Don't forget USF1kylef wrote:
Pit stops were so fun, and often different fuel strategies won the race. I don't like that one bit
Noting the maximum cars on grid has expanded by two. Lola AM, perhaps?
What's so ironicSnake wrote:
But...the irony
I'm guessing that Finray is so anti-sport that it's funny he actually said something sports relatedMekstizzle wrote:
What's so ironicSnake wrote:
But...the irony
finray hates separate F1 threads and he made oneMekstizzle wrote:
What's so ironicSnake wrote:
But...the irony
Wait...I thought it was £40...have they increased it yet again?Mekstizzle wrote:
If cars can stick to the £45m budget, things will be interesting for them. Double the amount of KERS power and 4 wheel drive especially.
Last edited by Mekstizzle (2009-05-01 11:50:26)
Lol, thats true. Its probably a typo.Mekstizzle wrote:
Well that specific article says £45m, but it links to the article that talks about the budget and it says £40
Iunno...
Although I won't be surprised if the budget slowly increases to something like £50-60m as this current season goes along, Ferrari will no doubt try to get it increased and they do have some clout when it comes to these things
http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/rules … ions/8692/Kinetic Energy Recovery Systems (KERS)
From 2009 teams have the option of employing a KERS to boost their car’s performance. As its name implies, a KERS recovers the (normally wasted) kinetic energy generated by the car’s braking process. This energy is stored using a mechanical flywheel or an electrical battery and then made available to the driver, in set amounts per lap, via a ‘boost button’ on the steering wheel. Under the current regulations the power gain equates to around 80 horsepower, available for just under seven seconds per lap. This could be worth several tenths of a second in terms of lap time, but the weight and packaging of the system - and its impact on the car’s weight distribution - also have to be taken into account.
Last edited by Mekstizzle (2009-05-01 12:07:39)
As far as I'm aware there are 6 compounds, but they only choose 2 for any one race. The 'option' tyre is always the softer of the 2 chosen but can be harder then the 'prime' chosen for some other races. Also, in the last race the softest tyre compound was the preferred one and there seemed to be little to no problems with reliability.TC.Troy wrote:
The no gas rule will put Bridgestone on the hotseat. I gotta believe they will have to alter the compounds yet again if they are to keep the rule of using multiple compounds during a race. As it is now, the option tire is lasting what, 12-20 laps...the prime a bit more obviously. If they are to keep this rule, we'll go back to hard and harder compounds...omg what that will do to a car full of fuel...
2010 and beyond will be very interesting to see.
Now THAT Id like to see.DrunkFace wrote:
Also bring back the 40 car grids
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsp … 044860.stmFerrari have announced they will quit Formula 1 at the end of the season if the sport continues with plans to enforce a £40m budget cap from 2010.
It's great news, hopefully Ecclestone will see that he can't keep fucking up F1 and expect companies to stay in it.Kptk92 wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsp … 044860.stmFerrari have announced they will quit Formula 1 at the end of the season if the sport continues with plans to enforce a £40m budget cap from 2010.
Not good news, even though I despise them
The Turbo should make a comeback, it fits in well with the whole efficiency green thing. But the idiots have put in an engine freeze for like 5 years or some shit. I mean what the fuck, engine development is one of the key areas of F1 but they go and freeze it, this is what I hate about the world today, too much emphasis on holding back on development and innovation and keeping things "like they were in the good old days"ghettoperson wrote:
Personally, I want to see 40 car grids, unlimited budgets, gigantic engines with turbos, pits stops, more KERS, and just generally more speed, explosions and excitement. Who wouldn't want that?
Bring back the 70's! 1.5L Turbo engine producing 1,500 BHP!Mekstizzle wrote:
The Turbo should make a comeback, it fits in well with the whole efficiency green thing. But the idiots have put in an engine freeze for like 5 years or some shit. I mean what the fuck, engine development is one of the key areas of F1 but they go and freeze it, this is what I hate about the world today, too much emphasis on holding back on development and innovation and keeping things "like they were in the good old days"ghettoperson wrote:
Personally, I want to see 40 car grids, unlimited budgets, gigantic engines with turbos, pits stops, more KERS, and just generally more speed, explosions and excitement. Who wouldn't want that?
So basically what they are saying is they can't compete unless they have an unfair advantage.Kptk92 wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsp … 044860.stmFerrari have announced they will quit Formula 1 at the end of the season if the sport continues with plans to enforce a £40m budget cap from 2010.
Not good news, even though I despise them
If you want a 40 car grid you can't have an unlimited budget. More speed in general also equates to less overtaking and much more boring racing. I want to see less down force and better tracks.ghettoperson wrote:
Personally, I want to see 40 car grids, unlimited budgets, gigantic engines with turbos, pits stops, more KERS, and just generally more speed, explosions and excitement. Who wouldn't want that?
BBC wrote:
Ferrari issue F1 quit ultimatum
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/4 … ari466.jpg
Ferrari have threatened to quit Formula 1 at the end of the season if the sport continues with plans to introduce an optional £40m budget cap from 2010.
"No F1 in 2010 if the rules do not change," said a statement. "Ferrari does not intend to register cars for the 2010 F1 world championship."
Ferrari fear the evolution of a two-tier championship, between those teams who adopt the cap and those who do not.
The teams will discuss the plans with FIA chief Max Mosley in the next week.
Ferrari, in a statement, insist their announcement is not simply posturing: "The same rules for all teams, stability of regulations, the continuity of... endeavours to methodically and progressively reduce costs, and governance of Formula 1 are priorities for the future.
"If these indispensable principles are not respected, and if the regulations decided for 2010 will not change, Ferrari does not intend to enter its cars."
Ferrari's stance has divided opinion on whether or not they will go ahead with their threats of withdrawing.
Former team boss Eddie Jordan told the BBC: "Maybe this isn't the posturing that most people think it is - I wouldn't be certain that they wouldn't carry this out.
"Ferrari shareholders are very concerned at the losses that are being made in the company at this time, the credit crunch has had an impact, and I think this (announcement) is different.
"Everyone concerned would be very silly not to put 100% of their time, effort and diligence into making sure there is compatibility between the sport, the governing body and Ferrari."
The announcement will put to the test Mosley's resolve after he claimed earlier this month that F1 could live without Ferrari, the sport's most famous, most successful, and longest-tenured team.
"The sport could survive without Ferrari," he said. "It would be very sad. It is the Italian national team."
F1 supremo Bernie Ecclestone, meanwhile, dismissed claims Ferrari could quit F1 on Tuesday, telling the Times: "Ferrari are not stupid. They don't want to leave Formula 1 and we don't want to lose them, so we'll get to grips with it."
However, Toyota and Red Bull have also already threatened not to enter next year's championship unless the new rules change.
And Ferrari have criticised the FIA's decision-making process, stating: "The rules of governance that have contributed to the development of F1 over the last 25 years have been disregarded, as have the binding contractual obligations between Ferrari and the FIA itself regarding the stability of the regulations.
"The same rules for all teams, stability of regulations, the continuity of the F1 Teams' Association's (FOTA) endeavours to methodically and progressively reduce costs, and governance of Formula 1 are the priorities for the future.
BBC Five Live Formula 1 correspondent David Croft
"If these indispensable principles are not respected and if the regulations adopted for 2010 will not change, then Ferrari do not intend to enter our cars in the next Formula 1 World Championship."
The FIA wants to introduce an optional £40m budget cap next year to encourage new teams to enter.
The plan would allow capped teams to operate with far greater technical freedom than those continuing with unlimited budgets.
However, Ferrari's president Luca di Montezemolo, head of FOTA, has warned it would create a two-tier championship that could be "fundamentally unfair and perhaps even biased".
The FIA has set a deadline of 29 May for teams wishing to compete in 2010 to enter and state whether they want a cap or not.
But, BBC Five Live Formula 1 correspondent David Croft fully expects Ferrari to line up on the grid in 2010, despite the threat.
"I would be amazed if Ferrari aren't racing in 2010," he said, "I think this is just the opening of a series of discussions that will take place between the sports most historic team and the governing body.
"It's inconceivable that we would have Formula 1 without Ferrari. Mosley says the sport doesn't need them, but I think a lot of people would beg to disagree."
That is a sentiment echoed by the sport's drivers, with world champion Lewis Hamilton saying he "could not imagine" F1 without Ferrari while Renault's Fernando Alonso added it was "impossible" for it to happen.
And BMW Sauber's Nick Heidfeld was left bemused by Mosley's comments.
He said: "I thought that people were looking and listening to the fans worldwide and Ferrari is obviously the biggest name in F1 with many supporters and has been there since the very beginning, so they belong in F1."
Ferrari, the sport's oldest and most successful team, also threatened a pull-out in October if proposals for a standard engine for all teams went ahead.
