Start, Spa-Francorchamps, 2014

F1 Commission decides against 2016 rules overhaul

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

Start, Spa-Francorchamps, 2014In the round-up: Plans to radically overhaul F1 car design have been delayed until at least 2017.

Links

Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

Formula One's rules revolution will have to wait (Reuters)

"Although there was no formal statement issued, sources said the FIA's Formula One Commission had rejected a proposal to change the regulations and allow cars with wider tyres and different bodywork for the 2016 season."

McLaren MP4-30 - reshaped brake ducts (F1)

"Another interesting feature at the front of the MP4-30 are the brake ducts (see circled area), which utilise an unusual shape in order to improve cooling efficiency - something that could be an important factor this year as the cars are expected to be faster than in 2014."

What if the Sauber C34...? (Sauber via YouTube)

Banker cleared of stealing Nico Rosberg F1 replica steering wheel from Mercedes-Benz World (Get Surrey)

"A banker who was accused of stealing a £2,000 replica Formula 1 steering wheel from Mercedes-Benz World at Brooklands has been cleared after magistrates agreed he was exposed to a 'cruel prank'."

A Korean Auto-Racing Debacle, but Hope Around the Bend (The New York Times)

"Both the location and the dearth of South Korean racing fans were cited by Parliament in its early warnings about the project."

Thanks to Chris for the tip

Tweets

Comment of the day

How realistic is Ferrari’s F1 Concept?

The only way F1 cars would ever look like that is by either:

A. Mandating a blueprint design which would equate to a spec series, or:

B. Banning anyone with aerodynamic qualifications, mandating a graphic designer as lead engineer and introducing a Formula E style fan boost that only the hellaflush crowd can vote on.

Cars don’t look exciting because downforce makes cars quick, not aesthetics.

This is Ferrari trying to drum up public enthusiasm for political purposes. They want radical rules introducing again because they have to figure rolling the dice enough times on technical rules will work in their favour.
Philip (@Philipgb)

From the forum

Snapshot

Chevrolet IndyCar aero kit, 2015

From this year IndyCar teams will be permitted to conduct a limited amount of aerodynamic development on their Dallara chassis, which they have previously used in a standard specification. Engine supplier Chevrolet was the first to reveal their aero kit for the 2015 season yesterday.

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to _Ben_ and Mike!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Enzo Ferrari, who founded Formula One’s most iconic team, was born on this day in 1898.

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

Posted on Categories F1 Fanatic round-upTags

Promoted content from around the web | Become a RaceFans Supporter to hide this ad and others

  • 47 comments on “F1 Commission decides against 2016 rules overhaul”

    1. I despise the rear-wheel shields on that IndyCar, without them the car would look so much better. However, I tolerate them because they’ve done their job so far.
      Still, I think it looks crazy epic. And I’m pretty sure many people here will disagree, but that’s ok ;)

      1. I like the rear wheel shields. Not only have they addressed a major safety issue (that exists in F1), but they are an interesting area for potential aero development and probably help cars follow more closely through corners (due to decreased wheel turbulence).

        Looks wise, I found them strange at first but they’ve grown on me.

        1. I have to agree that, from a technical and safety point of view, I would like to see wheel “shields”. I see no real reason for the wheels to be open, except that F1 is “open wheel”. Leaving the wheels with no covering has no point to it, generates a lot of turbulence (which may affect following cars), is less safe and is less efficient. Even a simple wheel arch would be effective, I believe, although limited sculpting would be better.

          From a cosmetic point of view, I believe they would grow on me. To be frank, I don’t give two hoots how the cars look. I’m a function guy.

      2. Is that an Indycar or an LMP2?

        1. Formula E..xD

    2. as a graphical designer i found the Sauber video rather offensive, t just a line! and the car (this and almost all of them) looks dull and boring. I don’t know if going 1000hp or that RedBull/Ferrari concept is the way to go, but i’m most certain that with this liveries they won’t be doing a good start…

      1. I’m leaning closer to Ferrari if I had to choose, although I hope neither of them. Although both look dreadfully garish, the RB wins that trophy

      2. As somebody quite close to an F1 Strategy Group member I find it offensive that they are using social medias and trying to appeal to under-75s. And they should receive a grid penalty for displaying a race number that can be seen from outside the car. They must be stopped, bled dry and put out of business.

        1. @geoffthehyacinthmacaw – Brilliant comment, I completely agree :)

    3. I’m not clear on the pros/cons of wider tyres. I imagine since the immediate contact surface area is larger (sorta like the idea behind slicks) the car is able to use it’s power more effectively? I also read that it boosts the slipstream drag effect witnessed on straights due to the wider tyres shielding the car behind, but hinders the following car in corners, if this is the case I’m not sure i’d want to propagate anymore overtaking on the straights.

      I must say I would like to see an increase in engine power, sometimes when I watch F1 from times gone by, particularly 2000-2005, an era which I was too young to watch, it always seems like the cars have a sort of aggressive finesse when diving into, and navigating corners, they always seem a little more ‘alive’ and reactive than the cars I see today.

      KPMG? New Mclaren sponsor?!

      I’ll tell ya, that Sauber looks absolutely delicious, lovin the radical, retro look, the nose though, not so hot.

      1. If Mercedes is hitting 950hp, and the cars are as wide and with the same tyre width, why did they looked more aggresive? maybe because they were better designed in a graphical way with all those big title sponsors. now all the cars looks like the minardi of paul stoddart! awful collection of tiny (if any) stickers.

      2. @frankjaeger

        KPMG? New Mclaren sponsor?

        They were announced earlier this year:

        Sponsor watch: 2015 F1 car launches

    4. Is it strange to anyone else that there is almost more creativity aloud in Indycar then f1? I know it’s not open development like f1 but the aero guys have way way more creative ways to work things. They even will have in season upgrades on aero this year which is a crazy leap from the last ten + years. I wish Indy would get its early following from the 1980’s and early 90’s.

      1. i don’t think so: there’s only one chassi manufacturer, and the only difference will be the aero kits.. two for year. So hardly more creativity there.

        1. I know it’s only Honda and Chevrolet and the tub is from dallara but I’m speaking just on aero nothing else. I know f1 is light years away but just on aero speak I think they have a ton of freedom

          1. i still don’t get where the freedom is. If the chassis is homologated, and the aero is almost homologated, i still don’t get it.

      2. By the end of the year they will all probably look the same, still, getting there first is what it is all about.

        1. That’s not true because they will be locked in but for there “tokens” to upgrade that boxed aero and the side pods and air box are locked in for 2 years. So the cars will keep their differences at least till the next full design stage.

    5. That Sauber video… are they proposing putting a Borat-style mankini on the car? That’s what it looked like.

      1. Yes!

      2. Because some of the other F1 teams have it also, it will make their livery look less GP2 like. Such original thinkers at Sauber.

      3. @swordsman_uk Maybe angling for a Daniel Juncadella/Astana sponsorship? :P

    6. Thank goodness the F1 commission read F1Fanatic.co.uk, they could make some horrible blunders otherwise.

    7. The CotD is yet again a Jose Mourinho conspiracy, either way you look at it, by the way it was reported that Ferrari stood by most of the proposed changes, these proposed by their counterparts. The only changes was asking for biturbo and for a compromise between RBR who wants dramatic bodywork and tyre changes asap and Merc, who want to delay everything, otherwise Ferrari just agreed with everything cost cutting, bodywork changes etc.

    8. Right decision there, I’m glad.

      And my goodness that Sauber is BEAUTIFUL!

      1. Oh Yes!
        That Sauber is coming together quite nicely!

    9. Unfortunately the new Indycar aero kits will likely make the racing worse this year because the added downforce the new kits are producing make them “A great deal more wake sensitive” which is going to be a big issue on road/street circuits but an even larger issue on the ovals where the last thing you want a car to be is wake sensitive.

      That according to Indycar engineer’s.

      Shame as the racing in Indycar has been fantastic since they introduced the new car in 2012 with good racing/overtaking on every type of circuit including several circuits where the racing tended to be poor in the past.

      1. I’d also add that Paul Tracy was saying in a recent article that from what he’s hearing the big teams (Penske & Ganassi) will have a massive advantage over the other teams because they will be doing 90% of the testing & development on the new aero kits.

        I just think these kits are going to turn out to be a massive negative when it comes to the competitiveness of the racing.

        I also think the Chevvy one looks really ugly with those stupid flaps/winglets & flipups, I hated them when F1 had them pre-2009 & hate them just as much now on an INdycar :(

      2. Plus, it looks plain ridiculous

      3. It’s a shame.. they should try and do some engine development, to get higher speeds at Indy, than aero development and losing the racing.

        PS. The Ferrari makes me think of Hot Wheels! And if they are copying Dallara..

    10. This is an interesting bit of news that popped up yesterday: FIA study shows F1 costs could be halved

      If this study/commission was even vaguely accurate then this could be great news for the future of the midfield teams (assuming the FIA actually manages to implement the cost-saving changes for once).

      Considering how Bernie/CVC seem to be unwilling to alter the distribution of prize money (at least until the end of the current terms in 2020), this quote is particularly significant: “Then teams like Sauber, Force India, Toro Rosso and Williams could be funded solely from the distributions from the commercial rights holder”

      1. Shame there’s not more detail in the article though. I am quite curious to learn what testing, racing and design activities could be cut.

    11. Wait, Sauber made a video asking if they should add a yellow line on their car?!

      I can’t even

      1. It would be hilarious if they did a sort of advent calender-style countdown to the beginning of the season, with each day adding a new stripe/bit of paint/sponsor logo etc. to their car, until they finally have an interesting livery at Melbourne!

      2. I didn’t get it.

        Was it meant to be funny or witty, or serious..? Like, genuinely confused.

        Either way, it does look better. That hint of lemon does add, well, SOMEthing to that boring livery.

        Here’s one thing that might make you like it a little more – I only realised the other day that it’s kind of similar to the late 90’s Saubers. Just, with much, much less sponsorship, and a much uglier chassis.

        1. And less likable/talented drivers…

      3. @hutch Yes I did very much prefer McLaren’s original strategy of raising two digits to the fans, in that regard…

        Seriously, there’s no pleasing some folk!

    12. i don’t get it, are aero-kits supplied by chevy ? n not developed by teams ? thought chevy just engine supplier ?

      1. Chevy and Honda develop their own aero kits (two each, a high-downforce street/road configuration and a low-downforce oval racing one) — makes some sense, as some parts directly affect the engine. Teams are free to bolt on any homologated parts of the aero kit as they choose, so there might be some variation even within teams running the same engine there.

        Indy racing teams tend not to be constructors in the F1 sense, so making them develop their own aero kits will just make costs even higher and further entrench big teams like Ganassi and Penske.

    13. There have been reports of more woes for McLaren-Honda. Apparently, they ran at Barcelona on Monday for a filming day, but had many issues and only managed around 2-6 laps.

      I find it a bit concerning. I was hopeful they would be able to do a healthier amount of running in the upcoming Barcelona test, as it looked like they had made a step forward with their problems in the latter half of the Jerez test. However, these reports seems to suggest that they are still struggling with reliability issues.

      Hopefully they can get some of these problems sorted out before the test begins – I am eager to see/hear the Honda engine performing closer to the limit. Also interested to see how stable the McLaren chassis looks compared to other cars when the drivers are pushing.

      1. This doesnt look good. Mclaren have put on a straight face all through Jerez, but if this weeks test end the same way as the last one did..they’ll be in deep trouble.

        They are already so far behind on mileage, here to hoping that they will catch up.

        Lets just hope that its a fast car..as the old ethos goes, its easier to make a fast car reliable than a reliable car fast.

        1. I’m not sure a filming day would be a day to determine where they are with the car. I don’t think of filming days as much more than that…certainly not opportunities to pile on the kms. I doubt they had a full crew and all their gear there. There may be new parts in the works from the first test that will be ready and they only want to try for the next real test. Let’s see how the next test goes, since this was not a test day. This is a brand new marriage so I think it would be more abnormal if they didn’t have teething problems. Let’s give them some time, like the first half of the season, and then let’s see where they are. After all, nobody but Merc nailed their package last year, so it should be no surprise if a brand new entity (marriage) needs some time to work their project…see their planned programs through…evolve from each step as each one shows the team where they need to go next.

          1. @robbie Teams pretty much just treat filming days as extra testing days. That’s why they are only allowed 2 filming days each year, because they are essentially extra testing. Mercedes used one of their filming days before Jerez this year in order to get up to speed with their new car and they ran as many laps as possible.

            It’s likely that McLaren specifically chose to use up one of their filming days now because they need as much testing as possible to iron out all the technical issues with their car before Melbourne. They also did a filming day with the interim car (2014 car with Honda engine) at the end of last year, which (according to Eric Boullier in an interview) was in order to test the systems of the engine. So it’s clear that teams do use filming days as opportunities to do some additional testing.

          2. @robbie I must say though, I agree that we need to give McLaren time to develop their package before judging them. Most teams had lots of trouble in 2014 with their car/engine, so it should be no surprise that McLaren are having trouble with a new engine now. And of course McLaren are similar to Red Bull last year in that they are intentionally compromising reliability in order to pursue performance (according to Ron Dennis). Plus all the problems McLaren have had so far have just been niggling software issues rather than fundamental problems like overheating/bodywork melting/etc. – they said that the issues themselves aren’t really big issues, just lots of small ones, but because of their extremely tight rear packaging (“size zero”) it takes a long time to fix each issue, which has meant that they have lost a lot of running due to spending much of their time fixing each problem.

    14. hahahaha!!!! That Sauber video is the best thing I have seen in ages! If Lotus put that out, everyone would say it was a touch of genius! Just imagine the scenes in the Sauber factory when this happened!?

      “What if… Now seriously guys, you’ll have to realise this is only an early concept idea so I won’t look as extreme in real life… well… Just imagine if we… hmm.. Ok I know this seems a bit crazy and outlandish but just hear me out ok?

      *turns on smoke machine*
      *puts ‘Chariots of Fire’ on Spotify
      *instructs Dave to flick the lights on and off

      “I have come up with something revolutionary that I think will change the face of F1 as we know it…..

      We could add a small yellow line to the nose.”

      http://31.media.tumblr.com/c215cda8ca79d4c5fe273030fa2f296f/tumblr_n0hxznzPH01r3logeo1_400.gif

      1. Oh ok, so it is meant to be funny. Fair play, I guess.

        Sauber definitely need to work on their image a little bit on all fronts! What was once a likable Swiss team headed by a quiet Swiss man is now a dull, drab, and plain team. Monisha Kaltenborne is the epitome of corporate.

    15. That Red Bull tweet is awesome! “Yes Ferrari….we know. Now here is our ridicules concept from a while ago. Try and keep up”….ahem.

    Comments are closed.