2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
User avatar
henry
324
Joined: 23 Feb 2004, 20:49
Location: England

Re: 2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post

dans79 wrote:
henry wrote:
Do you think that this disparity is sporting? If you don't what do you think the FIA should do about it?
I already said it wasn't sporting. To fix the issue, two things need to happen, Bernie needs to be removed from the equation (i don't care how), and the FIA needs a rule that mandates teams only get paid by how the finish in the championship.
As turbo points out the FIA have no direct control over the money problem. They can only do indirect things such as controlling component life or engine cost or wind tunnel time. Or, to the disptaste of most on this forum, restricting innovation. My suggestion was for a change to something they do control. It would be a case of 2 wrongs would be a little more right than the current situation.
Fortune favours the prepared; she has no favourites and takes no sides.
Truth is confirmed by inspection and delay; falsehood by haste and uncertainty : Tacitus

User avatar
dans79
267
Joined: 03 Mar 2013, 19:33
Location: USA

Re: 2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post

henry wrote:It would be a case of 2 wrongs would be a little more right than the current situation.
I'd prefer they find a way to fix the real problem, vs another band-aid.
201 105 104 9 9 7

User avatar
henry
324
Joined: 23 Feb 2004, 20:49
Location: England

Re: 2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post

dans79 wrote:
henry wrote:It would be a case of 2 wrongs would be a little more right than the current situation.
I'd prefer they find a way to fix the real problem, vs another band-aid.
Fair enough. It seems unlikely to me that that will ever happen. The regulator, FIA, has too few levers to pull.
Fortune favours the prepared; she has no favourites and takes no sides.
Truth is confirmed by inspection and delay; falsehood by haste and uncertainty : Tacitus

User avatar
Andres125sx
166
Joined: 13 Aug 2013, 10:15
Location: Madrid, Spain

Re: 2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post

turbof1 wrote:
In exchange for a payment of £211.76m - which represents about a year's revenue to Ecclestone's Formula One Management.

Ecclestone will pay the FIA £35.3m immediately, and the balance over the remainder of the term at £1.76m per year.
(Yes indeed, it's not even going to be inflation corrected over time!)
OMG, wondering what´s the part of the deal we general public don´t know .... :roll: :?

User avatar
adrianjordan
24
Joined: 28 Feb 2010, 11:34
Location: West Yorkshire, England

Re: 2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post

Eccleston now quoted by BBC as saying that a deal over engines hasn't been reached and that unless he gets his way with regards to getting rid of the hybrid engines then there'll be "trouble ahead".

Can someone please just show that man to a nice retirement island...

(On phone so can't post link)
Favourite driver: Lando Norris
Favourite team: McLaren

Turned down the chance to meet Vettel at Silverstone in 2007. He was a test driver at the time and I didn't think it was worth queuing!! 🤦🏻‍♂️

User avatar
OneAlex
0
Joined: 24 Oct 2015, 13:31
Location: England

Re: 2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post

adrianjordan wrote:Eccleston now quoted by BBC as saying that a deal over engines hasn't been reached and that unless he gets his way with regards to getting rid of the hybrid engines then there'll be "trouble ahead".

Can someone please just show that man to a nice retirement island...

(On phone so can't post link)
The link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/35428495

While the engine manufacturers do have too much power, I still don't think the biggest issue is cost* (which as many have said could still be sorted by giving teams more of the revenue). This new threat just smells of one last big power play by an ageing man, and I don't think he'll get his way this time; I reckon the rules are now largely set and Merc et al have won.

Maybe we can send him here?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longwood_House


*Controversial and impratical idea: maybe to reduce their power and influence manufacturers should be banned from having their own teams to avoid engine/mapping favouritism at the expense of customer teams

ScottB
ScottB
4
Joined: 17 Mar 2012, 14:45

Re: 2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post

OneAlex wrote:
adrianjordan wrote:Eccleston now quoted by BBC as saying that a deal over engines hasn't been reached and that unless he gets his way with regards to getting rid of the hybrid engines then there'll be "trouble ahead".

Can someone please just show that man to a nice retirement island...

(On phone so can't post link)
The link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/35428495

While the engine manufacturers do have too much power, I still don't think the biggest issue is cost* (which as many have said could still be sorted by giving teams more of the revenue). This new threat just smells of one last big power play by an ageing man, and I don't think he'll get his way this time; I reckon the rules are now largely set and Merc et al have won.

Maybe we can send him here?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longwood_House


*Controversial and impratical idea: maybe to reduce their power and influence manufacturers should be banned from having their own teams to avoid engine/mapping favouritism at the expense of customer teams
Instantly knocking the Ferrari, Mercedes and Renault teams out the sport? No chance!

Lilly67
Lilly67
0
Joined: 01 Feb 2016, 17:48

Re: 2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post

f1 is the only sport i know of that has dramatic rule changes every year i don't understand why this is the case
I'm Lilly i am a huge fan of everything car related especially f1

User avatar
godlameroso
309
Joined: 16 Jan 2010, 21:27
Location: Miami FL

Re: 2016-2017 chassis and engine rules (proposed)

Post

Because it forces teams to adapt, they do it to shake up the standings, try to keep things interesting. Except right now, the only thing we see is how much of a difference the engine makes. The more power you have the faster you go, the faster you go, the more heat you put in the tires, and the more downforce you make. I think the only aero change that should be made is to re-introduce the beam wing and raise the height of the diffuser to 20 mm instead of 12.5 like we have now. That alone is probably worth 1.5 seconds, another 1.5 seconds from mechanical grip of wider tires, and the natural evolution of the power units for another second, there's 4 right there. That means average race laps around Barcelona in the 1:25's to 1:26's for the top teams and qualifying in the low 1:20's, which is perfectly acceptable to me.
Saishū kōnā