McMrocks wrote:One way would be removing the 8th gear even though that will only bring 50-150mm.
Removing 8th gear will have no effect on the length of the car, as the gearbox is quite remote from the engine now.
McMrocks wrote:Allowing refueling might be more effective in reducing the wheelbase.
The tank is not much larger than they used in the refuelling era.
McMrocks wrote:The most dificult way would be writing rules that make short cars faster. Very claerly FiA wont go this way as we had to see in the past. FiA should have written rules that make cars with low noses faster instead of forcing the nosecone into a specific space. So we will rather see a maximum length instead of rules designed to keep the wheelbase short
The problem is aerodynamics rule the roost, so it would be next to impossible to make shorter cars faster. The same with low noses.
McMrocks wrote:However, i dislike the idea of stating a maximum length in the regulations. The regulations are much too tight anyway so we need to think of other ways.
I am of the opposite opinion - define maximum length, width and height and relax some of the other regulations.
For example, instead of defining the size, front to back, top to bottom, of the rear wing elements, why not define the forward edge of where the wing can be, a minimum and maximum height it can be and then the area of a bounding rectangle. So a team may decide to move the rear wheel forward to allow a wide chord rear wing, while another will want a short chord rear wing which is deeper.
Similarly for the front wing. Don't define it depth (ie front to rear), just the rear edge, the overall width and maybe the maximum height it can be. Big complicated wings like we have now will force a shorter wheelbase.