Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
I would be interested to hear people's opinions on the rear diffuser debate and the outcome of the appeal before the Chinese Grand Prix.
- Should the appeal be upheld then do you think the other teams will be ready with a design similar to that of Toyota/ Brawn/ Williams? Has there been enough time to develop this since the beginning of thew season? How much work will they allocate to developing a system which might not even be needed?
- How will Brawn/ Toyota and Williams perform if they have to design a new system for China - Have they had sufficient time for this?
- Is this all just a big fix by BE and MM to encourage new teams/ sponsors/ money into F1 and make the sport more exciting?
i think the general belief that the diffusers will be deemed legal. Many of the non-double deck teams are already working on their own versions and im sure we will see them in action by the time the circus gets to barcelona (if the legality is confirmed by then). I personally dont think that any non-diffuser team has a design ready to bolt on, at this point in time.
The diffusers have already withstood scrutiny. The appeal is on that ruling. If the appeal wins, then it will be Brawn/Toyota/Williams who have to be ready with a new design. Not the other way 'round, as your first question states.
Now, should the appeal fail, and the diffuser design be allowed to stand, odds are most of the teams will have the new diffuser integrated for China.
Second question, I think it's unlikely they will lose this case, but in that event, they will all be mid-pack along with Ferrari, McLaren, and BMW will be a much stronger team, relativistically speaking.
These are professional racing teams. Every team out there has an "ideal for them" outcome in mind for the appeal, but you can bet absolutely 100% written in stone that every team also is hedging their bet, preparing to scramble to the other side of the issue, depending upon the outcome. That means everyone will be running the diffuser within the next 3 races if the legality is upheld, and all 3 diffuser teams will have legit single plane diffusers ready for China should the appeal win. Otherwise, they couldn't race.
No, this isn't a fix. How do you create a fix within the rules? The OWG made recommendations, and the FIA wrote rules based upon those. Everyone was handed the same rulebook to work with for the season, everyone had the opportunity to read the rules, and everyone had the opportunity to interpret them to their advantage. That only 3 teams interpreted the rules to their advantage means there clearly are some rather thick people reading the rulebook for the other teams. Were that not the case, we would be seeing every team with the diffuser, and this wouldn't be an issue.
Formula 1 is all about creating the best performing car within the rules. 3 teams have done just that, and the rest have not. It's that simple.
LM_1983 wrote:I would be interested to hear people's opinions on the rear diffuser debate and the outcome of the appeal before the Chinese Grand Prix.
- Should the appeal be upheld then do you think the other teams will be ready with a design similar to that of Toyota/ Brawn/ Williams? Not for a race or two after China.
Has there been enough time to develop this since the beginning of thew season? No.
How much work will they allocate to developing a system which might not even be needed? As much as they can. They can not risk that the diffuser will be ruled legal.
- How will Brawn/ Toyota and Williams perform if they have to design a new system for China. Mediocre.
- Have they had sufficient time for this? No.
- Is this all just a big fix by BE and MM to encourage new teams/ sponsors/ money into F1 and make the sport more exciting?
Sponsors want stability and low risk. The current situation will be a negative to many new sponsors.
Enzo Ferrari was a great man. But he was not a good man. -- Phil Hill
passing scrutineering dosnt mean much, other than it passed scrutineering.
mass damper passed...the ferrari sprung floor passed...mclarens brake steer passed. Id imagine toyotas rear wing passed just a week ago.
all the same, i think the appeal will be dismissed.
Though I am a fan of a driver and team that do not have diffusor, I really hope the diffuser teams win.
This is a case of some people who were smart in their interpretation, and though of something new and interesting, and just because others did something dumb, does not mean the smart ones should be penalized.
They should devote their energy to making a diffuser of their own, rather than complaining!
The only way to close a stupid question is to give a smart answer
i dont really get every ones problem. its a complex issue, and very good arguments on both sides....why is it so unreasonable to let a court of appeal properly investigage it, and clarify the regulations
Well Brawn as technical head of FOTA tabled this last March and offered to clean up the rules regarding diffusers and to get rid of the bargeboards but the teams weren't interested - they are now See article below.
The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free and good men die like dogs - there's also the negative side' - Hunter S Thompson
woohoo wrote:Though I am a fan of a driver and team that do not have diffusor, I really hope the diffuser teams win.
This is a case of some people who were smart in their interpretation, and though of something new and interesting, and just because others did something dumb, does not mean the smart ones should be penalized.
They should devote their energy to making a diffuser of their own, rather than complaining!
According to the interview with the Williams guy (Parr?) when this was first brought up, he said that a few teams have been doing this since 2006, so it was NOT new.
That is where my crybaby complaint comes in. If teams have been doing this since 2006, it should have been specifically prohibited by the rule changes if it was not wanted there.
Once again, it is NOT new, and the OWG knew about it, and had the opportunity to stop it for 2009, but chose not to.
So the brilliant minds at 3 teams incorporated it this year, much to their benefit I may add!
If this was clear knowledge amongst teams, why didn't we see more than 3 teams running it?
I just won't understand why certain team principals, ie Briatore, would rather stick to "the spirit of the rules" at the expense of his team's performance, than embrace the killer instinct and competitive spirit and go for what lets them win?
The FIA seemed to have made up their minds in Australia, I doubt we'll see the diffusers deemed illegal in the 2009 season.
My question is that we've been hearing a lot about teams trying to get their weight balance as far forward as possible on account of the KERS weight and location (for some) and new rear tires. If Brawn/Williams/Toyota knew they were using the double-decker, they would've taken the fact that the car is rear-heavy to begin with into consideration.
So if you designed your car to be well balanced without the trick diffuser, and then you crank on a ton more downforce at the rear, will you really see that much of an improvement in handling?
You have to think of it this way, 3 teams found this way of doing it. Not 1 like the mass damper, flexi floor etc argument. The other 7 teams should eat humble pie and catch up
Nothing will change. The gap isn't that big (they're not dominating) + brawn's story about that he proposed last year to ban this year's diffuser will help him in the case. Brawn will keep their points + diffuser.
Mercedes AMG + Hamilton => dreamteam!
If you can't beat'em, call Masi!
See article below.
