Formula One's rule makers have today, just ahead of the start of the USA GP weekend, revealed the complete set of technical and financial regulations that are set to dramatically improve racing as of 2021.
I'm a bit on the fence... don't mind this so much, but it opens the door to further standardisation which is not what F1 is about. It's a constructors championship as much as a drivers championship. Where I don't see this as an issue is it's a part teams can purchase anyway.
I agree with you as welljjn9128 wrote: ↑19 Feb 2019, 19:17I'm a bit on the fence... don't mind this so much, but it opens the door to further standardisation which is not what F1 is about. It's a constructors championship as much as a drivers championship. Where I don't see this as an issue is it's a part teams can purchase anyway.
I agree with you, my initial concerns with this was the removal of innovation but i guess the current seamless shift sequential manuals are pretty much at the peak of their potential and all the remaining areas for development are banned. Eg dual clutch etc.jjn9128 wrote: ↑19 Feb 2019, 19:17I'm a bit on the fence... don't mind this so much, but it opens the door to further standardisation which is not what F1 is about. It's a constructors championship as much as a drivers championship. Where I don't see this as an issue is it's a part teams can purchase anyway.
Xtrac are probably set up to supply/manufacture large volumes of gears, likewise Hewland or Riccardo could probably manage. Williams and McLaren applied technologies might have a go, but not sure they're set up for this, as the tender closes on 15th March with the supplier selected between 15th and 30th April I don't think any team has the time to sort the facilities.
100% agreed. I have no idea where they come up with such brilliant solutions to the problems that don't exist. I'm really worried about 2021 rules because I don't think they have a clue about what they want (even 2019 rules are rushed and haphazard to me). Standardized parts for F1 is not the way to go. If we wanted that, we would watch spec series.jjn9128 wrote: ↑19 Feb 2019, 19:17I'm a bit on the fence... don't mind this so much, but it opens the door to further standardisation which is not what F1 is about. It's a constructors championship as much as a drivers championship. Where I don't see this as an issue is it's a part teams can purchase anyway.
Liberty do not care about the technical purity of Formula 1, what they care about is being able to sell F1 as a product and in their eyes that's lots of close racing between lots of different drivers and teams. I'm pretty sure their ultimate end goal is for everything you cannot see on the outside of the car is to be standardised or otherwise homologated to be the same performance.Morteza wrote: ↑20 Feb 2019, 00:41100% agreed. I have no idea where they come up with such brilliant solutions to the problems that don't exist. I'm really worried about 2021 rules because I don't think they have a clue about what they want (even 2019 rules are rushed and haphazard to me). Standardized parts for F1 is not the way to go. If we wanted that, we would watch spec series.jjn9128 wrote: ↑19 Feb 2019, 19:17I'm a bit on the fence... don't mind this so much, but it opens the door to further standardisation which is not what F1 is about. It's a constructors championship as much as a drivers championship. Where I don't see this as an issue is it's a part teams can purchase anyway.
I mean... Ross Brawn is an employee of Liberty Media for FOM so I can't agree with that assertion. The fact Bratches and Carey put him in charge of the technical stuff means they have some sympathy for the history of the sport.Cold Fussion wrote: ↑26 Mar 2019, 15:53Liberty do not care about the technical purity of Formula 1, what they care about is being able to sell F1 as a product and in their eyes that's lots of close racing between lots of different drivers and teams. I'm pretty sure their ultimate end goal is for everything you cannot see on the outside of the car is to be standardised or otherwise homologated to be the same performance.
Disagree entirely. F1 has 3 competing parties of roughly equal power, FOM/Liberty, FIA and the teams. How well would you expect a faceless executive of Liberty to be able to negotiate this quagmire and successfully execute Liberty's vision for F1? I'd wager not very well. Appointing Ross Brawn was a shrewd move on Liberty's part. All that really matters in the end are their actions and so far there is very little evidence to say Liberty's primary focus is to preserve F1 as a bastion of technical excellence.jjn9128 wrote: ↑26 Mar 2019, 16:12I mean... Ross Brawn is an employee of Liberty Media for FOM so I can't agree with that assertion. The fact Bratches and Carey put him in charge of the technical stuff means they have some sympathy for the history of the sport.Cold Fussion wrote: ↑26 Mar 2019, 15:53Liberty do not care about the technical purity of Formula 1, what they care about is being able to sell F1 as a product and in their eyes that's lots of close racing between lots of different drivers and teams. I'm pretty sure their ultimate end goal is for everything you cannot see on the outside of the car is to be standardised or otherwise homologated to be the same performance.
