they're not against Change, but against rules that make overtaking harder. there's a huge difference in that.
edit: i just saw that you refer to the same article. i'm interpeting the things costa said different then you
And Costa knows what they are talking about! If they just heap a bunch of extra super sensitive down force onto the cars, they will go faster, but overtaking will drop to zero. They need to add mechanical grip, and they need to make the down down-force a lot less wake sensitive.
I have my theories about this, and I don't want to keep harping on about Red Bull but there is some very clear evidence of why this is being done.
Mercedes dominated the sport for the last 2 years. Red Bull and Bernie would have you believe that this is down to the Merc PU106. And while I agree it does play a role here, it is not the silver arrow(excuse pun).
No other Mercedes powered team has won a race, Red Bull have in fact won more than any other Mercedes team since the Turbo's arrived.
We also see that Ferrari's V6 is now a near match for Mercedes.
http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/ferra ... s-in-2016/
Arrivabene wrote:“But looking at the data, we are there, because our engine department did a great job.
Then we have Andy Cowell of Mercedes HPP stating that the current rules would mean most engine makers would be converging performance wise very soon. to the point that the engine would make less than 0.3 seconds difference.
Allied to that, costs would have come down dramatically(V8's cost twice as much in 2008 than they did in 2011 for example).
Through the various machinations of F1, there was a brief to increase the speed and sound of the cars utilising less of the engine and more of aero.
This is being done for the simple reason of putting less emphasis on engines and more on aerodynamics. And if we look at Mateschitz relationship with Ecclestone and Mosley, it was clear why aerodynamics was the main precursor than mechanical grip. Read the link for more on that.
http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/f1/sh ... archionne/
There simply is no sense at all in making aerodynamics even more prevalent in relation to other aspects of the car.
It would be far cheaper and more effective to increase mechanical grip, through tyres and suspension/chassis rules than it would aerodynamics.
But the tyres would be the same for everyone and therefore Mateschitz team could not develop and extensive advantage from it.
Some may point to the Red Bull's superior use of Pirelli's from 2010-13 as something that dispels my assertions. However, those tyres were designed to fall apart when pushed over the limit. If you are going to have tyres that increase mechanical grip, thereby pushing the limit further, most teams would manage far better than the narrow working window of the 2010-13 Pirelli's.
Moving on though...Will Buxton and various others have their opinions on Red Bull's success, and it's their view that rules where changed at various stages that actually suited them. From frozen engines, to tyres, to aerodynamics.
Whilst I don't concur it was always one way traffic, they certainly do have a point.
Especially now we see aerodynamics being held as the magic bullet, not giving one flying jot as to what happens to the cars that follow...the cars that are racing
Who will it best serve? And why? And what of the costs involved?
Engines are being vilified as the major cost demon....at around 20 million for a years supply. Yet looking at team budgets, this is dwarfed in relation to total team budgets.
1. Red Bull Racing (€266m + €35.7m + €167m) = €468.7m
2. Mercedes (€122m + €212.4m + €133m) = €467.4m
3. McLaren Honda (€144.5m + €216.5m + €104m) = €465m
4. Ferrari (€208.5m + €34.5m + €175m) = €418m
5. Williams (€52.5m + €22.9m + €111m) = €186.4m
6. Lotus (€69.5m + €13.6m + €56m) = €139.1m
7. Toro Rosso (€68m + €9.45m + €60m) = €137.45m
8. Force India (€49.5m + €12.2m + €68m) = €129.7m
9. Sauber (€44m + €9.25m + €50m) = €103.25m
10. Manor (€0.5m + €32.5m + €50m) = €83m
So if we take a midfield running team like Williams, paying 20 million for Mercedes PU's that still leaves over 160 million to spend on chassis and aerodynamics.
The chassis certainly won't take up much of the budget, given the stringent rules on shape, size, materials and a general convergence in suspension design(post frics).
Leaving a massive portion being spent on Aero. And this is going to increase given the amount of importance they are putting on it. Is this really what Ecclestone want's to do seen as though costs
are the reason he wanted alternative engines in the first place?
It is my view that these rules are being brought in to not only favour a team, but to keep them in the sport.
It's not for cost reasoning, nor for competitive purposes.
I could be wrong, but given what I've read...it stinks.