SlotForum banner

1 - 20 of 48 Posts

·
DT
Joined
·
5,195 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
New rules proposed by the FIA, Formula One's governing body, in an effort to make F1 more interesting to spectators and more fair to the competing teams.

Level the field for better competition

For the 2008 season, the FIA is considering ending the tyre war between Bridgestone and Michelin by forcing all teams to use the same brand.

Rubber or silicone?

They are also considering reducing engine capacity to 2.4 litre V8s from three litre V10s, with each unit having to last two races and banning fully manual gearboxes, clutches and the use of spare cars.

20,000 rpm max

The FIA have summoned the 10 team bosses to a meeting in Monaco on May 4.

Scalextric, Fly, Ninco, Carrera, Slot.it, Revell, Sprint, SCX, Spirit & Vanquish

FIA boss Max Mosley outlined the six main objectives with the first "to improve the racing spectacle without introducing artificial rules."

Certain SF members are being drafted in to help

The others were the elimination of so-called electronic 'driver aids' such as traction control to put a premium on talent, measures to reduce the costs of running a top team and 'very substantially' cut the cost of operating a less competitive one.

Getting rid of the magnets perhaps?

Mosley is keen to ensure a full grid of 24 cars, rather than the current 20, and wants to make the sport more affordable to smaller teams.

This has to be digital...
 

·
Gary Skipp
Joined
·
6,476 Posts
If this is an amusing parody then I applaud you, if you are being serious I laugh in your face.

To be more polite, slot racing is different and therefor we should keep the rules we have. Plus, making more affordable will not be digital because those cars/sets are terrifyingly expensive.

A nice parody though
 

·
Scott Brownlee
Joined
·
4,275 Posts
Good one Nuro!

Just imagine what $200million per year would produce in terms of a slot car.

On a separate note, I see the lawnmower engined BARs are going fast at Imola. Sadly, the sewing machined engined Toyotas aren't.

Scott
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
714 Posts
QUOTE slot racing is different and therefor we should keep the rules we have.
WHAT rules?

Everyone and their dog makes up their own rules - there are NO useful standards and that is one of the huge problems with slot car manufature and racing.

Digital equipment doesn't actually appear to be very much more expensive if bought in sets, judging by what I have seen so far. Scalextric's pricing policy appears to be some way off yet, but will have a huge bearing on whetehr we see it as value for money or not.

A good post by Nuro, very interesting indeed.
I can't see enforcement of a single tire manufacturer succeeding though - this would stifle development. The only way this would happen would be if a manufacturer actually pulled out voluntarily - that is possible.

Reducing engine capacity, I wouldhave no objection to, though I am damned if I understand why the current configuration of V10 is complulsory nor why the proposed V8 configuration should be either. I would much prefer to see a free-for-all in configuration within the max capacity limit, whatever that figure might be.
QUOTE each unit having to last two races and banning fully manual gearboxes, clutches and the use of spare cars
The above restrictions strikes me as being pure lunacy! Is there an error? Surely they should be banning auto gearboxes and clutches if anything. What happens if an engine does NOT last two races? That team doesn't race that car at all? No spare cars? Good grief, I envisage races with no cars starting at all! They are all mad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,889 Posts
I agree - it must be a slip of the keyboard. Fully manual boxes should be encouraged - there's far too much electrickery involved these days! The only time I'd favour electronics on one of my vehicles is if I ever get one of these - http://www.marineturbine.com
look for the superbike! You need some electronics to keep the jet engine sweet
It's not so much the 250 mph aspect of the bike, more the actual start up procedure outside the pub
just having that jet engine spool up - immense street cred!!

Mark.
 

·
Brian Ferguson
Joined
·
3,652 Posts
QUOTE Everyone and their dog makes up their own rules

Meco, Tequila took that as an insult and is sitting here growling hoping you'll visit soon.
Hmmm... me thinks Tequila could come up with better rules than Bernie and company....

About the only points I can see as worthwhile are the reduction of displacement to 2.4L, and the elimination of electronic driver aids.

They should ban automatic transmissions and clutches, not manual units.

Nuro.... are you yanking our chains, or is this stuff really on the table?


Scott.... they'd be bloody fast sewing machines though!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,024 Posts
This has more to do with the lack of future tobacco sponsorship than anything else IMHO.

F1 costs have to come down as money entering the sport is about to to take a bigger u-turn than Mr Blair on Europe.

I was rather astounded though to learn that there is a proposal to remove any power steering arrangements. Max Moseley is looking at the lower cost and patented "you steer" design developed by a car company in the 60's as a driver aid to cirumnavigating F1 race circuits.


Moped
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,883 Posts
If the F1 circus moves to countries that don't ban weed adverts, then maybe that sponsorship, or some of it, will stay?
 

·
Scott Brownlee
Joined
·
4,275 Posts
Loss of *** money will not make a difference. Many companies, who currently will not enter F1 because there are **** involved, will be happy to write big cheques once the weed dealers have gone.

FIA rules suggestion no doubt 90% nonsense and easily ditched, but there only to scare teams and make it seem like they will be getting off lightly to accept the 10% Max really wants.

I suspect also that such proposals help fend off any nasty suggestions that, ten years on, F1 is still dangerous.

Those who advocate lower power, one make tyres, reduce downforce should be forced to watch a F3000 or F3 season review video. They have all these things and the races are as dull as a very dull thing.

BTW, no trouble introducing a one-make tyre rule - the FIA just says that's what it is and takes bids. (see F3000 chassis, engine and tyre rules).

Scott
 

·
Senior Slot Car Mechanic
Joined
·
2,230 Posts
And the absolute winner for the"I just shot myself in the foot award"
QUOTE If the F1 circus moves to countries that don't ban weed adverts
Is Bernie Ecelstone,having signed up China as a race venue this year,for exactly the above mentioned reason,has just been informed that Chineese authorities WILL NOT ALLOW ANY TOBACO ADVERTISING TO BE DISPLAYED AT THE UPCOMING EVENT.

Either on the cars,or around the race track.

Good one Bernie


I'm still laughing my guts out over that one.Looks good on him.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
Apparantly a few team owners have thrown their toys out of the pram over this lot, and have brought the "breakaway competition" story out.

I'm sure that there's more that can be done to allow the current cars to run, but to mix things up! How about for starters:

Grid placings to be decided by a lottery style draw

Water pumps to be placed around circuits, to create mini rainstorms at random

Anyone who dirves a red car to complete 5 extra laps, before they have been deemed to finish a race
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
I think these new proposels are ridiculas. If Mosely wants all these changes then he might as well promote the "pre-race Classic Car" run from sideshow to the main event!

I always read these whines about Ferrari winning everthing but this is how its always been. F1 history is littered with times when 1 particular team dominated for years only to be replaced by another. The main point is that Ferrari have at the moment the best driver in F1 who has won the championship several times even when he didn't have the best car. Just look at Rubens Barricalo, he doesn't always come second does he?!

Also Ferrari isn't even the biggest money spending team in F1, that crown belongs to Toyota and look at how well they're doing.

Even though Schumacher has won the first 3 races this season, those races have still been close and highly competetive. Just look at BAR's performance for example, I think for the first time in a good many years, this year more teams are capable of winning a Grand prix.

Is it really Ferrari's fault that Maclaran just havent got their act together this season? I think not.

They shouldn't keep tinkering with F1, why can't they just leave it be.
 

·
DT
Joined
·
5,195 Posts
I cant think of one other instance where the progression of a process works by going back to older methods. Perhaps I'm not thinking straight this morning though.

It is quite natural to progress and advance by incorporating new techniques and technologies - unfortunately some teams are doing so with much bigger budgets than others. The Ferrari team has 10 times the budget than the other Italian team Minardi.

This crisis isn't about electronic aids and auto gearboxes, it's about money and sponsorship.

It is obvious that only the top teams are getting the technical benefits because they can develop them themselves. The slower teams can only pick up on these developments in the following seasons.

Sometimes innovations developed in F1 filter down into the cars that we all drive. Wouldn't it be a shame if that was lost due to an anti-technology drive. I'm sure that the accountants need to get together to solve this problem.

On a side note, I hope Jenson Button does alright.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,883 Posts
I was going to pose the question earlier but will do it now.
Does anyone know the PURPOSE of Formula 1, other than just 'going fast', of course!
Is there an official 'Mission Statement'?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,889 Posts
QUOTE (Nuro @ 25 Apr 2004, 09:49)Sometimes innovations developed in F1 filter down into the cars that we all drive. Wouldn't it be a shame if that was lost due to an anti-technology drive. I'm sure that the accountants need to get together to solve this problem.
F1 has already been subject to an anti technology drive - witness banning of ground effect and even the wooden planks destroying the aerodynamics of the current cars. I'd lie to see some technology filtering down to the road cars, but only if you can turn the traction control OFF, and no top speed limiters. I mean launch control and fancy auto boxes may be desirable to some octogenarian in his Nissan Micra etc. but not to enthusiasts. Lamborghini don't fit top end limiters so why should BMW and Merc? It's an infringement of personal liberty! They say it's to do with environmental issues...well just plant more forests instead of bloody housing estates!!

Back to the ground effect and aero issues. We're not likely to see ground effect roadcars thanks to the inordinate amount of money shelled out in UK road Tax which ISN'T spent fixing the damn roads!!

Why did they ban these technological breakthroughs? I think it was because they (FIA?) said it was getting too dangerous. Too dangerous? Excuse me, but the drivers should decide that. If they think it's too dangerous then they don't have to drive the car - there'll be a large queue for the job!! It's up to the driver how hard he pushes his limits. If the chap reckons death is a very real probability then it's up to him - not some nanny state wrapping him up in cotton wool.

We must be careful not to let these thoughts spill over into other forms of the sport i.e. the TT - long may it continue. Yes, racers die every year, but it is their choice at the end of the day. They know what the circuit is about.

Phew! I feel better now that rant is typed up! Mongoose among the snakes and all that


Mark.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,883 Posts
QUOTE Too dangerous?
While a good part of me agrees with most of what Difflock says, I think that 'danger' has to be considered for
1. OTHER drivers
2. The spectators
Not in any particular order, but they do have to be considered.

Speed limiters on the road?
I think none of them (other than some commercial vehicles) are set even near the max speeds permitted, but are considerably higher. I also suggest that they are commonly used to prevent manic drivers from over-revving their engines rather than actually limiting speed on the road, though one could make a very strong argument that, if a national speed limit exists (where are your civil liberties here?), then it's quite justifiable to limit the car not too far above that limit. I believe Germany is one of only very few countries that do not yet have a national speed limit, though I might be out of date on that.
Points to ponder perhaps . . .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,457 Posts
FYI:

Germay doesn't have a limit on the Autobahn, but you will probably be pulled over for doing over 155mph (200kph). It's not against the law, but it's frowned upon (go figure...). That's why Mercs and BMWs are limited to 155mph. It's an aditional thing to the rev limiter I believe, so you can still stop the engine blowing up but cruise up to 180mph when the speed limiter is removed.

Think that's all correct (heard it from a reliable source, dunno who...). I'm sure someone will tell me it's not tho,
.

Lotus
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
420 Posts
i might be mis-informed here but I thought that the german (voluntary) speed limit that some manufacturer have put on their vehicles are 250 km/h. Anyway I remember that the reason that the main german manufacturers did agree upon the speed limiters were due to a threat that the german autobahn otherwise would get an official limit more in line with other european countries. So 250 (?) km/h is a rather generous 'free' speed anyway... me thinks. When it comes to being pulled over while driving fast on autobahn it is not necessarily related to speed as an isolated issue. I believe that the german stance is related to 'ruthless driving' and refers to the security of other motorists.. which ofcourse is in a way related to speed..


//peter
 
1 - 20 of 48 Posts
Top