local entries!

WB is going to hate this though, yes I know.

[WhiteBlue]

On a 100 second lap such as Valencia, 104% would be 4s behind and lapped in 25, which should be reasonable. Bring back pre-qual?

I have never heard Clark, Stewart, Lauda, Prost, Senna, Mansell or Schumacher complain about this. Throughout their career they had slower cars on track and they got on with the business. 107% is appropriate.

How quickly we can forget about the 1989 Hungarian GP, when the lapping of Stefan Johansson in his Onyx decided the race?

Stefan was fastet in pre-Q btw, with a time 104% of Patrese's on pole, you bet that Ayrton complained, WB.

Well, you do get the occasional odd ball. But generally there were a lot of slower cars on track and I cannot remember systematic complaints about that. It was more often about rookies (like Eddie Irvine) not knowing the ettiquette. The 107% rule was only invented nine years ago if memory is right.

Allow anyone to compete, the fastest of pre-Q on friday night will compete with the slowest on Saturday for a place on the grid??

ha that would be something!
Bumpday in F1 ...fair and square ..3 laps each ....starting delay of the two cars 50 seconds...and the whole thing at the end of Q3... so the slow cars have a real reason not to be last..

I vote for this!

This is an OT issue. Licensing new teams isn't an issue of speed alone. Compared to previous decades the constructor rules are a lot more stringent these days. On top you have a new CA were the FiA and the teams have agreed to exercise a joint screening process. Do you think the teams will let that position of power slip again? Sooner you can sell refridgerators to Inuit than open qualifying to the teams.

[xpensive]

Whatever you say WB, as if I didn't see this coming, a friday night pre-Q for locals an wharever would hardly disturb anyone but the ticket offices, why should entries such as HRT and Virgin have their positions on the grid unchallenged?

The way I understand things, the GP2 racers, Marcus Ericsson in particular, should give those garagistes a match, in their own cars!

[marcush.]

Whatever you say WB, as if I didn't see this coming, a friday night pre-Q for locals an wharever would hardly disturb anyone but the ticket offices, why should entries such as HRT and Virgin have their positions on the grid unchallenged?

The way I understand things, the GP2 racers, Marcus Ericsson in particular, should give those garagistes a match, in their own cars!

that would be ok to me as well.
Give them a shootout to the quickest GP2 .If you don´t beat him you are out...


What is the problem having some aspiring teams coming to F1 ? If they don´t make it .who cares..What this whole selction process has created is a complete mess with USF1
they would not have gained any publicity if there were 15 outfits trying to build a car and compete..
And Bernie financing HRT to fullfil his obligations..also not very clever..

[xpensive]

Agrred again marcush, why sanctioning crap like HRT or Virgin with no future whaatsoever?

[WhiteBlue]

....

You can dream up new ways to fill the grid all day, it will remain a dream if you don't recognize the economic reality.

I fail to see how pre qualifying with spec series cars will contribute anything to improving the lap times of existing teams. The 107% rule is decided for next year and the new licensees will be decided by the legal mechanism in the concord agreement.

[xpensive]

.....

[marcush.]

i completely fail to understand why the franchise should allow those monkeys to claim they are building a car when somewhere else creditable people are prepared to do it
and prove to be serious:see fernandez ..who really put together the one new team that
has lived up to the announcements tzhey made in the shortest timescale .
If this is business interest ..F1 will not live for long ..as Bernie will not live forever ..he seems to be guy who is pulling the strings to make it work at least...

But back on the 107% to me this is all to easy to achieve .Neither Virgin nor HRT should be sure to qualify with what they show since the beginning of the year .I understand that things are not easy and you have to learn ,etc.. but this is supposed to be F1 ,the pinnacle.
They have no idea of what Mercedes are talking about when speaking of tyre issues ...this is lightyears away from their problems..and I honestly think it should now
be exactly their concern for the second half of the season...but it is not ...they dream of miracle updates but struggle to widen the gap towards HRT who do nothing but learn the car they have..wich is crap and still they find enough in it to compete with Virginia ...104% and show them the door on saturday evening ,till they improve.
Give them those 2 hours they don´t race for a test and try again next race.

[WhiteBlue]

i completely fail to understand why the franchise should allow those monkeys to claim they are building a car when somewhere else creditable people are prepared to do it
and prove to be serious:see fernandez ..who really put together the one new team that
has lived up to the announcements tzhey made in the shortest timescale .
If this is business interest ..F1 will not live for long ..as Bernie will not live forever ..he seems to be guy who is pulling the strings to make it work at least...

The existing teams have an interest to keep new teams away from the championship. This is why we have a constructor status to make it difficult in the first place. This is why Montezemolo is banging on about third cars for the top teams.

F1 will be governed by the existing concord agreement until the end of the 2012 season. The Concord says that any empty slot up to thirteen teams will be filled by the FiA licensing new teams that will be selected by the F1 commission. The F1 commission is dominated by FOTA (the teams) and takes decisions with 70% majority.

I fail to see how anybody will convince FiA and FOTA to give up those privileges. It has never happened in the past and it is very unlikely to happen in the future. We might as well take it for fact that they will not change.

Any criticism by the teams and drivers with the 107% rule should be seen with an open mind for the vested interests of those players. Afaik Webber and Alonso have been the most vocal in criticizing slower drivers and telling us they should not fight for position. Alonso did it in Monaco. Webber took the same stance after his Valencia accident.

If we look at who was involved in Monaco and Valencia we find that it were not the HRT's which are the slowest. The controversy usually is about a Lotus or Virgin. Alonso fought Di Grassi's Virgin and Webber collided with Kovalainen's Lotus. So it never was the slowest car but the driver who used his right to defend his position. To expect any driver in whatever car to roll over and give a position away is childish. If they use their right to defend the position the top drivers should deal with it and shut up. The arm waiving is simply silly and undignified.

The same goes for teams who criticize small teams with 10% of the budget or resources they have themselves for being slow. Ferrari, Williams and McLaren have also started poor many years ago and were given room to breathe and grow up. They have no right to make it even more difficult by raising the bar beyond 107% to say 104%.