Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Monday December 5, 2016
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC General > Motorsports

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads. 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-23-2004, 10:20 AM   #1
RALLYT-WRX
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 9369
Join Date: Aug 2001
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Manchester, PA
Vehicle:
F#ck U & Your Stance
BLOD

Default Some shocking F1 news on the 2005 season!

FIA propose radical rule changes


Manual gearboxes, 2.4 litre V8s and control tyres?

The FIA dropped a bombshell in the Formula One paddock on Friday morning, when they released details of the proposed rule changes which would take effect from January 1 2008.

Engines would be 2.4 litre V8s with a maximum of four valves per cylinder and would have to be used for two races not one. There would be a list of prescribed components made from specific materials using a specified manufacturing process. Variable geometry inlet and exhaust systems would be banned, together with ultra high pressure direct injection fuel systems, and a standard ECU, something FIA president Max Mosley has always been particularly keen on.

Semi-automatic gearboxes would be banned, so manual operation of both clutch and gearbox would be mandatory. Electronically controlled differentials would also be banned, while brake discs, pads and callipers would be standardised. Power-steering would not be allowed.

Throughout the chassis there would be a general reduction in stiffness via the maximum modulus of elasticity, and the weight limit would rise at least 50 kg to eliminate the need for ballast. A combined tyre and aerodynamic package would be published no later than December 31 2004 to achieve specific targets for cornering speeds, straight-line speeds, grip and braking performance, and the front tyre width would be reduced while the rears would be increased to increase drag.

The proposed sporting regulation changes are equally far-reaching. Teams would no longer be allowed to use spare cars, and the race cars would be held in parc ferme throughout the weekend. There would be only one tyre supplier, eliminating the way that has so dramatically reduced lap times this season. There would be a drastic restriction on private testing, limited by mileage not number of days.

There would be two identical sets of tyres for qualifying the race, together with a new package to make sure all cars run on Friday (possibly with a return to a qualifying session) and a new Saturday qualifying system to be discussed with the commercial rights holder, broadcasters, teams and race promoters.

If qualifying continues to be with race fuel; (which is not yet decided), consideration would be given to whether the amount of fuel in the refuelling rig before a race should be fixed annually.

Tyre changes in a race would be banned (except in damage situations), but refuelling would stay.

Consideration would also be given to whether a maximum of four specified cars (two teams) per constructor should count for points, to encourage major teams to make information available to teams coming into Formula One racing. To facilitate this there would no restriction on loan, exchange or sale of chassis and components between teams or to new entrants in the championship. There would be 12 entries per years, instead of the current 10.

Finally, all future technical and sporting rule changes would require majority voting rather than the unanimity currently necessary.

The package is extremely controversial, and as is Mosley's modus operandi the FIA is asking for a great deal in the expectation that many of the proposals will fall by the wayside as the essential points they want to see agreed get ratified.

There will be a meeting with the teams to discuss the proposals on May 4 in Monaco.

Overall, the intention is to improve racing while eliminating electronic driver aids altogether and drastically reducing costs and encouraging new teams.

As one might expect, the proposals have met with widely varying reactions in the paddock.


* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
RALLYT-WRX is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Old 04-23-2004, 10:28 AM   #2
ITWRX4ME
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 24472
Join Date: Sep 2002
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Marshall, Virginia
Vehicle:
2001 Miata
White

Default

Meh. It's all proposals at this point.
ITWRX4ME is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2004, 10:48 AM   #3
artkevin
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 31097
Join Date: Dec 2002
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: The Sweaty H, TX
Vehicle:
2010 Acura ZDX
Grey

Default

F that. I want high rev world class engines. Not small NASCAR V-8s.
artkevin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2004, 10:53 AM   #4
heffergm
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 34672
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northern VA
Vehicle:
2003 wrx
WR Blue Pearl

Default

Some of the ideas they come up with are ridiculous. The grooved tires they run now are a good example.

I have no trouble with them taking away things like traction control, and perhaps "dumbing down" the motors a bit to make money less of a factor, but "no tire changes during the race"? What the hell are they smoking?
heffergm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2004, 11:06 AM   #5
skuttledude
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 738
Join Date: Jan 2000
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Southern Ohio USA
Vehicle:
2008 Lexus IS-F
Ducati Monster 800

Default

Holy smokes. Those are some radical changes. Even if it does get watered down a bit from the initial statement it still would be rather different.
skuttledude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2004, 11:22 AM   #6
cvalle-sd
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 420
Join Date: Oct 1999
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: The LBC, CA, USA
Vehicle:
2001 Cr-V
Silver

Default

Max Mosely must die. As we all must. Only in his case, I hope more or less immediately.



Hell, why not just put them all back in karts...no, wait!
2-horse CHARIOTS! 4 horses are way too fast, and too expensive. Plus the smell.
cvalle-sd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2004, 11:53 AM   #7
leecea
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 37359
Join Date: May 2003
Vehicle:
2003 WRX

Default

That's a shame. I want F1 to be the pinnacle of motorsports evolution. I want to be in awe of the cars.
leecea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2004, 11:58 AM   #8
buster
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 41811
Join Date: Aug 2003
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: Sidney, BC
Vehicle:
02 WRX
White

Default

I read something on Ananova a little while ago that quoted Mosley saying that he is suprised that F1 hasn't suffered a huge decline in interest with the domination of Ferrari in the last 5 yrs. He admitted they hadn't done enough to level the playing field and keep the lower budget teams interested and viable.

Guess they are going to try?!
buster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2004, 12:23 PM   #9
Chromer
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 20325
Join Date: Jun 2002
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Vehicle:
08 Yamaha WR250R
07 Suzuki DL650

Default

<checks calendar to make sure it's not April 1st>

Oh boy. IRL with right turns.

Chromer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2004, 12:29 PM   #10
DrBiggly
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 11482
Join Date: Oct 2001
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Winston-Salem, NC
Vehicle:
02 WRX
Acute Stickeritis

Default

I don't think the changes could be any more drastic. Unreal.
DrBiggly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2004, 12:43 PM   #11
BriDrive
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 21801
Join Date: Jul 2002
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: 90 Degrees North
Vehicle:
2013 Jacked Up T4R

Default

In its worst case, where all these rules were to be initiated:
Say Goodbye to F1 as we have all known it. It will basically become a new formula series and fall by the wayside a couple of years fron invocation.

No way the manufacturers are going to all get together and agree on all these rules....

Formula 1 : FROM SHOWCASE TO NO PLACE.....
BriDrive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2004, 12:55 PM   #12
HoRo1
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 15618
Join Date: Feb 2002
Chapter/Region: International
Location: Zhuhai, China
Default

Why don't they just bite the bullet and put out for bid a contract to build 100 (for example) spec (to be decided by FIA) chassis? Then put out a second contract for X engines. Then a third for tyres. Leave transmissions and brakes free.

If they want a level playing field, then level the field. I wonder how long F1 would last.
HoRo1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2004, 01:09 PM   #13
gtguy
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 2184
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Highland Park, Ill., USA
Vehicle:
2005 Legacy GT wagon
Platinum Silver Metallic

Default The other shoe has fallen...

We were wondering what Mosley was thinking, and now we know. There is no way they are going to get all of those changes, as that would reduce F1 to a shadow of its no-holds-barred self.

We still don't know what the FIA/Mosley has planned ultimately, but we know that cost reductions are paramount. I suspect that the elimination of driver aids, long-life motors and technology sharing by way of getting manufacturers to supply other teams will be at the crux of any goals.

The negotiations will be interesting. I don't think that Mosley wants to emasculate F1 any more than we want to see F1 emasculated. The real question is, what does he really want?

Kevin
gtguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2004, 01:26 PM   #14
mbiker97
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 7922
Join Date: Jun 2001
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Tucson
Vehicle:
04 CTS-V b/b/b
99 GMC Highrider

Default

Quote:
Tyre changes in a race would be banned (except in damage situations), but refuelling would stay.
You have got to be kidding me!
mbiker97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2004, 01:33 PM   #15
TyrannoSullyRex
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 8891
Join Date: Aug 2001
Chapter/Region: International
Location: Houston, TX
Vehicle:
2002 WRX Silver
'02 SV650

Default

I'm all for manual gear boxes, no traction/launch control and non-grooved tires (not a part of the proposal, but it's what I want), the rest of this proposal is crap. I think getting the driver back in the business of driving will reduce costs plenty.
TyrannoSullyRex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2004, 01:58 PM   #16
erich_sc
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 11225
Join Date: Oct 2001
Chapter/Region: W. Canada
Location: Calgary
Vehicle:
09 135i
Le Mans Blue

Default

If Max Mosley was in charge of NHL...

"Hey, I have a great idea. Why don't we take hockey players and put them in sumo-esque fully padded suits. That should help prevent injuries. Those skates are awfully sharp, maybe we should put them on rollerblades instead or better yet, running shoes. Why not instead of a hockey puck, they just use nerf balls. Hmmm, now what can we do about that stick problem... Maybe we should give some of the best teams strategy books to the lesser teams to try and make them more competetive. Hey why don't we just force the best teams to give their star players to the crappy teams, that would increase viewers I'll bet!"
erich_sc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2004, 02:37 PM   #17
AndyRoo
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 20952
Join Date: Jul 2002
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Baltimore, MD
Vehicle:
MINI & Datsun
BRG & White

Default

geez...thats a little much Max
AndyRoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2004, 02:57 PM   #18
jmott
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 6713
Join Date: May 2001
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: Houston TX USA
Vehicle:
2007 Prius
brown

Default

wow

they already banned suspension innovation back in the 80s when they banned active suspension

now they want to ban engine innovation too?

lol
jmott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2004, 03:30 PM   #19
gtguy
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 2184
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Highland Park, Ill., USA
Vehicle:
2005 Legacy GT wagon
Platinum Silver Metallic

Default But wait, there's more...

From GrandPrix.com:

GPWC pulls out of Formula One agreement
The GPWC has cancelled the Memorandum of Understanding which was signed with the Formula One Group before Christmas.

"Despite all reasonable efforts to implement the Memorandum of Understanding between GPWC Holdings BV and the shareholders of SLEC Holdings, the GPWC has decided to end negotiations on the future structure of Formula 1," the GPWC said in a statement, adding that this was "due to SLEC shareholders' failure to comply with key points agreed in the MOU."

In a private letter to the teams GPWC chairman Jurgen Hubbert went further, saying that "due to continuing delays and a lack of commitment, particularly from FOA Ltd, GPWC had has to come to the conclusion that pursuing the negotiations would not lead to the implementation of the MoU."

The GPWC refuses to admit defeat however and informed the team owners that the GPWC "will not compromise its strategy of securing a stable and transparent platform for the sport. Significantly increasing payments to teams through a fairer division of the revenues, identifying opportunities for cost-saving and ensuring a transparent platform remain priorities for the GPWC."

The problem however is that there does not seem to be that much support for the GPWC and with the new FIA proposals for the rules in 2008, there is little interest for the manufacturers to stay in the sport. They know that Max Mosley's proposals are not actually proposals because if Mosley chooses not to negotiate there is not need for the FIA to ask the teams about the rules after the Concorde Agreement ends. The federation can simply produce a set of regulations and ask the F1 teams if they wish to be part of the World Championship. The engine manufacturers may think that they are essential to the sport but that is not actually the case because customer engines can be made available fairly easily but those who do wish to take part.

For some months there have been questions being aksed about what Mecachrome is doing hiring F1 design engineers and investing heavily in Heine Mader's old factory in Switzerland and it does not take a genius to work out that within a couple of years this could be tunring out cheap customer engines for all the teams that want to be involved in F1.

The problem for the GPWC is at least six of the current teams will support the new FIA series on the grounds of cost. They cannot survive if current trends continue and do not see the GPWC's offers as offering them a much better deal. In addition a cheaper version of F1 will allow new teams to come in. Setting up a new GPWC series in such circumstances is not going to be easy. The details of the MoU, leaked to the teams some weeks ago, revealed that the big teams were going to take most of the available cash and leave the little teams with not a great deal. This drove them into the arms of Ecclestone at a meeting in Bahrain. In order to create a rival championship, the GPWC needs cars and there are doubts about a number of the GPWC members' commitment to F1, particularly if F1 has 2.4-litre engines and common ECUs.

What is also interesting is that Mosley's proposals are more than just a technical story because hidden away in the small print are what amounts to a mini-Concorde Agreement, outlining how decisions will be made in the future. This means that in the future there will probably be not one all-encompassing document governing the sport but two separate deals: one based on the way the sport operates and the other on the commercial arrangements which Ecclestone will make with the teams.

The next few weeks are likely to be lively.
gtguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2004, 03:38 PM   #20
gtguy
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 2184
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Highland Park, Ill., USA
Vehicle:
2005 Legacy GT wagon
Platinum Silver Metallic

Default

Some of the suggestions are good, such as a single tire supplier, and the exchange of technology. Lesser teams can buy the good stuff. Though it might not be as good as the real stuff (Sauber/Ferrari) it's still better than what they could come up with.

I also like the no tire changes, except for damage. Let's see who can really drive, and part of that is tire conservation. As a sidelight, this rule would play even MORE into the hands of Ferrari, who have the car that is widely acknowledged to be the easiest on tires, because of its stability.

The majority rule vs the current unanimity is the serious shot across the bow. I think that everybody knows that Ferrari is the only team resisting a testing reduction, as they have two tracks on 24/7 call for them. Currently, Mosley can't institute any sort of testing reduction (a first-class way to reduce costs) because Ferrari won't go for it. With the majority, it can be voted in without Ferrari having to sign on for the program.

What I think Mosley wants is for drivers to have to drive their cars. Shift, clutch and control the things themselves, with any ancillaries (launch, traction control) banned. I think if he can get that, plus a spec tire and testing reduction, which will reduce costs per team significantly, he'll be happy.

But who the heck knows?

Kevin
gtguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2004, 04:01 PM   #21
jmott
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 6713
Join Date: May 2001
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: Houston TX USA
Vehicle:
2007 Prius
brown

Default

Obviously a spec tire will reduce costs.
But it would be an end to tire innovation

Quote:
Originally posted by gtguy
Some of the suggestions are good, such as a single tire supplier, and the exchange of technology. Lesser teams can buy the good stuff. Though it might not be as good as the real stuff (Sauber/Ferrari) it's still better than what they could come up with.

I also like the no tire changes, except for damage. Let's see who can really drive, and part of that is tire conservation. As a sidelight, this rule would play even MORE into the hands of Ferrari, who have the car that is widely acknowledged to be the easiest on tires, because of its stability.

The majority rule vs the current unanimity is the serious shot across the bow. I think that everybody knows that Ferrari is the only team resisting a testing reduction, as they have two tracks on 24/7 call for them. Currently, Mosley can't institute any sort of testing reduction (a first-class way to reduce costs) because Ferrari won't go for it. With the majority, it can be voted in without Ferrari having to sign on for the program.

What I think Mosley wants is for drivers to have to drive their cars. Shift, clutch and control the things themselves, with any ancillaries (launch, traction control) banned. I think if he can get that, plus a spec tire and testing reduction, which will reduce costs per team significantly, he'll be happy.

But who the heck knows?

Kevin
jmott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2004, 04:35 PM   #22
Chaste Automotive
Vendor
 
Member#: 44921
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Default

One thing that has always set F1 apart from other series is the fact that each constructor had to build everything and it led to tremendous innovations. I think that with this little freedom that they may as well drive champ cars. Most F1 fans (real fans not casual) will tell you that the cars are a lot of the attraction. I like all the drivers but personally I am more interested in the technology. I htink htat htere will be some major problems with this.
Chaste Automotive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2004, 04:37 PM   #23
BriDrive
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 21801
Join Date: Jul 2002
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: 90 Degrees North
Vehicle:
2013 Jacked Up T4R

Default

It will be the end to alot of innovations....all innovation.

Also, I disagree with those that say returning to clutch + sequential shifters vs. semi-automatics will somehow level the playing field by putting more of it back in the driver's hands. The reason I say this is thus: these are the best drivers in the world. Every single one of them can and have long, long since been able to master dbl clutching, revmatching, downshifting upshifting, etc,etc....this is an academic, baby step type ability for all top caliber professional driver's...they could care less about anyone that thinks this is what separates them from other drivers....

The only thing this would accomplish, is making the cars marginally slower than they were before...so if that's the intent so be it......

Traction control, semiauto gear changes, tires, chassis design, and a hundred other innovations which have trickled down to the cars we drive on roads every day have come directly from the sport....F1 is the Dominant R&D test bed for automotive technology......

I think they are MORE worried about speed than cost right now.

Frankly, I see F1 as we have known it coming to an end with the end of the concorde agreement anyway.....

At some point, it has to end anyway....an analogy would be to look at the advances in aviation technology...they have now surpassed the abilites of a human to control they're potential envelopes...endgame is pilotless aircraft..........

BriDrive
BriDrive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2004, 12:58 AM   #24
buraddo
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 27218
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Vehicle:
1998 Impreza 2.5RS
WRB

Default

get rid of traction control and semiautomatics sure.

One tire brand heck no. Without competition, tires won't improve. A standard coefficient of friction or other spec, sure.

No tire changes would be good to see.

Open up suspension regulations. Let them play. F1 is about innovation. But this adds in cost again. Give each team a limited processor. They can either do crazy things to the engine or crazy things to the traction control or mess with an active suspension, but give it limited processing power so they can't do all three or more than 1 even.

Go to a majority vote for changes.

Reduce testing, sure.

If people wanted all the cars to be the same they'd watch NASCAR or some other spec series.

Given a max displacement and only so much air without FI what can be done? Engines need something to allow creativity, but level things out and that's the trouble with any of the rules.

Engine layout should be up in the air. v2, v8, inline 10, whatever they want. Maybe put a max intake valve area (or volume) instead of a max throttle body size? What would that do?

On the chassis side, I don't think that a limit on chassis stiffness would be great or easy to enforce, but I'm sure it would help the driverrs. They should implement a standard cockpit. This would improve driver safety and create a certain starting point for all chassis.

ok, I'm rambling. Enough is enough.
buraddo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2004, 01:51 AM   #25
Mark Avery
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 10313
Join Date: Sep 2001
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: Mission Viejo, CA
Vehicle:
2002 WRX wagon
silver

Default

Dump the grooved tires and go back to slicks, then seriously limit aerodynamic downforce. Make the cars more dependent on mechanical grip. This would bring speeds down, and would make for more passing. As it is now, a driver can't stick his nose under the tail of the car in front through a turn because without air on the front wing, it's understeer city.

Levelling the playing field pretty much means the end of cutting edge technology. So, if the cars aren't the stars, the drivers better put on a good show. More passing, less parades!
Mark Avery is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Some news on the Cobb AP 2.0 SedonaRed03WrX AccessPort 6 11-17-2006 12:51 PM
*Everyone please check the news on the front page. * KC New England Impreza Club Forum -- NESIC 28 11-19-2002 10:37 PM
Some news on the cats issue in STX z3coupe Motorsports 9 03-06-2002 02:18 PM
OK here is the news on the next Garage day!!!!!!!!! scoobyruman New England Impreza Club Forum -- NESIC 31 08-25-2000 11:11 AM

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2016 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2016, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.