Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 31

Thread: F1 rule changes for 2005 & 2006

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Posts
    1,595

    F1 rule changes for 2005 & 2006

    "FIA announce rule changes for 2005 and 2006"

    Formula One engines will have to last two race weekends from next season, under changes announced by the FIA on Friday designed to slow cars down and improve safety.

    From 2006, 2.4 litre V8s will replace the current V10s, though smaller teams will be able to continue with the old engines, subject to restrictions.

    Other changes to come into force next season include revised bodywork designed to cut downforce, and new tyre regulations whereby each driver may use only one set of tyres to complete qualifying and the race.

    The full text released by the FIA:

    On June 30, 2004, the World Motor Sport Council voted unanimously to invoke Article 7.5 of the Concorde Agreement and give notice to the Formula One Technical Working Group (TWG) to propose measures to reduce the performance of the cars within two months. Notice was given on July 6, 2004.

    When the TWG failed to produce proposals by September 6, 2004, the FIA Technical Department proposed three packages of measures to the TWG, in accordance with Article 7.5(c).

    In summary, all three packages involved bodywork changes to reduce downforce, new tyre rules to require “harder” tyres and a reduction in engine capacity from 3.0 to 2.4 litres with eight cylinders. Of the three, Package 1 gave the most aerodynamic freedom but imposed maximum restrictions on the engines; Package 2 gave less aerodynamic freedom but slightly fewer engine restrictions; and Package 3 imposed further aerodynamic restrictions but gave the same technical freedom for the 2.4 litre V8 engine as the current 3.0 litre V10.

    All the teams were prepared to agree the bodywork changes and tyre regulations contained in Package 2. However, opinions differed on the engines. The closest to the necessary 8 out of 10 votes was at the meeting of September 6, 2004, when the TWG voted 7 to 3 in favour of the Package 2 engine rules.

    The TWG met most recently on October 15, 2004, but still failed to vote 8 to 2 in favour of any one of the three packages within the 45 days specified by Article 7.5. The World Motor Sport Council was therefore free to impose its own measures from October 21, 2004, to come into force no sooner than three months from publication.

    On October 21, 2004, the WMSC decided to impose Package 2 and that those parts of it which apply to 2005 would come into force on March 1, 2005 and the remainder on January 1, 2006.

    Package 2 consists of the following measures:

    2005 (to come into force on March 1, 2005)

    Bodywork
    Changes to the bodywork (aerodynamics) to raise the front wing, bring the rear wing forward, reduce the diffuser height and cut back the bodywork in front of the rear wheels.

    Reason: it is estimated that these changes will result in the loss of 20% or more downforce with minimal loss of drag.

    Tyres
    One set of tyres must complete qualifying and the race.

    Reason: a harder tyre will reduce cornering speeds.

    Engines
    Each engine must last for two complete Events

    Reason: a two-race engine will give less power than a one-race engine.

    2006 (to come into force 1 January 2006)

    Engines
    The introduction of a 2.4 litre V8 engine together with a number of restrictions concerning design and permitted materials.

    Reason: reducing capacity is a sure way to reduce power (as repeatedly requested by the TWG), while technical restrictions will limit the rate of power increase. It is estimated that power will drop to about 700 bhp compared to the 1000 bhp that existing engines will reach by 2006.

    In order not to prejudice the smaller independent teams the existing 3.0 litre V10 engines may continue to be used in 2006 and 2007, subject to a restriction on revs to be determined by the FIA

    Reason: having reduced engine power, we need an inexpensive but competitive engine for the smaller independent teams, including newcomers. A rev-limited 3 litre can be adjusted to be competitive with factory 2.4 litre units, but will be far less costly.

    The full text of the 2006 engine technical regulations is available on request. These regulations impose restrictions on engine development comparable to those already applicable to Formula One chassis. Such restrictions have by no means stifled technical development of the chassis, but they have prevented uncontrollable increases in performance. In a similar way the proposed engine restrictions will significantly slow the rate of increase of engine power output. Current freedoms have resulted in engines approaching 1000 bhp compared to the absolute maximum of 650 bhp promised when engine capacity was reduced from 3.5 litres to 3.0 litres in 1994/5 following the Imola fatalities.
    VIVA FERRARI!!!!!!

    "Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy!" ~ Benjamin Franklin

    If everything's under control, you're going too slow ~ Mario Andretti

    "We can't stop here! This is bat country!" ~ [U]Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas: A Savage Journey into the Heart of the American Dream[/U]

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Auckland, New Zealand & Balikpapan, Indonesia
    Posts
    1,896
    Quote Originally Posted by Ferrari Tifosi
    Bodywork
    Changes to the bodywork (aerodynamics) to raise the front wing, bring the rear wing forward, reduce the diffuser height and cut back the bodywork in front of the rear wheels.

    Reason: it is estimated that these changes will result in the loss of 20% or more downforce with minimal loss of drag.
    just to give more info on that:
    -Front wing raised 50mm
    -Rear wing element moved forward 100 mm

    I thought the restrictions was to increase the the body work around the rear wheels?
    "Rejection is better than regret. It's better to try and know you did your part, than to spend the rest of your days wishing you had tried"

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    866
    I know that the proposed rules are mainly aimed at a reduction in the speeds of the cars, but do you think that a reduction in the downforce of the cars will mean more overtaking. Is a 20% decrease in downforce a lot in terms of turbulent air when following another car?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Australia.
    Posts
    12,833
    They tryed to slow them down with no turbo and shit slicks, But they only went faster, What makes them think they wont learn and become even faster, It's micheal that kills F1 cause he is so good Just make him drive a Road car around and then they will keep up with him that way
    "Just a matter of time i suppose"

    "The elevator is broke, So why don't you test it out"

    "I'm not trapped in here with all of you, Your all trapped in here with me"

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    St Marys Western Sydney
    Posts
    20,953
    thats unfair though, ferrari didnt even have the best car this year, its believed BAR did as well as the most powerful engine, and he still proved his dominance. its too unfair to cut him down because of his skill, despite how it may be hurting the sport
    I am the Stig

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    6,534
    A big thing about it is that Ferrari are developing the car so suit Michael specifically, rather than other teams who keep having driver changes, so keep getting different feedback about what they'd like to do to the car. Put Michael in a BAR car, even if it is more powerful, and he wouldn't match the pace he'd set in the Ferrari, I'd reckon.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    7,272
    Quote Originally Posted by SlickHolden
    They tryed to slow them down with no turbo and shit slicks, But they only went faster, What makes them think they wont learn and become even faster,
    The thing is not to stop them from becoming faster, but to "re-set" the speed they are getting faster from.
    Thanks for all the fish

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Pennsylvania USA
    Posts
    674
    Quote Originally Posted by fpv_gtho
    thats unfair though, ferrari didnt even have the best car this year, its believed BAR did as well as the most powerful engine, and he still proved his dominance. its too unfair to cut him down because of his skill, despite how it may be hurting the sport
    Whatttttttt!!!!!!!!! Ferrari did'nt have the best car this year?!?!?! Were you watching the same F1 as the rest of us??? Did you see the first couple of races when the Ferrari was at least a second a lap faster than all the other cars in the field? Sure the BAR and Renault's were as fast or faster than the Ferraris on some circuits but that doesnt matter if your car can't hold up until the end.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Australia.
    Posts
    12,833
    They didn't it's just micheal is so good he could drive a shopping trolly and get in the top3
    "Just a matter of time i suppose"

    "The elevator is broke, So why don't you test it out"

    "I'm not trapped in here with all of you, Your all trapped in here with me"

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    141
    Hmmmm reducing speeds? I thought F1 was all about fast racing. Gah

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    St Marys Western Sydney
    Posts
    20,953
    Quote Originally Posted by NAZCA C2
    Whatttttttt!!!!!!!!! Ferrari did'nt have the best car this year?!?!?! Were you watching the same F1 as the rest of us??? Did you see the first couple of races when the Ferrari was at least a second a lap faster than all the other cars in the field? Sure the BAR and Renault's were as fast or faster than the Ferraris on some circuits but that doesnt matter if your car can't hold up until the end.

    it was half Michaels talent and half the other teams sitting on their arse at the start of the season, expecting different to what Ferrari provided
    I am the Stig

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,456
    Idea behind the aero change:

    Moving front wing higher: Reduces the ground effect of the front wing, which means less effective as well as a less efficient wing. If one wants to gain more downforce out of it they have to run it with higher angle of attack and therefore with much higher drag tradeoff.

    Moving rearwing forward/reducing diffuser height:
    Both of these are to reduce the effectiveness of underbody aero, the latter makes the floor a lot less efficient and effective, as with a higher diffuser height, ie steeper, the relatively high ride height resulted from the underbody plank can be utilize more effectively, if you take that extra steepness away, the air flow will more prone to seperation and adds more drag. To counter it is to reduce the rideheight but with the plank it would not be possible. While moving the rear wing forward will also reduce the efficiency of the floor as it reduces its ability to "drive" the flow of of the floor.

    all in all the changes should mean one can follow the car in front at a closer distance than they could now without as much loss of downforce as today. Increases chance of the car to setup the car infront for a pass, and reduces the stability of the car under braking as to create more oppotunity for mistake underbraking...

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Haberfield, Sydney
    Posts
    1,759
    Quote Originally Posted by NAZCA C2
    Whatttttttt!!!!!!!!! Ferrari did'nt have the best car this year?!?!?! Were you watching the same F1 as the rest of us??? Did you see the first couple of races when the Ferrari was at least a second a lap faster than all the other cars in the field? Sure the BAR and Renault's were as fast or faster than the Ferraris on some circuits but that doesnt matter if your car can't hold up until the end.
    While the Ferrari's were very good, did you note that Barrichello spent the whole season battling the BARs, Renaults, Williams and McLaren's. It was mostly Schumacher that was so far ahead. The performance of Barrichello, in my opinion, was a better barrometer for how good this year's Ferrari was. Also, Ferrari did have Bridgestone tyres, which were superior (and designed to suit the Ferrari). Engine/chassis wise, Ferrari did not have a clear superiority this year.
    What they had was driver (Schumacher)/tyre (Bridgestone)/team strategy superiority.
    UCP's biggest Ford Sierra RS500 and BMW M3 E30 fan. My two favourite cars of all time.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    IA
    Posts
    467
    Quote Originally Posted by Ferrari Tifosi

    Tyres
    One set of tyres must complete qualifying and the race.

    Reason: a harder tyre will reduce cornering speeds.

    This is a very drastic change considering tires affect every aspect of vehicle performance. It will be interesting to see what kind of tires the manufactures can provide to meet the duration requirement while maximizing performance. At least more tire management will add to race excitement.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rozenburg, Holland
    Posts
    27,329
    Quote Originally Posted by motorsportnerd
    What they had was driver (Schumacher)/tyre (Bridgestone)/team strategy superiority.
    You of course realise that if there had not been MS, RB would have clearly won the world championship. You may also want to speculate about who in absence of MS might have been the second Ferrari driver, but he might have also ended second in the championship.
    "I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •