F1 Oil Clampdown

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Dec 5, 2009
Messages
28,049
Location
Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
See here. In addition to limiting the oil burn business and trying to close all those loopholes, they're making a team commit to one oil specification per engine per weekend, so no qualification oil being different from race oil.
 
I guess since a budget cap is virtually unenforceable, they have to do something to prevent the top teams from spending everyone else to death, which will happen anyway.
wink.gif
 
Originally Posted By: 02SE
They need to change the name from F1 to Nanny1.


That's the truth. It's just about gotten to the point of complete ridiculousness. I'm beginning to think my days as a Formula 1 fan are limited.
 
Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: 02SE
They need to change the name from F1 to Nanny1.


I'm beginning to think my days as a Formula 1 fan are limited.


You're a fan?? I thought you only watched it to find something to complain about!
wink.gif


Back on topic, this has been going on for years. The rule book gets thicker, the back marker teams get poorer and go broke. It would appear it's likely to get worse under Liberty (ironic name in hindsight) than better, so strap in for the ride.
 
Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: 02SE
They need to change the name from F1 to Nanny1.


That's the truth. It's just about gotten to the point of complete ridiculousness. I'm beginning to think my days as a Formula 1 fan are limited.

The whole point of the rule changes is to get closer racing. I do like the idea of innovations but the fans don't get to know about the technical innovations of why a car is faster until a season or two later. So all we get to see is MB in 2014 had a much stronger engine than everyone else but we didn't know why until 2017...
F1 is always a balance between what rules will make interesting racing, and what rules allow the teams to innovate and learn something for the billions spent.
You can bet that now a few other racing series has teams looking at using engine oil as a way to introduce fuel additives to combustion.
 
I'm disappointed all the time but still watch. It's an aspect of F1 that makes it F1, experts at circumvention.
Remember in the early nineties when there were qualifying engines? After qualifying was over the driver would blow the engine coming over the finish line(wonder if that sentence will get censored). No engine to inspect(Senna was good at this).
All racing has this sort of behavior.
Next: venting the gearbox to the intake.
 
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
The whole point of the rule changes is to get closer racing.


But that NEVER happens in F1. You have certain teams that dominate for years, with no one able to come anywhere close to knocking them off. First you had the Schumacher Ferrari era. Then came Red Bull and Vettel for another 4+ years of domination and consecutive championships. Next was Mercedes with years of Hamilton / Rosberg / Hamilton domination. While other teams couldn't come close.... Unless they either wrecked or broke. Then someone else was lucky enough to win one whole race in a row.

This is what always happens, and has been happening for the last 2+ decades in F1. All the while they introduced 678,547 rule changes per year. All with zero effect. The winners all kept winning. For a motorsport that is as rule saturated as Formula 1 is. And supposedly all for the sake of, "getting closer racing", they sure fail miserably at it. No other form of open wheel racing is as continually lopsided as Formula 1. Year in and year out. Next year will be no different. It will be Hamilton / Vettel..... Mercedes / Ferrari all over again. With Ferrari once again the underdog. While Haas, Renault, Williams, Red Bull, Toro Rosso, and everyone else will just be doing laps for whatever crumbs get tossed their way. I think it's time they at least start to look at the rule book as their problem.... Instead of always believing it's their salvation.
 
Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
The whole point of the rule changes is to get closer racing.


But that NEVER happens in F1. You have certain teams that dominate for years, with no one able to come anywhere close to knocking them off. First you had the Schumacher Ferrari era. Then came Red Bull and Vettel for another 4+ years of domination and consecutive championships. Next was Mercedes with years of Hamilton / Rosberg / Hamilton domination. While other teams couldn't come close.... Unless they either wrecked or broke. Then someone else was lucky enough to win one whole race in a row.

This is what always happens, and has been happening for the last 2+ decades in F1. All the while they introduced 678,547 rule changes per year. All with zero effect. The winners all kept winning. For a motorsport that is as rule saturated as Formula 1 is. And supposedly all for the sake of, "getting closer racing", they sure fail miserably at it. No other form of open wheel racing is as continually lopsided as Formula 1. Year in and year out. Next year will be no different. It will be Hamilton / Vettel..... Mercedes / Ferrari all over again. With Ferrari once again the underdog. While Haas, Renault, Williams, Red Bull, Toro Rosso, and everyone else will just be doing laps for whatever crumbs get tossed their way. I think it's time they at least start to look at the rule book as their problem.... Instead of always believing it's their salvation.


I did enjoy that year when Ross Braun and Jenson Button beat the big bucks teams. That may never happen again.
 
Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
The whole point of the rule changes is to get closer racing.


But that NEVER happens in F1. You have certain teams that dominate for years, with no one able to come anywhere close to knocking them off. First you had the Schumacher Ferrari era. Then came Red Bull and Vettel for another 4+ years of domination and consecutive championships. Next was Mercedes with years of Hamilton / Rosberg / Hamilton domination. While other teams couldn't come close.... Unless they either wrecked or broke. Then someone else was lucky enough to win one whole race in a row.


You are forgetting the Senna/Prost era, and the Hakennen era also before the Schumacher era.

In essence, since the late 1980s, one team has dominated for 3-5 years, then fallen asunder to another top ranked team.

Back to the interior quote: If F1 wanted closer racing, all they have to do is ban ALL aerodynamics--make the cars follow the Convex Hull model with no wings, diffusers, spoilers, diplanes, winglets, barge boards, or other aerodynamic devices. But F1 does not want racing that close!
 
Originally Posted By: 555
The equation: spec racing OR high speed parade?

I think you could have a set of aerodynamic rules that would have a reasonable amount of downforce, that isn't overly affected by following closely, and have the cars have some drag to keep them from going too fast on the straights.
I bet Newey could draw up the rules to do this while still having a car that looks half decent.
 
Originally Posted By: Brad_C
Back on topic, this has been going on for years. The rule book gets thicker, the back marker teams get poorer and go broke. It would appear it's likely to get worse under Liberty (ironic name in hindsight) than better, so strap in for the ride.

It's still not that thick. I'd hate to see some of the general FIA administrative rules.
wink.gif


And yes, Liberty's honeymoon is over.

Indylan: They can, with more ground effects, but that creates its own set of problems on the current circuits. You go off track, and the next thing you know, the car is 20 feet in the air.
 
Costs are always super high in F1 and I think that takes priority in F1 more than close racing. The grid must be full then they worry about close racing(107% rule). The problem that arises is that 107% is too much. That is a huge gap between pole position and a back marker. If the percentage was less there wouldn't be a full field.
 
I wish they'd just return to customer cars again. Let the lower teams buy chassis and engines from the top teams. They won't have the $$ to develop it like the factory teams but at least they'd be competitive. The old F1 did this and they briefly returned to this in the mid-late 2000's and guess what? Toro Rosso won a race with a Red Bull chassis, Super Aguri was faster than the factory Honda at times. Sauber was competitive because (though they wouldn't fully admit it) they were running a Ferrari chassis.
 
You want good racing? Make ‘em drive like dirt cars. No aero. Skinny up the tires. A real ‘driver’s car’.

When they have to lift at Eau Rouge, you’ve succeeded.

P.S. This makes the all the HP chicanery irrelevant because more power doesn’t make your race car faster.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Indydriver
You want good racing? Make ‘em drive like dirt cars. No aero. Skinny up the tires. A real ‘driver’s car’.

When they have to lift at Eau Rouge, you’ve succeeded.

P.S. This makes the all the HP chicanery irrelevant because more power doesn’t make your race car faster.


That will NEVER happen for two reasons. 1.) It makes too much sense. And 2.) Formula 1 prides itself in reinventing the $50,000,000.00 wheel every year. If they say it is a, "cost cutting measure", it will have the opposite effect, and wind up costing everyone more. And it's not just Formula 1.

Remember when the Indy Racing League was formed back in 1994? Tony George said it was because Champ Cars were getting too expensive for many of the teams to race competitively. That, and the fact he wanted to, "Give more young American drivers an opportunity to get into the sport". What is the cost of a grid ready Indy Car today? And are there really any more drivers of American descent, than there were when the Champ Cars ran at Indy?
 
Not that I would pay money to see one of these events today, for a lot of the above reasons. That coming from someone who did pay money to see the F1 circus in the 70's, 80's, and 90's.
To the subject, from what I have read on other sites - .6L per 100km. FIA monitors oil level in main tank at all times. Oil mass, all tanks, is reported to FIA one hour before race start. No active control valves leading to any part of intake. Single oil spec per weekend, as stated in subject post. PU lubrication defined as "lube/cleaning/cooling, no power boost". Article 21.1.2 states "the presence of any component that cannot be rationally associated with the defined functions of the engine oil will be deemed unacceptable" 5.1.12 - Breather fluids must exit rear. EGR forbidden. Here is a good one, 5.68 - Engine plenum air must hit a min target of more than 10 deg c above ambient air temp.
Sounds all rather draconian, and means that some teams were doing all or some of the above last year. And this year it gets taken away.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top