Ferrari $ & F1

N

nate

Well-known member
1000+ Posts
Joined
Dec 14, 2003
Messages
1,156
Location
Sydney
Well Ferrari appears to have some performance again... but at what cost?

From what i can gather they've told everyone to **** *** & did as much testing & R&D as they like! Quite odd when the entire motorsport has agreed to take measures to reduce costs!

Renault really showed what a great team they were, by getting a far superior product SO quickly during off season testing...
Ferrari just seem to throw stupid amounts of money at the problem!

Its just my 2c, but in the interest of the sport, if teams just refuse to co-operate & test as much as they like will they ever loose???
(of course they eventually will... but its just a point!)

NOTE: lets remember to NOT mention race results!
 
Nate - Ferrari have always had the biggest budget.

The fact that McLaren and Williams used to routinely wipe the floor with them for much of the 80's and 90's would suggest that money isn't necessarily the most important factor.... although it does help!

The fact that Ferrari snubbed the teams agreement for limited testing is for me just another nail in the coffin of Bernie's Formula One World Championship.

GPWC - here we come!
 
and i don't remember why rubens got pulled out of the race yesterday ??

personally i think if they think that they can do whatevr they want they should be chucked out of the competition, and we all know that would make for a more intresting championship
 
orestes said:
personally i think if they think that they can do whatevr they want they should be chucked out of the competition, and we all know that would make for a more intresting championship
Click to expand...

I don't agree.

If F1 is to be the pinnacle of track motorsport, why so many restrictions? If teams insist on playing adove their station (Minardi etc), then let them die.

How can less testing possibly amount to better racing?

No matter what you do, teams with lots of $ will find ways to spend it and get more out of their cars.

Risk is that the manufacturers could dump Bernie who continues to collect monopoly rents. Current F1 is an abortion of what it origianlly set out to be - I for one do not consider it worth protecting with the way restrictions are going.

:2cents:
 
Sergetov said:
I don't agree.

If F1 is to be the pinnacle of track motorsport, why so many restrictions? If teams insist on playing adove their station (Minardi etc), then let them die.

How can less testing possibly amount to better racing?

No matter what you do, teams with lots of $ will find ways to spend it and get more out of their cars.

Risk is that the manufacturers could dump Bernie who continues to collect monopoly rents. Current F1 is an abortion of what it origianlly set out to be - I for one do not consider it worth protecting with the way restrictions are going.

:2cents:
Click to expand...


I don't agree, this season has seen some of the best racing in F1 for quite a few years. I would actually say that the engine, tyre, and aerodynamic restrictions this season have made F1 into more like it was in the 80's, and if it keeps up like this, i think that the changes implemented will be a sucsess, so the fact ferrari think they can do what they want... well they should get the boot...

I do agree that some of the lesser teams in F1 should shut up and race, but i also think at least some of the changes were a step in the right direction.
 
Maybe the best for 'quite some years'... but not the best ever...

But that's more to do with the type of tracks, the aerodynamics and the limitations they place on the drivers when in overtaking situations and the pit stop strategy world in which they operate.

Some of the rules in F1 are good, some bad. That's the way it is with all things, especially as time goes on and things develop.

The issue that I'd have with Ferrari flaunting testing rules is that they can go from there to flaunt other rules, which Schumacher personally has shown himself adapt at in the past.

On the other hand, F1 at this stage has brought out a fantastic level of fine tuning in the drivers. They are all trained up to produce a lap time on a specific lap, to perform to a predetermined level at all times. This in itself takes practice, though they have a level of equipment never before seen.

It's not really a world I like to delve into... bring back the sixties!
 
gti138 said:
Aparantly it was an electrical fault that caused rubens to retire from the race.
Click to expand...
What .. he suffered a Multiplex bug .. must have been designed by PSA (or Alfa.R) :)

- xTc -
 
F1 requires continual restrictions otherwise the cars become so fast and powerful that they would be dangerous to the drivers, marshalls and spectators.

Interestingly, when the testing restrictions were brought in a few years ago, some thought it would be more advantageous for the bigger teams, as they have the computational facilities to conduct large hardware-in-the-loop simulations, which the 'smaller' teams don't have access to.

I suppose Ferrari's recent flip-flop shows that perhaps there is no substitute for the 'real deal'....


...oh.. and that they are sore losers who believe that they are bigger than the sport :mad: :nownow:
 
Sergetov said:
I don't agree.
If F1 is to be the pinnacle of track motorsport, why so many restrictions? If teams insist on playing adove their station (Minardi etc), then let them die.
How can less testing possibly amount to better racing?
Click to expand...

i initially thought the same thing, but reading a few regs made it clearer...
an example in an engine restriction: instead of just spending heaps of $ & using rare & expensive metals for an engine, they have to go back & design a better system using normal metals... this can then trickle down to ordinary cars & improve their efficiency etc

Its an evolutionary thing of course, i & know they have a huge budget, but its just that its now more of a huge concern it appears!
 
I doubt the changes this year have resulted in this levelling of the field we're seeing. Tyres are playing a huge role at the moment.

But the aeros certainly haven't made it any easier to overtake, actually it appears to have made it worse, not better. MS should've won that race with the pace he had... regardless of how much I'd prefer that he didn't win.

The procession has changed slighty, but it's still a procession.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top