FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[overboost]

Yes there hasn't been any racing allowed at Merc since the Spa 'incident' of last season. One thing Merc won't stand for is any kind of controversy, including the racing kind!

[overboost]

Mercedes continues to fight any changes for 2017. Protecting their dominance over the good of the sport. Of course this is to be expected from a corporate team like Mercedes who is only in it for the money and has no sporting background to speak of. First it was for bogus 'safety concerns' and now it is because the other teams are already close enough!

"Mercedes motorsport boss Toto Wolff believes Formula 1 is making a mistake in pushing on with changing the rules for next year, following an exciting start to 2016.

A convergence of performance for the third year of F1's turbo hybrid regulations, allied to the flexibility of strategy choice, has thrown up some early season thrills so far this year.

Plus, progress made in both power and downforce levels has meant that cars are now as quick over a single lap as they have ever been.

That background has prompted debate in the paddock about whether or not F1 will benefit from having faster cars next year, especially because there is a risk that the increase in downforce could hurt overtaking.

When asked after the Chinese Grand Prix why F1 was so keen to sell the idea of an overhaul for 2017, Wolff questioned if they were any positives to the new rules.

"There is nothing to sell on it," he said. "There is no selling proposition in those new regulations in my opinion.

"We should just leave it alone."

http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-sh ... ff-688542/

[myownalias]

I actually don't disagree with Toto, continuation of the rules is probably best for F1, constantly chopping and changing just makes the sport more expensive, stability of rules will bring overall cost down. I think the sport will be better off without everything in a constant state of flux. If we are going to make changes, I believe it should be to allow teams more open development of engines and cars within the spec instead of homologation of the spec, these days, if a team is behind at the start of the season, they will still be there at the end of the season, I remember when teams like McLaren were 2 seconds off the pace in March and on the pace and winning races by October, I'd much rather have that than a reset of the technical rules.

[overboost]

Sounds great moa. But in this case Mercedes isn't suggesting an open spec, they are just trying to block any changes for their own benefit. I for one will love to see the wider, ala pre-1998, cars and tires again though, I hope this makes it through.

[overboost]

Mercedes blocks the elimination of the fuel limits.

Looks like we will continue to endure the lift and coast style of racing in 2017 and forward. The Mercedes drivers and cars are the masters of the 'lift and coast' contests so they are quick to stop the return of real flat out racing. We will just have to be happy that Merc graciously allowed another 5kg of fuel, scraps basically . This will barely cover the extra fuel required for the wider more powerful 2017 cars. Lots more lift and coast 'gas mileage' style racing which suits the Merc is set. Of course this isn't really racing.

"Fuel saving "mess"

The wider cars and wider tyres will generate more drag than the current ones – and that will result in them using up more fuel per lap.

There have been concerns voiced for months now that if the 100kg fuel limit stayed in place, then it would force drivers to conduct far more fuel saving than they currently do.

Renault technical director Nick Chester warned back in February that if the 100kg fuel limit stayed in place there would be problems.

"I think it will be a mess,” he told Motorsport.com. "If we stay at 100kg and go to the 2017 regulations then there will be a lot of fuel saving, and I think people will start complaining about it."

While some manufacturers had wanted the maximum fuel limit abolished totally, this did not draw unanimous support – with Mercedes in particular keen for F1 to keep its environmental message.

It is understood a compromise has been reached so that if the 2017 car rules are signed off, the F1 Commission will be asked to vote on a plan to raise the fuel limit by 5kg to 105kg for a race."

http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-po ... ontent=www

[myownalias]

Sounds great moa. But in this case Mercedes isn't suggesting an open spec, they are just trying to block any changes for their own benefit. I for one will love to see the wider, ala pre-1998, cars and tires again though, I hope this makes it through.

I know, and every other team would do the same if they had the power to do so, Ferrari have done it a number of times in the past. I feel it's unfair to attack Mercedes for doing what every team on the grid would do given the chance. F1 cannot keep on moving the goal posts when one team gains dominance, teams/engine makers need to be able to develop more to overcome the deficit.

[sagi58]

... F1 cannot keep on moving the goal posts when one team gains dominance, teams/engine makers need to be able to develop more to overcome the deficit.

As I'm not as savvy about F1 as most people here, I will pose the following "question":
Isn't that exactly what was done over and again when Ferrari was dominating?
Or do we give Mercedes yet another advantage, as if building their engine whilst
they were helping write the hybrid rules wasn't enough? Ooops, almost forgot the
engine development freeze that has crippled F1, whilst Mercedes flourished!!

[myownalias]

... F1 cannot keep on moving the goal posts when one team gains dominance, teams/engine makers need to be able to develop more to overcome the deficit.

As I'm not as savvy about F1 as most people here, I will pose the following "question":
Isn't that exactly what was done over and again when Ferrari was dominating?

I don't remember anywhere near the level of changes during the Schumacher/Ferrari dominance compared what we have experienced since the Red Bull dominance.

Or do we give Mercedes yet another advantage, as if building their engine whilst
they were helping write the hybrid rules wasn't enough? Ooops, almost forgot the
engine development freeze that has crippled F1, whilst Mercedes flourished!!

First of all, the engine freeze has been in place for many years before the new V6T Hybrid formula. I agree that Mercedes should not have been allowed to develop the spec for the new engine formula, the FIA should have come up with the spec and every engine makers would have to work within that spec. My suggestion is that we loosen the stranglehold and allow for teams and engine makers to develop their engines and cars to close the gap, the sport is too locked down right now that no team is likely to make a jump in season to change the status quo.

[sagi58]

... F1 cannot keep on moving the goal posts when one team gains dominance, teams/engine makers need to be able to develop more to overcome the deficit.

As I'm not as savvy about F1 as most people here, I will pose the following "question":
Isn't that exactly what was done over and again when Ferrari was dominating?

I don't remember anywhere near the level of changes during the Schumacher/Ferrari dominance compared what we have experienced since the Red Bull dominance.

Probably; but, then again, there weren't any restrictions on testing during the season.

Or do we give Mercedes yet another advantage, as if building their engine whilst
they were helping write the hybrid rules wasn't enough? Ooops, almost forgot the
engine development freeze that has crippled F1, whilst Mercedes flourished!!

First of all, the engine freeze has been in place for many years before the new V6T Hybrid formula. I agree that Mercedes should not have been allowed to develop the spec for the new engine formula, the FIA should have come up with the spec and every engine makers would have to work within that spec...

Agreed!!
But, we can't go back, can we?

Most importantly, as you suggested, there really is only option available is to allow teams to catch up!

[myownalias]

Maybe we should have a spec series instead of the current system which just generates dominance from one team or another for years on end. Everyone can run Mercedes engines with a Ferrari Chassis and McLaren ECU...

[sagi58]

Not sure if you're being serious, MOA...

[myownalias]

Not sure if you're being serious, MOA...

I was being facetious in my statement, but sometimes I wonder if a spec series would be a better solution, the best drivers rise to the top instead of the drivers in the best cars. I don't know if you have watched lower formula races, but the pack is much closer and overtaking is off the scale compared to F1, for example GP2 is a spec series with the same engines.

http://www.gp2series.com/Guide-to/The-car-and-engine/

[overboost]

Sounds great moa. But in this case Mercedes isn't suggesting an open spec, they are just trying to block any changes for their own benefit. I for one will love to see the wider, ala pre-1998, cars and tires again though, I hope this makes it through.

I know, and every other team would do the same if they had the power to do so, Ferrari have done it a number of times in the past. I feel it's unfair to attack Mercedes for doing what every team on the grid would do given the chance. F1 cannot keep on moving the goal posts when one team gains dominance, teams/engine makers need to be able to develop more to overcome the deficit.

F1 is in a tight spot right now, of their own creation with these expensive engines and token rules, and are being forced to make changes by the promoters, etc. Because of the resulting and seemingly never ending Mercedes one two finishes, TV ratings and revenue are down, race attendance is slipping and Bernie is desperate as well having lost nearly a billion dollars of his net worth over this past year.

So they are making changes, some just for the sake of making changes as we saw with the qually mess, in the hope of a better show. You are right in saying that the others would try and do what Merc is doing in blocking anything that would harm their position at the top. But the type of racing that Mercedes is excelling at, fuel economy based lift and coast, isn't really the racing that F1 fans are interested in and it is not a sustainable model for F1. Merc is trying to lead F1 further down the wrong path. So changes to the car are necessary.

That is why it is so disappointing that Merc was able to block the removal of the fuel limits. Without the fuel limits (and with the promised better tires) Merc's fuel economy/power advantage is eroded and the others would be able to attack throughout the race distance instead of having to conserve fuel just to finish. More lift and coast.

The only hope is that without tokens moving forward one of the teams can quickly improve enough to get in front of Merc. Ferrari could be the one or Honda who is rumoured to be producing an all new engine for 2017.

http://www.thisisf1.com/2016/04/26/hond ... gine-2017/

"F1 supremo Ecclestone saw his wealth fall by an estimated £460 million to just £2.48 billion. As such he dropped nine places on the list to 42nd.

It is the 85-year-old’s biggest financial hit since his 2009 divorce settlement."

http://planetf1.com/news/hamilton-rises ... one-falls/

[myownalias]

F1 has been going in the wrong direction ever since we have gone down the road relevance route. How can F1 be the pinnacle of motorsport when we have cars with road relevant technology? My car has a bigger, albeit less powerful engine than F1 currently. I always thought F1 was a better sport when it was much more open, no fuel limits, refueling, no tire limits and multiple engine types, at one point, we had V10, V12 and V6 Turbo engines on the grid at the same time with 100% open development.

[sagi58]

F1 has been going in the wrong direction ever since we have gone down the road relevance route...

Whose "brain child" was that idea?