- 24 Oct 14, 23:07#422408
An how would that change the situation we're in now? That's like a flat tax rate rule. It sounds nice on paper but it won't work in practice. How is a team going to change things mid season if they've got it wrong? They're goign to have to redesign their entire unit mid season with the limited testing? We'll be back to the haves and the have-nots in less that two years with zero competition once again, with the one team that gets it right sweeping the podium.
This development race used to be a core value in F1 - not anymore it seems.
it wasnt for the best part of the last 10 years
and no one seems to want to go back to spending millions for am extra 0.0003 secs - AKA the law of diminishing returns, when the average Ferrari supporter wouldnt even know the difference between a minute or a millisecond if it wasnt red with passion bleeding through its exhaust
If there is a spending war, Merc will still whip the rest, and they will still lose, but a whole world more. Everyone knows this, and everyone knows losers always find excuses and reasons eagerly lapped up by passionate fans with a bit of butthurt
I've stated my opinion many times in the past (search the topics): I would like to have just one major restriction in F1 and that would be fuel available per race. And that would decrease annually. Let engineering prowess loose on this and we'll have some real innovation and savings.
An how would that change the situation we're in now? That's like a flat tax rate rule. It sounds nice on paper but it won't work in practice. How is a team going to change things mid season if they've got it wrong? They're goign to have to redesign their entire unit mid season with the limited testing? We'll be back to the haves and the have-nots in less that two years with zero competition once again, with the one team that gets it right sweeping the podium.
"I don't want to be part of a forum where everyone has differing opinions." Boom...