Phil wrote: ↑21 Jul 2017, 23:42
In a sport where every tenth counts, i dont believe that for a second.
I am yet to see a compelling argument that a gearbox designed for one race weekend will require significantly less R&D opposed to one that should last 6. As i already said, both will be optimized and engineered to last exactly what is expected for them at a) the least amount of weight b) the best amount of performance and c) maximum reliability for the expected lifespan.
As per your analogy, we are not comparing a cheap lighter to a zippo, but one zippo with another zippo.
As i said, i dont doubt that one designed to last longer will not be more expensive, but i am very, very certain that over a span of 20 races, 4 longer lasting gearboxes will be cheaper and more cost efficient to a customer than 20 shorter lasting ones in a sport where every tenth counts for the reasons noted above.
The question that the teams should answer is:
Exactly how many gearboxes are destroyed on the dyno per season? How much is spent to test/ inspect each of the 4 between races? What is the total cost between the 2 methods?
If x + 4 >20, then just blow them up each weekend. They could go back to 2008 gearboxes design methodology for single weekend reliability.
The limitations always bring their own expense, just like aero. And the concept of a saved € will just be spent in other areas doesn't hold water.
If you want true cost reductions in F1, put total design sharing into the next concorde. Each part and all design/ test data needs to be shared with the FIA during scrutineering. That data is then given to the commercial rights holder for fan exposure, team sharing.
This would limit obscene spending as the teams would know they have to share, so there is no long term competitive value for investing outrageous sums for a 2 race advantage.
And imaging the machines that would take the grid after the first complete data share... top 10 separated by .10s, AND NO MORE CHEATING!
I would love to see what a bit more of an open-source environment in F1 would be like... But only if they opened up the regulations for design scope.