Welcome to the biggest shake-up in F1 since, er, ever. The FIA has just announced a £40 million team budget cap within Formula 1 for next season.
That’s not much by F1 standards, but it could have been even lower: the figure was originally expected to be £30 million, but FIA president Max Mosley agreed to the increase after discussions with F1 teams last week.
The £40m budget covers all team expenditure with a handful of exceptions including drivers’ pay, marketing and – good news for McLaren – fines. More significantly, engine costs will not be included within the budget for 2010, but this is expected to change in future years.
As expected, teams will be permitted to opt out of the budget. If they do so, they will be heavily restricted in their technical freedom: budget-capped teams will be allowed to run adjustable front and rear wings as well as engines without rev limits, and will not be bound by the current wind tunnel restrictions on scale and speed. They will also be able to run unlimited winter testing.
Teams that sign up to the budget cap and then exceed it will not be subject to fixed penalties. Instead, a new ‘costs commission’ will assess the ‘degree of misdemeanour’ and then advise the FIA on the penalty that should be applied.
Mosley also announced that the maximum number of cars in the championship will rise from 24 to 26 from 2010. Currently there are only 20 cars on the grid.
What do you think of the new rules, Sunday Afternooners? A much-needed kick up the arse for F1? Or the start of a two-tier dissolution?
This is only going to lead to a 2 tier F1, they might aswell race at different times.
In retrospect of the rule changes made to this season, the budget cap might just work. Nobody thought that the aerodynamic changes would alter F1 for the better, but we have already seem more scraps in the opening races than we did all last year.
I think this will be progressive step for F1 allowing teams like Lola and Prodrive to enter the competition whilst being competitive.
this is a great idea! The Teams will have to work harder as they wont just be able to throw money at the cars and expect to win! Well done Mosley!
This sounds like 1970’s F1. Colin Chapman would have a field day with this! I can see someone like Williams going down the budget cap route and possibly Renault. I’m pleased that we’re finally seeing the back of refuelling though.
Interesting as this is, I think that the biggest news today is that there will be no refuelling in 2010!
I really can’t see how it will do anything other than remove any remaining element of team strategy…
I quite like those ideas actually. Limit on testing for high budget teams and limiting capped teams by the availability of funds, it will attract teams, provide close racing and reduce the budgets overall. The only major problem is balancing the pro/cons for the different types of teams.
Wow, the FIA seem to have thought this one out.
Now the only problem is fixing the tear in reality created by my last statement.
Anyone remember the BTCC in 2000, the expensive Supertourers doing the proper racing with the cheaper production class cars just there to make up the numbers and hopefully crash for entertainment.
I don’t think there will be a two tier formula. I think they will all comply. Unlimited engine revs, movable wings and unlimited testing would make it hard to beat any capped teams regardless what you spend!
Economy crisis!
I really am in 2 minds over this. On the one hand when I heard about the rule changes for this year I was expecting it to monumentally rubbish. But, fortunately I have been proven wrong.
Recently the FIA seems to be getting things right and they may be spot on over this as well. However, I have a gut feeling that they are trying to fix something that isn’t broken.
The big money teams this year are on the whole struggling (BMW Sauber, Ferrari, McLaren) and the privately owned teams with the already limited budgets are running well (Brawn, Red Bull, Williams). OK, it is fair to say that Brawn inherited all of Honda’s work for the last 18months but they are still making it work.
Is the introduction of budgets just going to make what is fast becoming compulsive viewing back into something you watch the first two laps of and hope for a pile up into turn 1?
Hopefully this will bring the likes of Lola and Aston Martin into the sport for next year. Maybe a couple of other teams too. Can’t remember the name, but some GP2 team is looking at entering for 2010. More teams means more drivers, so the likes of Anthony Davidson, and Bruno Senna could make an appearance.
Normally on the Sunday Afternoon Club blog i would be going ‘Arrrgh!’ at all of these rule changes. But this one isn’t that bad. It gives new teams who have wanted to join F1 but never had the chance because of the ridiculous prices. Now though, teams with lower budgets can afford F1, just.
But this is a huge blow for teams who have been in F1 for years, now they have to spend on what they call ‘cheap things’, in other words, millions of pounds. To be honest though, i’m looking forward to a greater possibility of Aston Martin joining F1 because of this ‘low’ budget. What’s a credit crunch?
Limited budget might be a good idea.
It’s only half of the story, by the way. FiA also wants to ban fuel pitstops during the race. And that, I think is a stupid idea. They deffinetely want to make races shorter.
What are your thoughts about it?
THe budget is a good thing. OK so the teams who opt out have technical restrictions but there’s something that restricts the teams under the cap: Money. There wont be much difference between the two. I can see Ferrari, Mclaren, Toyota and BMW opting out of this.
I think there is litlle bit more in this whole mess.
They are scared that big manufacturers (who themself brought in culture of big spending in to F1) will start pulling out due to the recession.
They need new teams in.
Even if one or two more teams leave F1, they will have to ask others to run 3 cars, effectively increasing exepditure by another 20-30% (guesstimate).
No can do now.
I can’t see two-tier simply because you’d have be barking-mad to opt for uncapped option with clear dissadvantage. Spend more money to go slower?
It is another ‘read-between-the-lines-h oney’ idea from BernieMax & co.
Big teams will have to adjust more and get rid of hell lot of people.
But just think how exciting it is going to be.
13 teams, 26 cars. Hope it works out.
the FIA actually doing something positive,about flipping time ,i think banning refuelling is right cus’ the racing should be sorted out on the track and not in the pit lane.capping the budget ,,mmmm hopefully thats a good thing ,and will help the smaller teams…c ya dave
Hmmmm, interesting. So you could spend very much money and not know if it’s actually helping, or keep testing and testing and developing and developing until you’re out of money by about April.
I’m not sure what to make of this in terms of racing closeness. Guess we’ll just have to – brace yourselves – wait and see!
@14. Well Alex, I can see their thinking (economy, mpg, etc.), but unless they do indeed shorten the distance, that might turn Formula One into Formula Mileage. And when TopGear swapped supercar race for economy race (the one with the Blackpool lights), it wasn’t so well received compared to other episodes. This no fuel stops thing had better just disappear into the pages of internet rumors and lies, for it would be the final straw for me.
mosley deserves a smack
@17
Refuelling will be banned-that what FIA said today.
They can still come in for tyres, but they will get them cold!
I don’t know and would apprieciate if someone told me if they still have to use both compounds next year or is pitting optional?
I don’t know if ban on refuelling will affect show in any way. There are other variables to play with.
Probably ferrari has something to do with it
I’m no expert but surely at the moment an F1 car struggles to do about half of a race at a fastish track on one fuel tank. Wont this mean either halfing race distances, massively improving fuel consumption or (and in my opinion most likely) doubling fuel tank size and therefore adding a lot of weight.
Also if they have then set up the car to run well when full of (lots and lots of) fuel won’t it then be terrible when very light(or vice versa). Although I do suppose that adjustable wings will help somewhat with that. (which would be difficult if you had spent more than 40M and were not allowed them)
Maybe they should stop making things optional and tell the teams what they HAVE 2 do…
all this is extremely dissapointing. i have been a fan of f1 since i was a kid but what is happening now is just intolerable. f1 used to be a sport where the best engeneers had the best technology to produce the fastest and most exciting race in the world. with all these budget cuts and restrictions the sport is loosing its glamour. have a championship life formula 2, 3 etc. with all the restrictions but make formula 1 the sport that it used to be…
good news to ross brawn?
Why FiA can’t just leave things the way they are. Right now we have one of the most exciting seasons so far, and it might be the last one. With another big pack of regulation changes, it might not be as exciting to watch as it was.
Banning pit stops for fuel will deffinelty mean shorter races. And limited budget.. won’t it create two different types of cars, only competing in the class of there own.
I do hope that I’m wrong…
the budget was always a good idea.. but here mosely has gone and SKREWED IT UP!
you’ll now have a 2 tier sport, with 2 different types of cars and through out the entire season teams on both sides are going to be arguing at each other because this team following these sets of rules are x faster then us who are following the other set of rules and it’s not fair. and through out the next 3 years theres going to be a million stupid rule changes to fix the balance, all while increasing the overall cost 10 fold because changes are not frikkin cheap!
where as the stupid idiot named Mosely should of just implemented a 100M-200M budget cap on all car related development (like discussed BEFORE), and every team should of gone by the cap as planned!
and this refueling plan is another idiotic idea, because here you save money on the transportation of refueling equipment, but SPEND MORE on developing fuel efficient car design!
More cars would be a welcoming thing. (Aston Martin have an open slot now =D )
But why would you pay more to go slower? I mean you have more money to spent but restricted tech options? That’s where the money is being spent on, more tech! And on the budget-limit side: that’s not much freedom if its still under a 40 million budget…
I mean Honda didn’t pulled out because of recession, they pulled out because they’re not sure where the sport is leading to (maybe?), and that is caused by Mosley himself…
And one thing… No refueling??? For real?? You expect everyone to carry 200l fuel tanks, eh Mosley?? And four-wheel-drive??? We have that Max, its called WRC…
“Whatever happened to the greatest motorsport known to man..?”
Out of interest, what do the teams normally spend in a year?
Frank Williams seems to want all the teams to join this budget cap, to eliminate the threat of a two-tier race. Maybe the FIA are slightly overeacting, but something like this was necessary.
I think with refueling banned the idea was to increase the size of the fuel tanks. I think that’s part of the reason why they increased the maximum car weight from 605kg to 620kg.
As for it being two-tiered series. It could be but then again it could all strangely level out. Taking the cap you have less money to work with in developing new parts, but you’re allowed to test current parts and eek out as much performance as you can. Not taking the budget cap you have more money to throw at developing parts using methods and technology that one couldn’t afford on a capped budget. Better designed wings and engines could conceivably equal out to unlimited testing with cheaper designed parts and single supplied Cosworth engines.
I guess the only way for all teams to get on board, as Frank Williams would like them to be, is that there is an adjustment that teams like Ferrari and BMW can build their own engines. I just don’t see teams like Ferrari sticking a Cosworth in their car, they’d rather die.
@Calmerc: Not very current but still gives you an idea, the total spending of all eleven teams in 2006 was estimated at $2.9 billion. This was broken down as follows; Toyota $418.5 million, Ferrari $406.5 m, McLaren $402 m, Honda $380.5 m, BMW Sauber $355 m, Renault $324 m, Red Bull $252 m, Williams $195.5 m, Midland F1/Spyker-MF1 $120 m, Toro Rosso $75 m, and Super Aguri $57 million.
I think the banning refueling thing could go either way, watching a processional race until someone gains a place during a pitstop certainly isn’t great, I remember a conversation last year when ITV were showing F1 cars from different eras. Someone commented one of the old pre-refueling cars looked pregnant because of the bulbous fuel tank and Martin Brundle said it felt like he was towing a caravan when they set off in one with a full tank. Of course, it seems Ferrari have been preparing for this for about 12 years now…
Well it seems that unlimited revs do not look to attractive with refueling ban.
Maybe someone will build diesel F1 car?
Refueling ban SUCKS!
@ prick
The only way that would be work is if turbos were alowed. a diesel has no power enless it has forced induction. (correct me if im wrong)
I love how people are going on about a two tier race…
1987 people. Look it up. If it really is two tier, call is the Jim Clark Trophy and I’ll be happy. Was always fun seeing the non-turbo cars mixing it with the turbo ones.
Ed: You are a fool. The refueling ban is the greatest thing ever. Go back and watch some old races before that atrocity was allowed. Racing was much MUCH more interesting. F1 going to hell coincides exactly with that dangerous and unnecessary stupidity being introduced.
Bring back the old F1..this new rules will only end up confusing manufacturers, drivers and viewers alike!
Bloody hell. This is for next year, yes?
So after “The Biggest Change In F1’s History” in 2009, we have an optional low budget, no refuelling, new qualifying and probably something else for 2010?
So how exactly will this no-refuelling work? Do they drive conservatively, petrified of overtaking, or will they fit huge fueltanks, thus leaving no room for KERS, or will the race distance shorten, giving DC and EJ more time to box eachother?
Name me a positive. Or should I wait and see about that too?
Money talks ! Watch for the shenanigans…..
Name a positive? Drivers can’t wait until a pitstop to overtake as they won’t have one to wait for. The option of changing tyres and having fresh rubber over staying out on more worn rubber, to save time, will be interesting and interested many of the olde viewers for a good 10 years in the 80s and 90s. Tell me that today’s dross is more exciting. If you do, you’re lying. The first three races were only interesting because of the conditions, either wet or a tyre not suited to the track. Get a ‘normal’ race, like Bahrain, and it made for painful viewing.
Also it would be a better test of driver skill. Who can drive the car well on a full tank and on an empty tank.
The budget cap will only work if all teams stick to it. And considering the technical freedom, engine especially, that should look attractive to the manufacturers. They can work on modifying their engine for ‘normal’ revs before the cap includes engine development, and they can streamline their team. And spend a lot less money. Why pay double to obey stricter guidelines? It would make no sense, and would BMW, Mercedes, Toyota et all really allow their F1 teams to spend considerably more than now is necessary? I doubt it.
Finaly, all this business about fuel tanks and so on. Clearly the teams will just fit bigger fuel tanks. If they all have to do it, the teams can’t, or shouldn’t, complain about the detrimental effect on the aerodynamics or balance of the car. It’s called a challenge. Might keep Newey around for an extra year or two as well…
What else would the teams do? Just all turn up to the first race with 09-sized fuel tanks and grind to a halt mid-race in protest? Perhaps some of you should think before you type.
lmp1, lmp2, gt1, gt2, gt3, f1-1, f1-2. its all the same, and its the future.
Please people, don’t mention the “D” world in F1 discussion. Someone will say it’s a good idea, and very soon we’ll have a silent Tesla F1 team. Let’s enjoy the noise while it last.
In my opinion, cap yes, but higher and for all.
About refueling, if they want to avoid pit stops, they should design new tyres. And then you will have drivers taking care of rubber and consumption the whole race… I’m sure I don’t want to see that.
Well… I’d love to go back to the 1.5 litre formula (1961-1965) beautiful, precise machines and the flawless driving of Jimmy Clark, Graham and others; not to expensive, great engine notes and entertainment for everybody.
Is it to much to ask?
Greetings to all you, petro heads
The formula for winning the 2010 championship:
Before January 1st, 2010 (when the cap takes effect), develop the hell out of a 4-wheel drive car with “super KERS” and constantly movable front and rear wings. Then after January 1st, have your team live off of baked beans and water and make your way to the championship.
Side note: the F1 website proposes 4-wheel drive as an option, but I’m having trouble picturing how you would get a drive shaft up to the front wheels considering the shape of current F1 cars. I’m thinking it would take a hell of a lot of constant-velocity joints (around the gearbox, under the fuel cell, under the driver, then tucked closely under the front of the car, and finally up to a differential near the nose). And it seems like Brawn would have a leg up in this department, considering that when they were BAR (or Honda, I can’t quite remember) they tried to use a front differential. It was not powered by the engine, it was just there to transfer torque from the outside front wheel to the inside one, to avoid lock-up and improve traction through corners. Just get some power to that thing and you have yourself 4-wheel drive.
…oh yeah, and have a little red button on the steering wheel that ups the rev limit up to the maximum that the engine can take (for passing).
It seems like it wouldn’t be a great idea to have your engine revving to the absolute limit all the time considering the limit on the number of engines you can use.
They’ve made all these changes and failed to let us know what’ll happen to Q3 if there’s no refueling, it’s not like you can qualify on your race fuel, you’ll need all of it for the race otherwise you’ll run out…
But personally I can’t see any team, including the big guns not choosing to go for the budget cap, technical freedom outweighs spending bucket loads on restricted rules.
A non-rev limited merc or ferrari motor will probably bump bhp northward of 1000hp.
Budget cap? Let’s call it F3 from now on.
But the racing was better before the refueling was introduced (1994). Let’s go back to the 1993 rules (without traction control and active suspension), those cars looked gorgeous and the racing was superb!
Bit of updating for the safety offcourse but hell those were the days! Ford V8s, Ferrari V12s, Renault V10s..
what a nonsense, two routes, it is stupid. look at it now-cars with kers are slower than the ones without, so why to have kers at all?
same applies to the rules for 2010
definitely formula1 is going to loose its charisma now with all this nonsense, in fact it has lost some of it already.
i thought it is about who is the best driver and the best car-straight forward.
it is becoming like politics.
bu..s.it business
Budget cars will be faster!
BOOOOOOO! I am against budget caps, they will be bad for the sport. Just give us the technical freedom we deserve, this engine freeze for example, has gone on far too long. Give the teams a set of regulations to fit, nothing standardized, and let us race.
I’m all for smaller teams joining, give them the assistance they need, bring in someone like cosworth for cheap engines, but dont cap the teams.
Sooner or later big teams will HAVE to join the budget cap because FIA will definitely ensure that teams with a budget cap to be faster than free-spending team in order to push big teams to join them.
Is it just me that’s spotted another potential problem? What’s to stop the big teams from running another, budget-capped team? Take, for example, Red Bull and Torro Rosso. Red Bull can run without the cap and use Torro Rosso as a development/testing team, as TR will have unlimited testing time if they opt into the cap. So, in effect, you’d turn Red Bull into a sort of ’super team’ with both an unlimited budget and unlimited testing time.
Or have I misread things, and there’s something in the new regulations that would prevent this?
So this means that if there will be another kind of double diffuser scandal next year, other teams couldn’t even think of getting to the same level, because they are capped with the money they can spend(ferrari estimated the cost of the double-diffuser overwork to be around 30M £). Great thinking!
Its so funny how people get really angry with other peoples comments. And this time last year eveyone was moaning about the new 2009 rules, now you are all moaning about 2010 rules. He he very funny
@edgars: don’t forget, motor racing is actually about testing and developing new technologies that will someday end up in your car, but packaged in an interesting event called motor racing, which you happily pay in the name of good sport. Thats why FIA kept on revising rules to somehow specifically develop new tech. SO yes, they’re testing KERS systems and batteries that will someday end up in your cars in maybe 5-10 years time.
I think the option to over you budget cap, is a bad call. I mean, you’ll have more money but will not be allowed to use them? Most of the teams will work under budget but with more freedom in tech because thats what they are doing right now, and it is working.
F1 2010 won’t look good anymore… Ecclestone’s stupid medal system, and no refuelling?? What next?? No pit-stop?? What’s the point then??? Cutting costs?? What for? Isn’t someone over-acting in the name of budgets???
Besides, this economic recession should be over in somewhat a year… right? (God I hope so…)
I think the budget cap is a good thing. Lots of anti-ferrari fans have made claims that the only reason why Ferrari is always ahead is because they always have the biggest budget, etc etc. with a cap at £40m, it makes the cars less dependent on team finance and more dependent on how good the teams are at using that cash. Basically the best team wins.
To whoever says the ban on refuelling is a bad idea, please go and watch any race between 1984 and 1993.
F1 was brilliant without refuelling – its an experiment that hasnt really worked and next year will be better off without it.
interesting that the rules for the capped budget teams allow for fully movable aerodynamics – Fan car anyone???
i think next year is going to be fantastic
perhaps bernie will wheel out that shonky old brabham with the fan and try to do a season on £40m with it! he’s a crafty one – he knew if he waited long enough it would be deemed legal. I dont think its a coincidence that it featured on last weekends GP coverage!
I’ve been watching F1 for….I don’t know…..10 years maybe and one thing I know is that you can’t say anything about a rule-change until it goes into effect. Well….not with certainty anyway.
It’ll probably cause problems for the likes of McLaren and Ferrari who are used to throwing huge piles of money away (for no good reason…. apparently) but it will certainly create an opportunity for the teams who like to be as frugal as they can, while being as efficient as they can.
All we can do is hope they find a way to make it work for everybody.
Isn’t watching 10-second-hold-your-breat h hectic pitstops one of the reason we watch F1? The mix of “get it together” and daring strategies what makes F1 different? Whats the deal with no-stop races? Why make shorter races? Under what reason???
Refueling ban and pitstop ban is utterly stupid and nothing else but stupid. Thats why only a handful of F1 seasons are no-stops, and the rest has pitstops.
Sounds good, I’m looking forward to going back to how it was before refuelling was allowed. I remember races where drivers actually overtook each other and had running battles, rather than waiting for the next pitstop. How about banning the bloody diffusers and allowing cars to follow each other more closely?
So if Mikeado is to be believed the cap is going to be about 1/10th of current cost? I’m sure it can be done – after all you can buy a Skoda Roomster for about 1/10th the cost of a Maserati Quattroporte. They do the same thing don’t they?
Although if you’re reading this site, you probably know the answer to that question.
Great idea, really there is no downside
But in cutting refueling, race durations are just going to get shorter. I mean, does the cost-cutting thing has to be so extreme that you have to cut race durations?
We all should remember that this is Formula One. No matter how you cut costs, this is an expensive sport. So why not do the cost-cutting thing away from the race and let Formula One be Formula One?
With more race durations you can actually see the whole strategy in effect. Like how someone from the back of the grid can improve to mid-field on good strategy. If the racing is only for 20 laps or so then the finish result would just be the same as the qualifying result? Why have a race at all?
And please don’t say anything about 600l fuel tanks or something.
just checking out the ferrari website incase my euro millions numbers come up and found this
ferrari, along with all the other teams in FOTA, has, for some time now, felt the urgent need for a significant reduction in costs as from this year, and believes that the future of this sport requires stability of the regulations and the gradual achievement over the next two to three years of a cost-profit balance which would allow current teams to remain in the sport while at the same time encouraging the arrival of new ones.
if ferrari want a budget them id be supprised if more than a couple of teams go down the unlimited budget route (mclaren?) that the part about keeping teams leads me to suppect that some of the big names have been considering pulling out after honda left. and on the refueling ban thank god i want to watch a motor race not a contest of which team can luck out the most in the pits wheres the excitment in that! like people have said there hasnt allways been refueling so why would it change anything? it just means that now the best driver/car combo will win not who can fuel there car the quickest!
a budget cap of 40m wouldn’t even be enough to develop an engine, gearbox and KERS unit! hell it’s not even enough to pay kimis salary! lol
at least 100M
im with musicmanvin
LOL im with musicmanvin 40 million dosent sound all that much in terms of priceing high teach race cars and what gose along in a team.
it dose sound rather cheap
f1 should change its name to cheap1. what people r forgetting that f1 has a big budget bcoz they innovate, find different things and technology to drive cars forward pushing engineering limits beyond the ordinary and creating something spectacular. every company boasts that we use f1 technology in our cars and this and that after this they will concentrate only on winning and finding loopholes instead of developing new technology and capped budget will be like cost cutting that is used in a tata nano.
and i think they will stop using the K.E.R.S ice-cream tooooooooooo.
It’s an interesting dilema for teams with this one because:
1.)If you accept the budget caps, you get the freedom, but you’ll soon run out of money and won’t be able to aford them
2.)If you reject the budget caps, you’ll be blowing money but with no guarantee of performance gain.
The two-tier problem may be solved by adjusting the rev limits from race to race.
But if this prevents the big budget teams from having an advantage then there will be no big budget teams.
If the F.I.A. get this right (fat chance, I know) every team will sign up.
The last refuelling ban ended because (i) it made races boring because drivers often couldn’t attack near race-end to save fuel (ii) spectators opposite the pits had less to watch (iii) less team involvement during the race. A good drive could be ruined 200 yards from the line. The big benefit was in manufacturer teams transferring fuel-efficient technology to road cars – eg Honda. But KERS is for that now. It seems like a (relatively small) cost saving without regard for history.
Oh – and 2-tier F1: we’ve had that before, at the start of the turbo era. You could use 3-litre atmo or 1.5 litre turbo. (Rule had existed for years before Renault exploited it.) Over time, turbo gained prominence. But the racing stayed good throughout. I expect the same here – over time, one of cost-cap or open will swamp the other, without harm to the racing.
The bit that seems weird to me is allowing the cost-capped teams to do expensive things like high-revving engines, more testing and better wind-tunnels. Seems contradictory?
I dont know about the cap.FIA s ideas dont usualy work out as planned but still its worth a try.I guess most teams will agree to it.The best thing is that there will be no refueling.I hope this will mean less time in the pits(hopefully none).Another idea would be for them to run 2 races like they do in other formulas;this would mean no refueling and no tire changes so all racing would be dealt on the track
Teams who opt out of the cap will get around it by pumping money into unrestricted resource fields,Mclaren always find a way.
It’s Senna Day. R.I.P Ayrton.
The best ever.
This sounds like good common sense from the FIA, which is getting rarer these days.
It sounds good. But maybe the FIA should try to get every team to get a budget cap. That way everybody has around the same car. But surely all the personnel salaries would amount to alot too ?
Great decision, I’m all for it! More teams, more cars, more excitement…the budgets that some F1 teams have used in recent years have become incredibly ridiculous.
Having an exciting F1 does not mean that you have to spend $10,000 on a nut or a bolt!
BTW, my comment (78) was made on May 1st…
back to the cost-capping: it’s a good thing.
The cost capping is a good thing but it shouldn’t be optional thats like the government saying we’re going to up the petrol tax but you don’t have to pay it if i you don’t want to. Good idea, bad execution.
I think it’s all about public image. F1 is seen (by some) as an expensive pasttime in the middle of a recession, so the FIA is responding to that and making it more ‘responsible’. And I think the removal of refuelling (although a shame for hardcore fans like myself) will make the racing simpler to watch by Joe Bloggs on his sofa — less to calculate, like fuel loads, short fast/long slow stints, etc. I don’t think the refuelling ban will improve the racing, it may even harm it a little, since there is one less variable and less scope for team tactics jiggery-pokery.
As for the ‘optional’ budget cap, this has always been the way that the FIA does things. Rules changes over he past ten years has always been a case of the FIA giving too options to the teams: the first option that the FIA wants them to choose, and the second option that is totally impractical for the teams. No prizes for guessing which is which in this case.
Maybe the FIA doesn’t want to be seen to be making wide, sweeping non-negotiable decisions… but in reality they are.
Not that I think the budget cap is a bad idea! I think it’s great and I can’t wait to see 26 cars (26!) including Lola and Prodrive/Aston.
The new teams next year are likely to be Prodrive/Aston, Lola and USGP (big write ups in the F1 magazine recently)
Reminds me on the past, where F1 had the turbo teams n non-turbos..
this COULD once again, lead to Ferrari dominance.
think, the field is made up of Mclaren-Mercedes, BMW Sauber, Renault and then Formula One teams, Mclaren don’t currently really make cars, Mercedes, BMW and Renault do not make supercars, Ferrari do. this means Ferrari can break the rules sort of and develop a lot of aerodynamics and that sort of trickery on their road cars and then put them on the F1 cars without the cost of development, without anyone really noticing and given the cost would then be under the Ferrari road car department, not the Scuderia Ferrari F1 department of Ferrari… they could potentially only spend a fraction of the other teams on their aerodynamics and so on leaving them with lots more money to spend in other areas… if they are smart enough to think of this…
But McLaren have their follow-up to the F1 road car coming out soon. Mercedes can rope AMG into doing some aero work.
Thing is, I’m pretty sure the FIA would notice a stunt like that and pull them up for it.
I think budget caps are a great idea.
but surely all the team should operate under the SAME RULES
If so, F.1 has to be renamed GP2 or F.3000. Where’s the difference? If you want simple standard cars you watch other series than F.1
The budget is limited, the drivers’ pay is not. So the teams won’t be cheap to run even with the cap. The cuts will only apply to what makes F.1 cars competitive and safe.
And starting with 150 kg of fuel worsens matters. Not even overtakes because everyone will have a car slow and hard to handle.
WTF no refuelling wat a load of ****, do they still have to change tyres. pitstops and team strategy are arguably the most important part of F1.
If only the F-1 rules would stay the same for a few years, the teams could actually optimize something on their cars, instead of just adding half-assed solutions, to cope with the new rules each year.
The 40 mio. rule does not include engines. so the big teams with the infrastructures can develop High-revving 1000+ hp engines, add a bigger fuel tank. And keep the rest of the car cheap.(big advantage right there)
Also i have to agree with the “testteam”-issue.Like 51. (Dave) said…If McLaren or Ferrari decide to have two teams, one capped and one not,they ll just have the best of both worlds,and therefore an advantage over the other competitors.
And i actually like pitstops, cuz thats the part where a team can shine or fail.Be it refuel or tire changing (i d be for a 4x tire change per race) ;-D
I thought we had F2 starting next year maybe this will be f1 and f1.5
Ferrari should agree and put its development in to sport car racing that looks very much like a F1 car with a body and then sell the parts for well below cost
Even the ‘little’ teams now have about a £150 million budget, so this cap of £40 million will be like running a whole team on the running costs of one car this season. Should be interesting…
on a side note well done to Adam Carroll on his win in A1gp
Marcus, good to remember and to pay the respect, he was something very special and one of a kind !
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOo !!!!!!!!!!!! Another communist attempt by the FIA to ruin F1. it should not go ahead. Ever
What is the FIA going to do if a non-capped starts to win a lot? Change the rules mid-season?
Besides, some teams will find a loophole…or cheat a little.
Im all for a Cobra Team one with a hugger for Wining
Latest update – looks like His Bernieness is siding with the teams on this one…
This is brilliant, it leads to the best thing u can have in motorsport: unpredictibility. and it gives the under dogs a chance to shine.
The new rules has made F1 more interesting but that does not mean it was not interesting before. I think the new rules are to incurage new teams to join but in the proses it punishes large teams like ferrari and Merc. It could help mclaren if they start there own team.
*SPAM ALERT*
Why, Stig, why?
FIA is turning F1 into F3 because they know some manufacturing teams are considering to leave F1 as a result of far too many rule changes. Even Ferrari. They should. The current monsters are too ugly to be advertising for such an elegant brand. The ‘09 Ferrari is the first ugly F1 Ferrari, not their fault though..
really? if you stare at it long enough there’s a certain degree of coolness in 2009 F1 cars… somehow…
Well, isn’t thats why we have F1 and F3? F1 IS expensive. I mean, surely even the Red Bulls is spending more than 40million?
And why make F1 more simpler by banning refueling? I mean, F1 has its own trend of market.
I think the biggest threat to Formula One is losing its identity…
When 2010 is next, every single team will go completely mental. Buying new technology for the engine and the body. This would be good
I think that no matter how much money your limited to f1 will still not get simpler
I am looking forward to Air Brakes. Now since the front wing and rear wing is allowed to move under the capped rules.
Budget cap is fine, but I would’ve thought it more realistic to cap around £60m – £80m? That way the FIA could scrap all this engine development freeze and make it even more interesting: does a team invest in its engine or chassis for more speed? No refueling will improve the racing, especially with tyre warmers removed: a car leaving the pits with fresh rubber will be equally difficult to control than a car with heavily worn rubber. Think of the over-taking and tactics with that!
And to keep the technology in F1 realistic stop forcing technology like KERS! How about simply bringing engine size back down to 2000cc, or even 1600cc, but making it compulsory that all engines must be based on a mass produced engine? And simply make any metals not employed in the mass produced engines illegal. That way engine development cost is significantly reduced and real engine mechanics can make a return to F1. Teams can also decide to bring in stop-start technology if they wish because improved fuel consumption will lead to a lighter car, more speed, and better environmental credentials! All engine producers in F1 have access to mass production smaller cc engines (Ferrari = Fiat) and teams can be allowed to sell engines to rival teams to balance their development cost with non-engine manufacturing teams.
I think the new rule changes are going in the right direction. But the easiest of all would be to simply return to the rule book from the 70’s with cost capping!
The big thrill of F1 is the incredible noise. Sizing down the engines does not help that at all. F1 sounding like a kitchen machine ain’t appealing.
An F1 should look and sound cool! That’s what brings the goosebumps when you watch and hear them going full throttle through Eau Rouge.
stop-start technology in formula 1.explain please when formula one cars are stationary apart from pitstops(soon to be irrelevant).budget cap too low.40million wouldnt buy the refreshments at the red bull centre
Please dont make engines smaller, I cried when they went form v10s to v8s.
But the FIA should forget the Budget cap, unfreeze the engines, and give the teams the freedom they deserve
And dont get rid of pitstops, they are an intrical part of F1 and add a lot to the race. There is no strategy needed if there are no pit stops.
So agree, me too. Still miss the V10 sound.
Guess pit stops will continue, for tires, just like the pre ‘94 period.
One starts to wonder why the hell the FIA changed the rules (apart from safety measures) every season??
Imagine if the same would happen in any other sport.
ok how about this for rules:
1 No cost cap – spend what you want, but you make your research available to all after each race.
2 Exotic materials to be encouraged. brakes can be made from something only found on the moon
3 No max power rating or minimum weigh – Maximum power to weight ratio instead
4 Extra points for teams with cute/sexy/willing/rich pit girls. Points deducted from drivers who bring their granny (unless accompanied by carer with criteria above)
5 Extra points for teams with Oscar winning or top 10 artists in toe.
6 If drivers finish on same points championship decided by drunken fistfight
7 No team can have more lawyers than drivers
Like with this year’s rules, we’ll have to wait and see if it really works. But it is great to see F1 big bosses recognizing something is wrong, and trying to change it. Maybe is the track attendance in the European races that got them thinking…
i definetely agree with H above those would be brilliant. i personnally think f1 would be great with no rules ‘cept no contact. imagine that, no limits on the engines or how much power or downforce youre allowed. every team could make the car as fast as they possibly could. that would get a lot of close racing and overtaking!
I think this would be brilliant, but my only concern is whether they will be able to afford repairs and some other stuff that are maybe not mentioned.
I agree as well “Old Cow said:” no offense though.