I read the following (on Planet I think) which I totally agree with.
It was a letter written by a Lynn Friz (pls excuse the spelling, Lynn, if you are reading this).
When will the organizers realize the best way to control costs is to open the rules up instead of constantly restricting them? The rules should simply specify maximum engine capacity, physical strength/crash protection requirements and maximum dimensions. In the spirit of true “road racing” re-fueling during the race should be banned and the entire race should be run on a single set of tires (unless there is a failure). This would require the drivers to “put in an entire race” instead of just sprinting between pit stops. Under the current rules system there is so little room for variation that millions of euros must be expended just to eke out a miniscule advantage.
The long and distinguished history of the sport is of broad design freedom and vast diversions between designs.
Let’s all remember “lobster claw” Brabhams, 6-wheeled Tyrrells, Sterling Moss competing successfully in a 2 litre car at Monaco against 3 litre competitors. Les’s try to remember when there were three relatively equal aspects to an F1 car: Aerodynamics, engine power and handling qualities, and each car had its own strengths and weaknesses. The sport has been on a steady decline since 1983. The aerodynamics are all just derivatives of John Barnard’s MP4/3 from that year. The ‘80s and ‘90s were simply an exercise in which engine was best.
Now, with the engines all being clones (I still cannot believe they all have to have the same number of cylinders and valves), the only real difference between the cars is small aerodynamic advantages gained at enormous expense. If we’re going to have a low-tech spec series, then why not just buy a fleet of IRL cars?
Let’s get back to innovation and back to the sport’s roots!
A team may spend Millions on technology to get a 0.2 advantage, whereas, another team may find the same 0.2 advantage with some inovative ideas at a fraction of the cost.
An aside but somewhat related:
One of the changes for this year (correct me if I am wrong) was a mandated larger engine cover, to give sponsors more space, or so we understand. The question is why make it compulsory (for lack of a better word). If a team needs a larger engine cover and can figure out how to manage it without any performance penalties good. These are the type of things which stiffle inovation.
