FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[FerrariFan63]

This year we've seen that teams that started work on their 2009 car early stole a march on the opposition. That's generally down to the rule changes, and finding good solutions to them.

However, there's another situation where starting work on next year's car could be advantageous. That's if there's a budget cap. If we assume that the development for next year's car comes out of the budget for the year the development is done in, then teams who divert resources from "this year's car" to "next year's car" will also be able to spend more on that car in total.

[Gaz]

This year we've seen that teams that started work on their 2009 car early stole a march on the opposition. That's generally down to the rule changes, and finding good solutions to them.

However, there's another situation where starting work on next year's car could be advantageous. That's if there's a budget cap. If we assume that the development for next year's car comes out of the budget for the year the development is done in, then teams who divert resources from "this year's car" to "next year's car" will also be able to spend more on that car in total.

Well possibly, also most teams will have laid down plans the 2010 cars using the reg's issued so far.

So every team currently in F1 should have an advantage over any new teams joning who may be instanly capped.

For example Mclaren could start R&D and Design of the car now throw lots of money at building models and wind tunnel testing then sign for the new regs with whatever the cap is.

New team comes along didn't do any R&D and Wind Tunnel work since they weren't sure if they were joining and is capped instantly when they sign the new regs.

Because thats when the cap will come in, when the sign the new regs

[bud]

yep that is true FF63, and i think once the regs are fully agreed on for 2010 you will see teams beating the cap as you say, get all the ground work done while they can! then update the car as the season goes along using the cap money

[Arsenal 1-nil]

That would be the smart thing to do. In fact Brawn's emergence really bespeaks of a long term strategy for some teams--simply dump every other year, run on a shoestring, and go all out the next year, knowing the following year will be a downer. As long as regulations keep changing. Now, if they are solidified for a 3 or 4 year period it probably wouldn't work.

[Jensonb]

Dumping 2009 for 2010 is not exactly the same as dumping 2008 for 2009. The rules are similar enough that quicker teams this year needn't worry too much about their 2010 challengers needing a full year to gestate.

For the slower teams, makes perfect sense to help catch up.

[bud]

Dumping 2009 for 2010 is not exactly the same as dumping 2008 for 2009. The rules are similar enough that quicker teams this year needn't worry too much about their 2010 challengers needing a full year to gestate.

For the slower teams, makes perfect sense to help catch up.

moveable rear wings.... one tank of fuel..... front tyre slimming down the rules are hella changing. this is another start from scratch again sorry to say for Brawn!

[Jensonb]

Dumping 2009 for 2010 is not exactly the same as dumping 2008 for 2009. The rules are similar enough that quicker teams this year needn't worry too much about their 2010 challengers needing a full year to gestate.

For the slower teams, makes perfect sense to help catch up.

moveable rear wings.... one tank of fuel..... front tyre slimming down the rules are hella changing. this is another start from scratch again sorry to say for Brawn!

Other than the movable rear wings, the aerodynamics are hardly changing at all. So Wrong you are Mr. bud.

[Frosty]

Dumping 2009 for 2010 is not exactly the same as dumping 2008 for 2009. The rules are similar enough that quicker teams this year needn't worry too much about their 2010 challengers needing a full year to gestate.

For the slower teams, makes perfect sense to help catch up.

moveable rear wings.... one tank of fuel..... front tyre slimming down the rules are hella changing. this is another start from scratch again sorry to say for Brawn!

Other than the movable rear wings, the aerodynamics are hardly changing at all. So Wrong you are Mr. bud.

The movable wings are a major, major change.

[Jensonb]

Dumping 2009 for 2010 is not exactly the same as dumping 2008 for 2009. The rules are similar enough that quicker teams this year needn't worry too much about their 2010 challengers needing a full year to gestate.

For the slower teams, makes perfect sense to help catch up.

moveable rear wings.... one tank of fuel..... front tyre slimming down the rules are hella changing. this is another start from scratch again sorry to say for Brawn!

Other than the movable rear wings, the aerodynamics are hardly changing at all. So Wrong you are Mr. bud.

The movable wings are a major, major change.

Which does not significantly alter the design of the rest of the car.

[Gilles 27]

They may do, it's to do with center of pressure but on the whole i agree, it's probably not a major change from a overall development point of view. I was under the impression that there was going to be a closing of the loopholes which permit things like the double diffusers also for next season...

[Frosty]

Dumping 2009 for 2010 is not exactly the same as dumping 2008 for 2009. The rules are similar enough that quicker teams this year needn't worry too much about their 2010 challengers needing a full year to gestate.

For the slower teams, makes perfect sense to help catch up.

moveable rear wings.... one tank of fuel..... front tyre slimming down the rules are hella changing. this is another start from scratch again sorry to say for Brawn!

Other than the movable rear wings, the aerodynamics are hardly changing at all. So Wrong you are Mr. bud.

The movable wings are a major, major change.

Which does not significantly alter the design of the rest of the car.

Really? You don't think redesigning a completely different types of front and rear wing which will interact in a completely different way with the rest of the car wont mean a complete redesign of the cars?

[McLaren Fan]

This year we've seen that teams that started work on their 2009 car early stole a march on the opposition. That's generally down to the rule changes, and finding good solutions to them.

However, there's another situation where starting work on next year's car could be advantageous. That's if there's a budget cap. If we assume that the development for next year's car comes out of the budget for the year the development is done in, then teams who divert resources from "this year's car" to "next year's car" will also be able to spend more on that car in total.

Sounds like it's time for McLaren and Ferrari to get spending for their 2010 campaigns (if both teams are still in Formula One that is!).

[Gilles 27]

if there wasn't this mayhem over next year, I'm sure we would be hearing announcements from certainly BMW, McLaren and probably Ferrari in the near future that they are focusing on next year. As it is, we might not see any of them next year

[Jensonb]

They may do, it's to do with center of pressure but on the whole i agree, it's probably not a major change from a overall development point of view. I was under the impression that there was going to be a closing of the loopholes which permit things like the double diffusers also for next season...

There is some discussion of that, but nothing concrete about banning GeniusDiffusers has ever been put in writing.

They probably ought to close the winglet loophole though.

[Gaz]

Dumping 2009 for 2010 is not exactly the same as dumping 2008 for 2009. The rules are similar enough that quicker teams this year needn't worry too much about their 2010 challengers needing a full year to gestate.

For the slower teams, makes perfect sense to help catch up.

moveable rear wings.... one tank of fuel..... front tyre slimming down the rules are hella changing. this is another start from scratch again sorry to say for Brawn!

Suppose if you consider that lot yeh