FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[andrew]

Mosley said at the intorduction of the 107% rule in 1995:

any small team which is properly organised will be able to get within the 107 per cent margin

Likely the powers that be thought that 108% was too easy but 106% was expecting too much of a new and small team. That's my guess at least.

[myownalias]

Personally I like the 107% rule, keeps teams at the back of the grid on their toes.

Yes, me too. After all... losing and having no pts is bad in itself, but not being allowed to race is more destructive... so its good to have something to really push them even a bit fwd.

Or on the flip side, they don't regularly qualify, e.g. no air time for the few sponsors they have, the sponsors end their sponsorship and the team folds...

The rule has largely been ineffective, if the rule is to be enforced then it needs to be enforced regardless of circumstances!

That's exactly the point though, it forces them to turn up with something that at least stands a chance of ever developing into a moderately successful outfit

As you know, unless you have good financial backing, making a step forward is easier said than done, F1 is a big money sport, to be able to move forward, finances are needed constantly to bring new parts and bring in top people to design those parts, the backmarker teams are trying the best they can with the resources they have, I'm sure they'd love to latch onto the midfield teams!

And frankly the bottom three teams have done well, everyone has qualified within 107% with the exception of Australia where HRT barely made it to the qualifying session!