2011 technical changes ....who gains , who loses ?

[lebesset]

with every change in the regulations there are winners and losers ; who do we think will be most affected ?

most obvious change is liable to be due to tyres , last time there was a change renault went backwards rapidly ; in my opinion this time it is liable to be ferrari who will be most affected ..when it went 100% bridgestone the tyres were those developed specifically for ferrari , and there does not appear to have been a great deal of change since then ...I am well aware that pirelli are an italian company , but I don't think that will significantly influence their designs in a pro-ferrari direction ; gainers team wise I tend to favour renault , because they have been off their previous pace for the last 4 years

drivers wise I see schumacher and button being the biggest gainers ...both went into new teams in 2010 , and both struggled to get the tyres to work ; more aggressive tyres should favour both of them , but for different reasons

I could comment on my opinion of the effects of other changes but the isn't intended to be a monologue ....what do others think?

[Giblet]

Teams like Renault and Mclaren that have already undergone the tire change trauma from Michelin to Bridgestone could have an advantage adapting over Ferrari and others who have been on Bridgestone for ever and haven't had to make a tire transition.

It could be argued at the same time that everyone had to make a big change when the no tire change phase of the sport as around in 2005, so at the very worst, it might take some teams a couple extra races to really find their feet as it were.

Mclaren and Ferrari with their KERS expertise should have an advantage over teams that have never really run it as well, but other teams like Mercedes have the experience onboard with the systems and should transition well.

[Tamburello]

The team with most to lose from big rule changes is the one with the fastest car, so Red Bull. Next year's rule change is not as significant as the one last year, but let's see how it pans out.

As to specifics, I think McLaren without F-duct is significantly weaker so they have some work to do.

The rest of the rule changes are the same for everyone as nobody ran KERs, and the new wings and WD etc everyone has to integrate. Red Bull had the best non DDD car in 09 but surely they can't just rehash a RB5 for next year?

[ell66]

The team with most to lose from big rule changes is the one with the fastest car, so Red Bull. Next year's rule change is not as significant as the one last year, but let's see how it pans out.

As to specifics, I think McLaren without F-duct is significantly weaker so they have some work to do.

The rest of the rule changes are the same for everyone as nobody ran KERs, and the new wings and WD etc everyone has to integrate. Red Bull had the best non DDD car in 09 but surely they can't just rehash a RB5 for next year?

i disagree on the f-duct statement...all the top teams had one by the end of the year...if mclaren had any advantage...it was only a very small one at that point...as martin whitmarsh said himself.

i think red bull are gonna have problems with reliability..having never ran kers before,coupled with the nature of the tighyly packaged car.

[Tamburello]

i disagree on the f-duct statement...all the top teams had one by the end of the year...if mclaren had any advantage...it was only a very small one at that point...as martin whitmarsh said himself.

mclaren's was the only f-duct that was designed around the whole concept of the car, everybody else did it as an after thought. as such it, it was the best f-duct there was. and this won't be the first nor the last time that whitmarsh talks up his chances

it pays to not listen to teams and drivers occasionally and just let their actions speak for them.

[marcush.]

change of tyre supply to veryone ,introduction of KERS is not significant?
May I remind you that not a single team was instantly on top of it when changing tyre supplies in the past and when new tyre rules came into play this inevitably had effect on ranking of teams and drivers if I´m correct.
No single team came up with a winning package when KERS was introduced first time but a lot of them abandonned the KERS at one time during the season or seriously thought about doing this...
So to my mind the teams with big experience on KERS and those who have the best understanding of tyres in general will be likely to emerge as the winners over this winter ...and the drivers will be either the ones most adaptable (without loosing their speed adapting)or the ones the tyre will fit best to their talent ...

[lebesset]

what about the 2011 weight distribution agreement ?
drivers like button and especially webber must have been disadvantaged by their size ;and what about petrov ! wonder if he lost the 10Kg renault wanted him to lose !

[Tamburello]

change of tyre supply to veryone ,introduction of KERS is not significant?

Who said 'not significant at all'? Learn to read, the rule changes for next year are not AS significant as the ones for 09, though obviously more significant than the ones for 2010.

[raymondu999]

Considering McLaren's barn-door second deck of a diffuser has to go, and the f-duct has to go, McLaren are in for some pretty tough redesign work

[marcush.]

change of tyre supply to veryone ,introduction of KERS is not significant?

Who said 'not significant at all'? Learn to read, the rule changes for next year are not AS significant as the ones for 09, though obviously more significant than the ones for 2010.

oopps .... learn to read.. a bit late in my life..but thanks for the advise.


the change to the smaller fronts and the bigger fuel capacity was deemed to be not to be a significant one by most teams ,certainly less significant than the step from 2008 to 2009 .
well ,from 2009 to 2010 some teams got rid of KERS as well and now it is returning.
I don´t know if a change of tyre supply and a loss of adjustable front wing,F-duct and DDD plus introducing KERS and adjustable rear flap is not as significant as having a big fuel tank and a new size front wheel...but maybe others can quantify with ease ..to me this looks like a major aero change plus mechanical grip change plus introduction of an additional power source...areas for a lot of development and chance to get things wrong .the tyre situation especially tricky as a lot of components have been settled a while ago without ever testing the new rubber..ah yes its the same for everyone..but that still offers the chance for being wrong or right or any shade in between for all teams.

[Gerhard Berger]

change of tyre supply to veryone ,introduction of KERS is not significant?

Who said 'not significant at all'? Learn to read, the rule changes for next year are not AS significant as the ones for 09, though obviously more significant than the ones for 2010.

oopps .... learn to read.. a bit late in my life..but thanks for the advise.


the change to the smaller fronts and the bigger fuel capacity was deemed to be not to be a significant one by most teams ,certainly less significant than the step from 2008 to 2009 .
well ,from 2009 to 2010 some teams got rid of KERS as well and now it is returning.
I don´t know if a change of tyre supply and a loss of adjustable front wing,F-duct and DDD plus introducing KERS and adjustable rear flap is not as significant as having a big fuel tank and a new size front wheel...but maybe others can quantify with ease ..to me this looks like a major aero change plus mechanical grip change plus introduction of an additional power source...areas for a lot of development and chance to get things wrong .the tyre situation especially tricky as a lot of components have been settled a while ago without ever testing the new rubber..ah yes its the same for everyone..but that still offers the chance for being wrong or right or any shade in between for all teams.

I think you're a little confused. Tumbarello said the changes are not as signifcant as the ones brought in for 2009 (i.e. higher narrower rear wing and wider lower front wing).

You bring up an interesting point regarding the new tyres in your last few lines. According to Ross Brawn, the mandatory weight distribution is being used this year so that teams don't gain an advantage by simply "guessing" the ideal weight distribution needed for the Pirelli tyres.

[marcush.]

I might be confused at times but still one team (Brawn/Mercedes)got it very right for 2009 but dropped the ball significantly for 2010...so for them the truth that was painted does not apply...they managed a seemingly big step coming up with the best car and came up with almost desaster when only a small change was on.

i´d think tyres are a lot more than a static weight distribution and we have discussed this for along time in the w01 thread ..it was never clarified why they would have difficulty to adjust a misconception in weightdistribution apart from some memebers stating there was a problem to place a few kgs of tungsten near the gearbox..and it seems mercedes realised only later that their problem was something else..

[Formula None]

General question: how different are a team's two cars allowed to be? Could the newer teams run a modified 2010 car and a 2011 at the same time, to save some dough?

[gridwalker]

I sincerely doubt the rules for a homologated chassis would allow this.

[marcush.]

I ´m not even sure if it was allowed to start with the old design and change to a 2011 contender later on...i think the last team who did this was Toro Rosso in 2008? but then the tub was not a homologated part not allowed to change ,wasn´t it ?