F1 2006 Rules

[Mirabelle 0]

How boring would formula 1 be in 2006 with engine changes like engine capacity would be reduced from 3.0 litres to 2.5. and cylinders form v 10 to v 8. It is said that the cars will be 3 seconds slower. Imagine how the already struggling cars would compete. The FIA's explanation is that the races would show the "drivers' abilities" and not technology dependant. And the tyre rules are used to reduce costs, but how come in other motor sports cars are allowed to change their tyres during pitstops. And some say that slick tyres will be back in 2006 which are very dangerous. Oh, and cars will be wider in 2006.

And considering the Qualifying session, they still can't figure out how to carry it out next season.

[blueboots 0]

I think the changes are for the better. Getting rid of the driver aids can only make the sport better. And we will begin to see who is actually a great driver and who is not.

And why are the cars struggling? The cars are actually going way to fast in a straight line, the engine capacities need to be reduced to reduce the high speeds.

Why are slicks dangerous? They provide more grip than the current tyres so I can't see what your point is.

[demonhorse 0]

I think the changes are for the better.  Getting rid of the driver aids can only make the sport better.  And we will begin to see who is actually a great driver and who is not.

And why are the cars struggling? The cars are actually going way to fast in a straight line, the engine capacities need to be reduced to reduce the high speeds.

Why are slicks dangerous?  They provide more grip than the current tyres so I can't see what your point is.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree other than on one thing... why do speeds need to be reduced?

we are now getting a new generation of tracks like Sepang, Bahrain and Shanghai that are built for a good mixture of massive speeds and also high grip corners.

F1 is meant to be a showcase of automotive technology. I agree with taking away driver aids, but not with reducing speed and power, as this kinda goes against the point of F1 for me.

[Jenson_Rules 0]

I agree other than on one thing... why do speeds need to be reduced?

we are now getting a new generation of tracks like Sepang, Bahrain and Shanghai that are built for a good mixture of massive speeds and also high grip corners.

F1 is meant to be a showcase of automotive technology. I agree with taking away driver aids, but not with reducing speed and power, as this kinda goes against the point of F1 for me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

One must agree.

[Null 0]

If anyone wants to see what F1 will be like next year with the rule changes, just watch GP2... ie, pretty much the same as F1 this year, just slower Personally, I can't wait for slicks to come back. The only things in F1 which need fixing are; the aero rules, the tyre rules and the engine rules. Change the aero rules and you'll see nose to tail racing, like in GP2. Qualifying should have the same format as DTM. The new proposed 2006 qualifying will be a shambles.

[Jenson_Rules 0]

oh no the new qualifying sounds very exciting

[Null 0]

It sounds dull as ever. The times that the first 10 cars to go out will set will be far off their "real" times due to traffic, less heat in the track and being pulled off the track after 15 and 30 minutes. There's little you can do in 15 minutes on a traffic laden track. The only thing they have got right about it is the refuelling during the session thing.

[CC 0]

I agree other than on one thing... why do speeds need to be reduced?*

we are now getting a new generation of tracks like Sepang, Bahrain and Shanghai that are built for a good mixture of massive speeds and also high grip corners.

F1 is meant to be a showcase of automotive technology.** I agree with taking away driver aids, but not with reducing speed and power, as this kinda goes against the point of F1 for me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

*Well Formula One is meant to be the panicle of motor sport, so that means being the fasted or one of the fasted. But sometimes the cars can be too fast, ever since 2000 and onwards, when the cars were getting faster and faster, we have seen less competitive races and seasons, that

[demonhorse 0]

*Well Formula One is meant to be the panicle of motor sport, so that means being the fasted or one of the fasted. But sometimes the cars can be too fast, ever since 2000 and onwards, when the cars were getting faster and faster, we have seen less competitive races and seasons, that

[JayStorm 0]

One must agree.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Make that two, I couldn't really agree more with that.

JS.

[Buttonfan 0]

Make it three

[ykickamoocow 0]

From my understanding they banned slicks because cars went too fast in the corners because of the increased grip. I personnally like F1 the way it is except for a few problems.

1. I think the areo package on the cars limit overtaking opitunities.

2. I think the differnce between the best team and the worst team is too great, i still like the idea on having very limited testing which would make costs go down and would allow teams like Minardi and Jordan to catch up to the rest.

3. The cheaper F1 becomes the more teams will enter F1 which means for more exciting racing.

Most of the rule changes which are designed to cut costs will do the exact opposite. I wonder how much Honda, Toyota, Ferrari, Cosworth and McLaren are going to spend to create a completly new engine, something tells me its in the hundreds of millions range.

[rodders47 2]

2. I think the differnce between the best team and the worst team is too great, i still like the idea on having very limited testing which would make costs go down and would allow teams like Minardi and Jordan to catch up to the rest.

3. The cheaper F1 becomes the more teams will enter F1 which means for more exciting racing.

This difference can be explained IMO in just a few words ! FERRARI do not obey the rules, either during racing or most imnportantly with regards to TESTING.

WHY is it that FERRARI are allowed to test whenever they like, regardless of cost, and to the detriment of ALL the other teams !!! Thank god this year they are not "runaway winners" as in the past, but you have to admit it's not through the lack of testing/trying :-(

RULES are RULES and EVERYONE involved should abide by them , even the "Prancing Horse" !!!

[Null 0]

"the cheaper F1 becomes, the more teams there will be racing"

maybe but they'll be lacking in a fair few departments.

They're going to need slicks if they're going to reduce the downforce. I WANT fast racing! I LIKE fast corners.

Ferrari are allowed to test because the summer testing ban is self imposed by the teams, ferrari don't want to adhere to it and they just make people like them even less.

[Mikathegreat 0]

If anyone wants to see what F1 will be like next year with the rule changes, just watch GP2...  ie, pretty much the same as F1 this year, just slower   Personally, I can't wait for slicks to come back.  The only things in F1 which need fixing are; the aero rules, the tyre rules and the engine rules.  Change the aero rules and you'll see nose to tail racing, like in GP2.  Qualifying should have the same format as DTM.  The new proposed 2006 qualifying will be a shambles.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree with changing the engine rules.Kimi Raikonnen would have been leading the Drivers title by now all thanks to the crap engine failure rule

[kup 0]

FiA wants to reduce speed ... and ... cuts engines ... hmm ...

In may 2005 there was a huge Poll FiA+AMD

Main results:

fans vants more overtakes and more driver`s role in racing.

Brakes - by reducing diameter - braking distanse bacomes longer

and drivers have more place for wheel-to-wheel overtakes.

And role of a good driver is more than middle one ...

[Senna 0]

Mirabelle

[ButtonGod 0]

I like the new rules with the exception of qualifying...

Qualifying is heading for another year of total disaster. I just know it'll be changed again before we hit mid-season.

[Senna 0]

I like the new rules with the exception of qualifying...

Qualifying is heading for another year of total disaster. I just know it'll be changed again before we hit mid-season.

I disagree. I think this format is the best since 2002.

[ButtonGod 0]

I think its the worse one we've had since 2002.

My gripe is not with the qualifying track action itself, its the rule where the slower cars get eliminated half way through the session that I don't like.

All cars, slower or not, should get equal track time.

[Senna 0]

It will be the most entertaining format since 2002, mark my words

[ButtonGod 0]

I'm not disputing that... Its the cars being eliminated that I'm disputing. If all of them were allowed to have equal time on the track then I'd be joining you in singing the praises.

[bajo39 0]

I agree other than on one thing... why do speeds need to be reduced?

we are now getting a new generation of tracks like Sepang, Bahrain and Shanghai that are built for a good mixture of massive speeds and also high grip corners.

F1 is meant to be a showcase of automotive technology. I agree with taking away driver aids, but not with reducing speed and power, as this kinda goes against the point of F1 for me.

Good points.

[Senna 0]

Indeed.

[Vas 0]

Changing to V8 is a decision forced on the F1 by the teams as they did not welcome the idea of Rev limited V10s.

Now as per media reports, rev limited V10s will be still much better than V8s. Could this make some of the teams abandon their developement of V8 and accept rev limited V10? We have to wait and see.

V8 are expected to give almost same speed as V10 in the future with further develpement of the car design and whoever suceeds in acheiving that first will rule the tracks.

Bringing back the tyre change is welcome step as the objective of humbling Ferrari is already acheived.(Bernie said tyre rule of 2005 was to reduce the speed thereby increase safety!)

Every changes brings in added R&D expenditure to the teams and this lets down one of the objective of F1- to bring down the cost. But this very changes only will keep F1 interesting as it is evident there is already an anticipation on Bahrain race and new season.

Bernie and co must decalre the obvious unequivocally that this sports is expensive and hence popular and glamorous rather than misguide kolleses and Allexes.