2019 Rules Changes - Revision 20 Dec 2018

[subcritical71]

Looks like the 2019 rules were updated. I went through them to see what changed from the originally released version (20 Oct 2018).

- Bolded and underline = added/changed text
- Bolded and italic = removed text

Section 3.3.6
October 2018;
3.3.6 Front wing profiles
Front wing profiles are defined as bodywork that is contained in the volume which extends from 250mm to 950mm from the car centre plane, and within the volume defined in Article 3.3.3. They must meet the following criteria :
a) Any intersection of these profiles with any longitudinal vertical plane may contain no more than five closed sections, each of which may contain no concave radius of curvature less than 50mm. The rearmost closed section may have a ‘gurney’ type trim tab fitted to its trailing edge provided no dimension of it exceeds 10mm.
b) For the part of the profiles outboard of a plane that lies 400mm from the car centre plane :
i) The rearmost point of every closed section must be visible when viewed from below.
ii) With the exception of the rearmost closed section, the rearmost point of every closed section must not be visible when viewed from above.
iii) The normal to any point of the profiles’ surface must not subtend an angle greater than 15° to a vertical plane which is normal to the diagonal line described in Article 3.3.3(a).
c) Outboard of a plane that lies 400mm from the car centre plane the minimum distance between adjacent sections at any longitudinal vertical plane must lie between 5mm and 15mm at their closest position.
Minimal exceptions to the above geometrical criteria can occur in areas of transition close to consecutive longitudinal vertical cross sections with a different number of individual profiles. Outboard of a longitudinal plane that lies more than 400mm from the car centre plane, such changes may only be achieved by the bifurcation of a single closed section into two or more closed sections, and the method of construction of this transition is detailed below.
The area of transition will be defined by two vertical planes, which are parallel to each other, up to 20mm apart, and form an angle of no more than 20° to the car centre plane. Within this area :
d) The inboard (single) profile surface must be defined over the full span of the transition area in full compliance with Article 3.3.6.
e) The outboard profile (two or more) surfaces must be defined over the full span of the transition area in full compliance with Article 3.3.6, lie entirely within the single profile surface, and share the same overall chord.
f) Once the inboard and outboard profile surfaces have been defined, blending surfaces must be defined to join the profiles together. These surfaces must lie within the volume of the single, inboard profile surface, and entirely within the transition volume. Once these minimal transition surfaces have been defined, the original overlapping surfaces of the inboard and outboard profiles must be trimmed accordingly.
Once the front wing profiles have been defined, they must be trimmed by the virtual endplate surface defined in Article 3.3.5, and the portion of the front wing profiles outboard of that surface must be discarded. Where the front wing profiles intersect the front wing endplate, a maximum fillet radius of 10mm may be applied.

December 2018;
3.3.6 Front wing profiles
Front wing profiles are defined as bodywork that is contained in the volume which extends from 250mm to 950mm from the car centre plane, and within the volume defined in Article 3.3.3. They must meet the following criteria :
a) Any intersection of these profiles with any longitudinal vertical plane may contain no more than five closed sections, each of which may contain no concave radius of curvature less than 50mm.
b) For the part of the profiles outboard of a plane that lies 400mm from the car centre plane :
i) The rearmost point of every closed section must be visible when viewed from below.
ii) With the exception of the rearmost closed section, the rearmost point of every closed section must not be visible when viewed from above.
iii) The normal to any point of the profiles’ surface must not subtend an angle greater than 15° to a vertical plane which is normal to the diagonal line described in Article 3.3.3(a).
c) Outboard of a plane that lies 400mm from the car centre plane the minimum distance between adjacent sections at any longitudinal vertical plane must lie between 5mm and 15mm at their closest position.
Once the rearmost profile has been defined a single ‘gurney’ type trim tab may be fitted to its trailing edge provided no dimension in a vertical longitudinal section exceeds 10mm. This part must comply with the constraints of Article 3.3.6 (b) (iii), with the exception of its innermost and outermost 10mm (measured in a direction normal to the car centre plane) where these constraints do not apply. For clarity, gurneys that overlap with the adjustable and non- adjustable portion of the profiles (as described in Article 3.3.7) will be considered to be a single gurney, provided they satisfy all of the above criteria in the design position of the profiles.
Minimal exceptions to the above geometrical criteria can occur in areas of transition close to consecutive longitudinal vertical cross sections with a different number of individual profiles. Outboard of a longitudinal plane that lies more than 400mm from the car centre plane, such changes may only be achieved by the bifurcation of a single closed section into two or more closed sections, and the method of construction of this transition is detailed below.
The area of transition will be defined by two vertical planes, which are parallel to each other, up to 20mm apart, and form an angle of no more than 20° to the car centre plane. Within this area :
d) The inboard (single) profile surface must be defined over the full span of the transition area in full compliance with Article 3.3.6.
e) The outboard profile (two or more) surfaces must be defined over the full span of the transition area in full compliance with Article 3.3.6, lie entirely within the single profile surface, and share the same overall chord.
f) Once the inboard and outboard profile surfaces have been defined, blending surfaces must be defined to join the profiles together. These surfaces must lie within the volume of the single, inboard profile surface, and entirely within the transition volume. Once these minimal transition surfaces have been defined, the original overlapping surfaces of the inboard and outboard profiles must be trimmed accordingly.
Once the front wing profiles have been defined, they must be trimmed by the virtual endplate surface defined in Article 3.3.5, and the portion of the front wing profiles outboard of that surface must be discarded. Where the front wing profiles intersect the front wing endplate, a maximum fillet radius of 10mm may be applied.

3.3.7
October 2018
3.3.7 Adjustability of front wing
Once the Front Wing Profiles have been defined in accordance with Article 3.3.6, a portion of up to four of the rearmost profiles may be adjustable in order to trim the front wing aerodynamic load.
For this purpose :
a) The parts of the front wing profiles that are included within the adjustable part must have no degrees of freedom between them.
b) The adjustment may only be a rotation about a fixed axis. The original position of these profiles (as defined in accordance with Article 3.3.6) must be included within the overall range of adjustment. Furthermore, the maximum deviation for any point of these profiles between the uppermost and lowermost angle of adjustment must not exceed 35mm. Minimal exceptions to the geometrical criteria for the wing profiles may be made in the junction between the adjustable and non-adjustable parts, in order to ensure the necessary level of sealing.
For the avoidance of doubt, the adjustment permitted under this Article is only allowed when the car is stationary and by the use of a tool, and in accordance with the Formula 1 Sporting Regulations.
Furthermore, any such variation of incidence maintains compliance with all of the bodywork regulations, with the exception of Articles 3.3.6 (a) and 3.3.6 (b).

December 2018
3.3.7 Adjustability of front wing
Once the Front Wing Profiles have been defined in accordance with Article 3.3.6, a portion of up to four of the rearmost profiles and the gurney, may be adjustable in order to trim the front wing aerodynamic load.
For this purpose :
a) The parts of the front wing profiles that are included within the adjustable part must have no degrees of freedom between them.
b) The adjustment may only be a rotation about a fixed axis. In plan view, this axis must not subtend an angle greater than 20deg to the diagonal line described in Article 3.3.3 (a), and in front view it must not subtend an angle greater than 15deg to the horizontal plane. For the full extent of the adjustable part of the profiles outboard of a plane that lies 400mm from the car centre plane, and in any longitudinal vertical plane, this axis must lie between two vertical lines, one that passes through the forward most point of the adjustable part of the profiles in that section, and another one 30mm behind the first line.
c) The junction between the adjustable and non-adjustable parts of the profiles must be defined by one or two surfaces of revolution about the fixed axis of rotation defined in 3.3.7 b . Furthermore, any normal to these surfaces of revolution may not subtend an angle greater than 55° to a line that is normal to the car centre plane. These surfaces of revolution must also lie inboard of the virtual endplate surface defined in Article 3.3.5.
d) The original position of these profiles (as defined in accordance with Article 3.3.6) must be included within the overall range of adjustment. Furthermore, the maximum deviation for any point of these profiles between the uppermost and lowermost angle of adjustment must not exceed 35mm.
e) Minimal exceptions to the geometrical criteria of Article 3.3.6 for the wing profiles may be made in the junction between the adjustable and non-adjustable parts, in order to ensure the necessary level of sealing. Such parts must lie within 3mm from one of the two surfaces of revolution and their maximum size must be the minimum necessary amount required to achieve a 20mm overlap between the adjustable and the non-adjustable parts of the profiles over the whole range of movement.
For the avoidance of doubt, the adjustment permitted under this Article is only allowed when the car is stationary and by the use of a tool, and in accordance with the Formula 1 Sporting Regulations.
Furthermore, any such variation of incidence maintains compliance with all of the bodywork regulations, with the exception of Articles 3.3.6 (a) and 3.3.6 (b).

3.3.9
October 2018
3.3.9 Front wing auxiliary components
For mechanical, structural or measurement reasons only, the following components will be permitted in addition to the bodywork defined in Articles 3.3.5, 3.3.6 and 3.3.8 :
a) Two brackets which define the pivot axis of the adjustable part of the front wing profile, and allow the necessary movement. These brackets should be no more than 5mm thick, and in no part more than 30mm distant from either the stationary or the adjustable part of the wing profiles. A fillet radius no greater than 2mm will be permitted where these brackets join the two profiles.
b) Slot gap separator brackets between consecutive front wing profiles, provided they are no more than 5mm thick and in no part more than 25mm distant from both of the two profiles they support in relation to each other. A fillet radius no greater than 2mm will be permitted where these brackets join the two profiles.
c) A minimal mechanism with or without a minimal fairing to contain it for the angle adjustment of part of the front wing profiles, as defined in Article 3.3.7.
d) A minimal fairing that contains a single tyre temperature sensor. The dimension of the complete tyre temperature sensor and fairing must be no greater than 30mm wide x 50mm long x 30mm high. A maximum of one sensor and fairing may be positioned on each side of the car, and may be joined to the bodywork defined in Articles 3.3.5 or 3.3.6 with a minimal support.
Should there be a requirement for any additional component to be added, a team must write specifically to the FIA with an explanation, design, and calculated aerodynamic effect, in order to get approval. Such a communication will be circulated to rival teams if deemed to cover a new aspect that had previously not been considered.

December 2018 - Pretty much entirely re-written
3.3.9 Front wing auxiliary components
The following components will be permitted in addition to the bodywork defined in Articles 3.3.5, 3.3.6 and 3.3.8 for primarily mechanical, structural or measurement reasons:
a) Two brackets which define the pivot axis of the adjustable part of the front wing profile, and allow the necessary movement. These brackets must:
- be in their entirety within 40mm from both the stationary and the adjustable part of the profiles over the whole range of adjustment
- be no more than 5mm thick. A fillet radius no greater than 2mm will be permitted where these brackets join the two profiles
- have no dimension that exceeds 80mm
b) Up to sixteen (in total, per side) slot gap separator brackets which connect consecutive
front wing profiles. These brackets must:
- be in their entirety within 30mm from both of the two profiles they support in relation to each other
- be no more than 5mm thick. A fillet radius no greater than 2mm will be permitted where these brackets join the two profiles
- have no dimension that exceeds 60mm
c) A mechanism with or without a fairing to contain it for the angle adjustment of part of the front wing profiles, as defined in Article 3.3.7. This mechanism and fairing must fit within a cuboid of which is 25mm wide, 60mm long and 60mm high. This cuboid may have a free orientation in space, but must intersect both the stationary and the adjustable part of the profiles for the entire range of adjustment.
d) A fairing that contains a single tyre temperature sensor. The entire fairing and sensor must:
- fit in the union between two volumes, a cuboid which is 15mm wide, 60mm long and 50mm high and a circular cylinder which has a base diameter of 30mm and a height of 60mm. The axis of the cylinder must coincide with the major axis of the one of the 15mm x 60mm faces of the cuboid.
- be symmetrical about a plane which is parallel to the 50mm x 60mm faces of the cuboid, and - intersect either the profiles defined in Article 3.3.6 or the endplate defined in Article 3.3.5. A fillet radius no greater than 5mm will be permitted along the periphery of this intersection.
Furthermore, all the components listed above must not be visible from below, with the front wing endplates defined in Article 3.3.5 and the front wing strakes defined in Article 3.3.8 removed, and must lie inboard of the virtual endplate surface defined in Article 3.3.5.
Should there be a requirement for any additional component to be added, a team must write specifically to the FIA with an explanation, design, and calculated aerodynamic effect, in order to get approval. Such a communication will be circulated to rival teams if deemed to cover a new aspect that had previously not been considered.

3.5.1
October 2018
3.5.1 Engine cover
a) With the exception of the opening described in 15.2.6, when viewed from the side, the car must have bodywork in the area bounded by four lines: one vertical 1330mm forward of the rear wheel centre line, one horizontal 550mm above the reference plane, one horizontal 925mm above the reference plane and one diagonal which intersects the 925mm horizontal at a point 1000mm forward of the rear wheel centre line and the 550mm horizontal at a point lying 50mm forward of the rear wheel centre line.
Bodywork within this area must be arranged symmetrically about the car centre plane and, when measured 200mm vertically below the diagonal boundary line, must have minimum widths of 150mm and 50mm respectively at points lying 1000mm and 50mm forward of the rear wheel centre line. This bodywork must lie on or outside the boundary defined by a linear taper between these minimum widths.
b) Bodywork lying vertically above the upper boundary as defined in a) may be no wider than 125mm and must be arranged symmetrically about the car centre plane.
c) When viewed from the side, no bodywork forward of the rear wheel centre line may lie above a line parallel to the diagonal boundary defined in a) and intersecting the rear wheel centre line 650mm above the reference plane.

December 2018
3.5.1 Engine cover
a) With the exception of the opening described in Article 15.2.7, when viewed from the side, the car must have bodywork in the area bounded by four lines: one vertical 1330mm forward of the rear wheel centre line, one horizontal 550mm above the reference plane, one horizontal 925mm above the reference plane and one diagonal which intersects the 925mm horizontal at a point 1000mm forward of the rear wheel centre line and the 550mm horizontal at a point lying 50mm forward of the rear wheel centre line.
Bodywork within this area must be arranged symmetrically about the car centre plane and, when measured 200mm vertically below the diagonal boundary line, must have minimum widths of 150mm and 50mm respectively at points lying 1000mm and 50mm forward of the rear wheel centre line. This bodywork must lie on or outside the boundary defined by a linear taper between these minimum widths.
b) Bodywork lying vertically above the area defined in section (a) of the present Article may be no wider than 125mm and must be arranged symmetrically about the car centre plane.
c) When viewed from the side, no bodywork forward of the rear wheel centre line may lie above a line parallel to the diagonal boundary defined in a) and intersecting the rear wheel centre line 650mm above the reference plane.

4.1
October 2018
4.1 Minimum weight :
The weight of the car, without fuel, must not be less than 740kg at all times during the Event. If, when required for checking, a car is not already fitted with dry-weather tyres, it will be
weighed on a set of dry-weather tyres selected by the FIA technical delegate.

December 2018
4.1 Minimum weight :
The weight of the car, without fuel, must not be less than 743kg at all times during the Event. If, when required for checking, a car is not already fitted with dry-weather tyres, it will be
weighed on a set of dry-weather tyres selected by the FIA technical delegate.

21.1.2
October 2018
21.1.2 All cars must be equipped with four positions in which cameras or camera housings can be fitted. Referring to Drawing 6, all cars must carry (i) a camera in positions 4, and 5 and (ii) a camera or camera housing in positions 1, 2 (both sides) and 3.

December 2018
21.1.2 All cars must be equipped with six positions in which cameras or camera housings can be fitted. Referring to Drawing 6, all cars must carry (i) a camera in positions 4, and 5 and (ii) a camera or camera housing in positions 1, 2 (both sides) and 3.

So, what does it all mean?

[jjn9128]

So, what does it all mean?

The cars are going to be even heavier... with more cameras

The front wing stuff seems to be tidying up the wording around gurney tabs and slot-gap separators, so they can't be used as strakes, and flap adjustment, so incidence changes can't create outwash beyond the virtual surfaces... I think....

It will be the result of a query from a team to Whiting or brought up in a technical working group meeting.

[henry]

A NON rule change.

After all the fuss about extra sensors on Ferrari’s ERS I can’t see any changes to the ERS requirements or the sensors associated.

So business as usual, which is a pity because new requirements might have shed some light on a part of the PU for which there is little information.

[henry]

An area that hasn’t been discussed much is the change to driver weight rules:

4.6 Weight of the driver :
4.6.1 The weight of the driver with his seat and driving equipment will be established by the FIA technical delegate at the first Event of the Championship, this reference weight may be amended at any time during the Championship season if deemed necessary by the FIA technical delegate. This reference weight will be used to establish the minimum weight of the driver and ballast referred to in Article 4.6.2 below.
4.6.2 The reference weight of the driver will be added to the weight of any ballast designated for this purpose and, at no time during the Event, may this be less than 80kg.

It has been suggested that this will level the playing field by reducing the advantage lighter drivers have in the amount and positioning of ballast. Given that the weight distribution is mandated in the rules I would think this will not be a large effect.

I think this rule change will have a bigger effect on the drivers mental well-being and state of mind. At the end of this post I have listed the height, weight, BMI and weight at BMI = 23.5 for most of the current drivers and some who have retired. (I made this list to compare F1 and MotoGP a couple of years ago).

BMI (body mass index) is calculated as weight(kg) divided by height square (m^2). It is an indication of a healthy weight range for individuals. For the general male population the range 20 to 25, is considered normal. Amongst athletes, those with a higher proportion of muscle mass those numbers are both higher, maybe 22 to 27.

As can be seen from the numbers below two years ago F1 drivers were at the light end of the spectrum. This typically means they have to work hard at maintaining their weight. They must be extremely careful with their diet and their exercise regimes, just enough muscle is what they aimed at.

There is likely to be a cost to this constant vigilance and hunger. Research into people who suffer food deprivation shows that it affects mood and general mental capability. I know that these are wealthy individuals with a professional support network, so they won’t suffer the full impact like distressed individuals but I can’t help but think that those who had a very low BMI , say Kvyat or Ocon, Verstappen, Ricciardo, Hulkenberg, will all have benefits from improved mood and using less intellectual energy on managing their weight.

Some drivers have commented on this, not least Hamilton and Bottas, both of whom have talked of better preparations because they can eat more normally.

I don’t think this will make a huge difference but I have a suspicion that we may see less moody behaviour from drivers in general (less collisions) and some of the taller or more heavier built drivers able to perform to their full capabilities.

Ht.m kg. BMI. Kg @BMI=23.5
Kimi Raikkonen 1.75 63 20.6 72.0
Sebastian Vettel 1.68 62 22.0 66.3
Esteban Ocon 1.86 66 19.1 81.3
Sergio Perez 1.75 64 20.9 72.0
Romain Grosjean 1.80 68 21.0 76.1
Kevin Magnussen 1.74 68 22.5 71.1
Fernando Alonso 1.71 68 23.3 68.7
Stoffel Vandoorne 1.76 65 21.0 72.8
Valtteri Bottas 1.73 70 23.4 70.3
Lewis Hamilton 1.74 68 22.5 71.1
Max Verstappen 1.80 67 20.7 76.1
Daniel Ricciardo 1.78 66 20.8 74.5
Nico Hulkenberg 1.84 70 20.7 79.6
Carlos Sainz 1.77 66 21.1 73.6
Marcus Ericsson 1.80 69 21.3 76.1
Charles leclerc 1.79 69 21.5 75.3
Pierre Gasly 1.77 70 22.3 73.6
Brendon Hartley 1.84 67 19.8 79.6
Sergei Sirotkin 1.84 71 21.0 79.6
Lance stroll 1.82 70 21.1 77.8
Average 21.3 74.4
Jenson Button 1.81 72 22.0 77.0
Nico Rosberg 1.78 67 21.1 74.5
Daniil Kvyat 1.81 64 19.5 77.0
Felipe Massa 1.66 59 21.4 64.8
21.0 73.3

[subcritical71]

An area that hasn’t been discussed much is the change to driver weight rules:

You wouldn't have numbers for Mark Weber, would you? It would always amaze me how thin he needed to be due to his height.

[henry]

An area that hasn’t been discussed much is the change to driver weight rules:

You wouldn't have numbers for Mark Weber, would you? It would always amaze me how thin he needed to be due to his height.

In 2013 he was reported as 74.8kg and 1.80m for a BMI of 22.3, that’s 11st 11lb and 6ft.

So a fairly “normal” BMI . Today’s rules wouldnt have helped him much. In a magazine article he said he hadn’t “eaten for 5 years”.

Once again the rules appear to do one thing, make it easier for taller drivers, when the reality is it will give the shorter drivers another potential advantage by allowing them to operate at a more comfortable weight.

A further point I find interesting is that a 1.8m driver is in the 70 to 80 percentile for people from most of the countries that provide drivers. But not the Netherlands, where Max Verstappen is below average height at about the 45th percentile.

[Jolle]

An area that hasn’t been discussed much is the change to driver weight rules:

You wouldn't have numbers for Mark Weber, would you? It would always amaze me how thin he needed to be due to his height.

In 2013 he was reported as 74.8kg and 1.80m for a BMI of 22.3, that’s 11st 11lb and 6ft.

So a fairly “normal” BMI . Today’s rules wouldnt have helped him much. In a magazine article he said he hadn’t “eaten for 5 years”.

Once again the rules appear to do one thing, make it easier for taller drivers, when the reality is it will give the shorter drivers another potential advantage by allowing them to operate at a more comfortable weight.

A further point I find interesting is that a 1.8m driver is in the 70 to 80 percentile for people from most of the countries that provide drivers. But not the Netherlands, where Max Verstappen is below average height at about the 45th percentile.

Sport isn't fair one just can run faster then the next guy...

but the minimum drivers+seat weight is a huge improvement and yes, at no point will this be perfect balanced out.

tall drivers always have a difficulty to get to f1, we (im 6,11") just don't fit or are too tall for a karting or single seater career.

I think the rule is more about safety then equal the drivers out.

[henry]

You wouldn't have numbers for Mark Weber, would you? It would always amaze me how thin he needed to be due to his height.

In 2013 he was reported as 74.8kg and 1.80m for a BMI of 22.3, that’s 11st 11lb and 6ft.

So a fairly “normal” BMI . Today’s rules wouldnt have helped him much. In a magazine article he said he hadn’t “eaten for 5 years”.

Once again the rules appear to do one thing, make it easier for taller drivers, when the reality is it will give the shorter drivers another potential advantage by allowing them to operate at a more comfortable weight.

A further point I find interesting is that a 1.8m driver is in the 70 to 80 percentile for people from most of the countries that provide drivers. But not the Netherlands, where Max Verstappen is below average height at about the 45th percentile.

Sport isn't fair one just can run faster then the next guy...

but the minimum drivers+seat weight is a huge improvement and yes, at no point will this be perfect balanced out.

tall drivers always have a difficulty to get to f1, we (im 6,11") just don't fit or are too tall for a karting or single seater career.

I think the rule is more about safety then equal the drivers out.

Fair points. Sport is entirely arbitrary. A good choice of parents is absolutely essential. But a sport like F1, where the equipment rules can be tuned to adjust the cohort of people that can reasonably compete at the top level should, I think, cast the net a little wider than it does.

In what way do you think the new driver weight rule aids safety?

[Jolle]

In 2013 he was reported as 74.8kg and 1.80m for a BMI of 22.3, that’s 11st 11lb and 6ft.

So a fairly “normal” BMI . Today’s rules wouldnt have helped him much. In a magazine article he said he hadn’t “eaten for 5 years”.

Once again the rules appear to do one thing, make it easier for taller drivers, when the reality is it will give the shorter drivers another potential advantage by allowing them to operate at a more comfortable weight.

A further point I find interesting is that a 1.8m driver is in the 70 to 80 percentile for people from most of the countries that provide drivers. But not the Netherlands, where Max Verstappen is below average height at about the 45th percentile.

Sport isn't fair one just can run faster then the next guy...

but the minimum drivers+seat weight is a huge improvement and yes, at no point will this be perfect balanced out.

tall drivers always have a difficulty to get to f1, we (im 6,11") just don't fit or are too tall for a karting or single seater career.

I think the rule is more about safety then equal the drivers out.

Fair points. Sport is entirely arbitrary. A good choice of parents is absolutely essential. But a sport like F1, where the equipment rules can be tuned to adjust the cohort of people that can reasonably compete at the top level should, I think, cast the net a little wider than it does.

In what way do you think the new driver weight rule aids safety?

Drivers don’t have to starve themselves into the ER anymore, like what happened the last couple of years a few times. Safety goes further then just a big crash.

[henry]

Drivers don’t have to starve themselves into the ER anymore, like what happened the last couple of years a few times. Safety goes further then just a big crash.

That seems reasonable. I was confused by a health matter being characterised as a safety matter. I associated the term safety with behaviour on the track.

My point, I think, still stands, I expect an improvement in the overall performance of those drivers who previously had to work harder on their weight, starvation or not. I’m pretty sure that at some point I will be able to cherry pick some stats to prove this.

[Jolle]

Drivers don’t have to starve themselves into the ER anymore, like what happened the last couple of years a few times. Safety goes further then just a big crash.

That seems reasonable. I was confused by a health matter being characterised as a safety matter. I associated the term safety with behaviour on the track.

My point, I think, still stands, I expect an improvement in the overall performance of those drivers who previously had to work harder on their weight, starvation or not. I’m pretty sure that at some point I will be able to cherry pick some stats to prove this.

oh of course, there must be an ideal weight/height for a f1 driver. But with his new rule, the tall and heavy ones finally have less of a deficit than before. A few extra kilo's too much slows you down more then you gain with some extra muscles I think.