i think it's more that teams would like MORE loopholes pleaseCapharol wrote: ↑12 Oct 2019, 18:07The way i read it (and interpret it)
these 6 Teams, Mercedes, Ferrari, Red Bull like these changes but know there are many loopholes to take advantage of and this is why they say "we don't like it"
but as stated in the article aswell, they have little change of success, because they have to bring something really good to the table to get it approved .....
so for now i say it's a small sturm in a teacup or tempest in a teapot..... (what ever you like to call it)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/50027293The questionnaire asked about 10 questions, including whether teams preferred to press ahead with the proposed 2021 rules or stick with the existing regulations. In the case of the new rules, it also asked whether there should be more design freedom, and what teams felt about standardisation of parts.
that is the way i meant it, my bad way of expressionizzy wrote: ↑12 Oct 2019, 18:24i think it's more that teams would like MORE loopholes pleaseCapharol wrote: ↑12 Oct 2019, 18:07The way i read it (and interpret it)
these 6 Teams, Mercedes, Ferrari, Red Bull like these changes but know there are many loopholes to take advantage of and this is why they say "we don't like it"
but as stated in the article aswell, they have little change of success, because they have to bring something really good to the table to get it approved .....
so for now i say it's a small sturm in a teacup or tempest in a teapot..... (what ever you like to call it)https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/50027293The questionnaire asked about 10 questions, including whether teams preferred to press ahead with the proposed 2021 rules or stick with the existing regulations. In the case of the new rules, it also asked whether there should be more design freedom, and what teams felt about standardisation of parts.
yes I get the impression they're all fine with the basic aero concept and the argument is about how much it's defined in every little detail versus how much teams can do their own designingjjn9128 wrote: ↑15 Oct 2019, 14:50With the 18" wheels from 2021? I think IF the top 3 can prove their ideas aren't harmful to the 2021 car Brawn and his team designed then it's likely this will all be voted through. I imagine they've had simulations running non-stop to prove their case otherwise more fool them. If they can't prove their changes then we'll have the same split where the top 3 and their B-teams are against... in which case the 2020 rules probably carry on another year. It's all gone a bit Brexit.
I don't think the double diffuser wrecked the last rule change, I actually think it would have given better racing if they kept it as it was, as it shifted the aero balance to the underfloor. But FIA got afraid that the cars would get too fast.jjn9128 wrote: ↑15 Oct 2019, 16:23They've already cancelled the spec brakes/uprights/fuel pumps/gearing...etc so I think that side of things is sorted - they've got a discussion about how their open-source parts might happen. It is all detail - but the FIA/FOM are wary of some loophole being inserted like double diffusers, which wrecked the last overtaking oriented rule change.
Hence why allowing them to position their own under-floor devices (within limits), as now, would allow them to be team-dependant. The current floor is effectively spec - the rules define the important bits such as diffuser max height, length, width.
i don't suppose they'll be satisfied with designing the brakes and a few other bits and pieces. I read, probably on AMuS, that atm there are 50 boxes defining the body/aero! 50!!jjn9128 wrote: ↑15 Oct 2019, 16:23They've already cancelled the spec brakes/uprights/fuel pumps/gearing...etc so I think that side of things is sorted - they've got a discussion about how their open-source parts might happen. It is all detail - but the FIA/FOM are wary of some loophole being inserted like double diffusers, which wrecked the last overtaking oriented rule change.