Of course, though, when they got rid of actually enforcing the high amount of grid penalties for engine changes for Spa, what did Ron Dennis do with each car? I'm surprised we didn't see a repeat of that at Monza with other teams.
F1 - 2015 Italian Grand Prix
- Thread starter gofast182
- Start date
- Status
Limiting the amount of engines, by forcing teams to run them beyond their longevity limits is STUPID. Look at what happened to Rosberg. His engine letting go with 3 laps left in the race, (that he voiced concerns of it even lasting the race), could easily have cost him the championship.
That's just plain dumb. There are enough things that can break on a high performance race car as it is. Pushing them beyond their limits because of some silly pie in the sky cost reasoning, is idiotic. What would losing the championship cost Rosberg?
Then putting grid penalties on a team like McLaren, who is struggling to even finish a race, let alone finish in the points, is doubling down on that stupidity. Formula 1 really needs to wake up. It's time for Eccelstone to take his money and get out. Good riddance!
That's just plain dumb. There are enough things that can break on a high performance race car as it is. Pushing them beyond their limits because of some silly pie in the sky cost reasoning, is idiotic. What would losing the championship cost Rosberg?
Then putting grid penalties on a team like McLaren, who is struggling to even finish a race, let alone finish in the points, is doubling down on that stupidity. Formula 1 really needs to wake up. It's time for Eccelstone to take his money and get out. Good riddance!
There are a couple sides to every issue, though. There was some fault with Rosberg's new engine that it couldn't be used. There was no concern of penalties with respect to him.
And look what Ron Dennis did with engines at Spa. He took massive advantage of the easing of the rules, and I'm surprised that everyone didn't do that at Monza and open up and try every engine in their garage.
Bernie has a lot of problems, but again, there are two sides to that coin. First, you're not going to handle the massive egos, expected underhandedness, and years of experience within the teams with an inexperienced pushover running F1. Also, the teams had a pile of input on engine numbers and engine design. Mercedes was the one who didn't want more engines allowed, aside from the token proposal of one more, since they are well ahead of the curve on the reliability standpoint. The fact that they didn't raise a giant stink about the easing of the engine use rules is probably because they don't feel at risk no matter how many engines are allowed now, at this point in the game, from a financial or points perspective.
If they were so concerned about cost and reliability, the teams should have stuck with the previous generation of engine design. I wouldn't object to that. Obviously, though, they did.
And look what Ron Dennis did with engines at Spa. He took massive advantage of the easing of the rules, and I'm surprised that everyone didn't do that at Monza and open up and try every engine in their garage.
Bernie has a lot of problems, but again, there are two sides to that coin. First, you're not going to handle the massive egos, expected underhandedness, and years of experience within the teams with an inexperienced pushover running F1. Also, the teams had a pile of input on engine numbers and engine design. Mercedes was the one who didn't want more engines allowed, aside from the token proposal of one more, since they are well ahead of the curve on the reliability standpoint. The fact that they didn't raise a giant stink about the easing of the engine use rules is probably because they don't feel at risk no matter how many engines are allowed now, at this point in the game, from a financial or points perspective.
If they were so concerned about cost and reliability, the teams should have stuck with the previous generation of engine design. I wouldn't object to that. Obviously, though, they did.
On one hand the easing of the grid spot penalty regs. to starting from the back of the grid is smart and shows F1 can adapt quickly if they want to.
I'm torn on the 2017 regs. On one hand I want to see the cars be faster and more challenging to drive but I'm not sure the formula needs to be altered that much. Give them 10Kg more fuel to actually let the cars rev to 15k RPM and allow ground effect body work to encourage passing and that will do as much for the sport as the entire list of proposed changes without another massive financial/design commitment from the teams.
I'm torn on the 2017 regs. On one hand I want to see the cars be faster and more challenging to drive but I'm not sure the formula needs to be altered that much. Give them 10Kg more fuel to actually let the cars rev to 15k RPM and allow ground effect body work to encourage passing and that will do as much for the sport as the entire list of proposed changes without another massive financial/design commitment from the teams.
I'm still not sold on the easing of the grid spot penalty regs, at least out of the blue like that, with nothing more constructive accompanying it. I'm a McLaren fan, and it was fairly clever of how Ron Dennis took advantage of the easing, but his method completely defeated the penalty system. I'm not sure why someone else didn't abuse this last weekend, unless Charlie had some strong words behind closed doors.
Interestingly, at least on some tracks and with some teams, the gap between this generation of cars and previous ones is beginning to close.
Interestingly, at least on some tracks and with some teams, the gap between this generation of cars and previous ones is beginning to close.
Originally Posted By: gofast182
On one hand the easing of the grid spot penalty regs. to starting from the back of the grid is smart and shows F1 can adapt quickly if they want to.
I'm torn on the 2017 regs. On one hand I want to see the cars be faster and more challenging to drive but I'm not sure the formula needs to be altered that much. Give them 10Kg more fuel to actually let the cars rev to 15k RPM and allow ground effect body work to encourage passing and that will do as much for the sport as the entire list of proposed changes without another massive financial/design commitment from the teams.
If I was the engine supplier, and the FIA gave me another 10kg of fuel for race distance, I would raise boost instead of rpm. Higher rpm would just make the engine less efficient and more unreliable.
On one hand the easing of the grid spot penalty regs. to starting from the back of the grid is smart and shows F1 can adapt quickly if they want to.
I'm torn on the 2017 regs. On one hand I want to see the cars be faster and more challenging to drive but I'm not sure the formula needs to be altered that much. Give them 10Kg more fuel to actually let the cars rev to 15k RPM and allow ground effect body work to encourage passing and that will do as much for the sport as the entire list of proposed changes without another massive financial/design commitment from the teams.
If I was the engine supplier, and the FIA gave me another 10kg of fuel for race distance, I would raise boost instead of rpm. Higher rpm would just make the engine less efficient and more unreliable.
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
If I was the engine supplier, and the FIA gave me another 10kg of fuel for race distance, I would raise boost instead of rpm. Higher rpm would just make the engine less efficient and more unreliable.
I agree. Engineering and building an exotic, turbocharged, high performance, Formula 1 racing engine, then turning around and limiting it's fuel consumption, makes about as much sense as entering a one legged man in a a$$ kicking contest.
If I was the engine supplier, and the FIA gave me another 10kg of fuel for race distance, I would raise boost instead of rpm. Higher rpm would just make the engine less efficient and more unreliable.
I agree. Engineering and building an exotic, turbocharged, high performance, Formula 1 racing engine, then turning around and limiting it's fuel consumption, makes about as much sense as entering a one legged man in a a$$ kicking contest.
I never claimed it all made sense. They should have enough fuel to run flat out for the whole GP, whatever that number may be.
- Status