The controversial F1 idea that's been called 'a catastrophe'
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ส.ค. 2024
- “A catastrophe and bankruptcy declaration for F1” that “should never be talked about”.
It’s fair to say Mercedes boss Toto Wolff isn’t a fan of the idea of performance balancing coming into F1.
So let’s take a look at what’s brought this subject to the boil, the specific idea that triggered Wolff’s impassioned response, and why he and plenty of others in the paddock feel so strongly about it.
00:00 Strong words from Toto
00:21 What started the debate
03:27 Teams' concerns
07:11 Is BoP bad?
Subscribe: the-race.com/youtube_subscribe
Website: the-race.com/
Twitter: @wearetherace
Instagram: @wearetherace
Facebook: / wearetherace
Podcasts: the-race.com/podcasts
Thanks for watching - please like, share and comment, please also hit subscribe to show your support so we'll keep doing what we're doing.
www.the-race.com
/ wearetherace
#f1 #f12023 #f1news #formula1 #formulaone #engine #engines #f1engine #renault #mercedes #honda #redbull #alpine #ferrari #fia #f123 #grandprix #therace #lemans #BOP - กีฬา
Performance balancing rewards teams who don’t innovate
*cough* Alphatauri
It works for open formulas like WEC were you can build any car you like - 9:04 - so very healthy for Le Mans, but bad for the innovation of F1’s, where stories like McLaren’s late, but great mid-season push to the front, has kept the season fresh.
@@MsZeeZed you’re rewarding failure. Its not fair on the teams who worked hard
I thought the cost cap was supposed to allow greater technical freedom without bankrupting teams. What are we even doing it for then? 🤡🤡Ah yes so Liberty and wealthy team owners can pocket more money.
Edit: Meanwhile FWONK shares have doubled in just 5 years. 📈📈
@@russell6075 the difference with WEC is that its closer to road cars so its more marketable, the Peugeot has interesting design which resonates with the brand.
There is also a giant difference in spending. Glickenhaus has 10% of the spending compared to Toyota each season. This is a problem if youre trying to get new brands to join the sport.
F1 is an engineering competition. These restrictions and balancing gimicks are against the spirit of the sport.
Yeah its an engineering championship, so fans should accept the fact that every single driver that has ever won, won because of their car.
@@aaronwestley3239exaclty. For me I look at f1 as a constructor's competition. The driver deserves credit but he is just another employee in the team.
@@Nothing-kz9pj Exactly, at least quarter of the grid would have done the same job in the same car. We should stop pretending we care about drivers.
You mean the engine freeze itself?
Exactly!!! Honestly, we make it way too much about the drivers and too little about the engineers
The cost cap and wind tunnel allocation already acts as a BOP , creating additional rules is just penalizing teams that actively innovate
That’s what it’s supposed to do but it doesn’t work in any way whatsoever does it.
@@Yosser70 How are you already saying it's not working? The mid and backfield is much more competitive this year than the last few already. Red Bull is still dominating but only for the 2nd year in a row, that's not exactly a dynasty yet and not even close to unprecedented.
lol yeah the cost cap rules and penalties
that's really effective isn't it lol
@@tech99070 And who exactly cares about the mid and backfield? It’s a race and who wins is what gets people interested. Max is heading to be as dominant as lewis was, at least until the reg changes in 2026, which is fair enough, that RB and him are a perfect match right now. F1 is a one horse race, with a couple of others chasing second and the rest fighting over points scraps, tell me you wouldn’t prefer a full field of competitive cars, rather than what we have had for years.
@@Yosser70 It doesn't work? If you disregard Red Bull this is one of the tightest fields we've ever had which is ridiculous considering we're only in the 2nd year of a massive regulation change.
I remember years ago when Williams F1 had started to not be a consistent podium finisher and winner (early 2000's). Frank Williams was asked if he would support adding weight to the car for drivers sucess. He said he wouldn't because this is F1, we want to win based off our hard work and not through a competitor being restricted.
Then his daughter happened, and helped bring in a system that blocks their improvement.
Those days of F1 are long gone , now it's just muricuns buying into teams ,rip f1
Clown show
You mean in f1 teams win by having more money than their competitors
Right on, Frank!!
Why can’t we just have bad teams, great teams and teams somewhere in the middle like every other sporting league on planet earth.
Politics
we can, its always been the case not matter the regs
Because, whiners. Big baby whiners.
We do, but the lower teams always complain, as in all sports…
that's what I say. let's have innovation or else it becomes another spec series
BOP goes against everything F1 is
Agree but it's a bit obvious that freezing performance without BoP would end up in this result. Even in BoP series this can go wrong and they only find out after homologation, imagine in F1.
There is an engine freeze... Is that what F1 is about?
And F1 used to be about customer teams. Now they are banned. It used to be about innovation, that is banned.
Saying F1 is about a specific thing is dumb because what F1 is about has changed over time
BOP also shouldn't be part of WEC in my eyes.
@@DefinitelyNotEmma Hypercar, yes. LMGT3 is fine it being centered around privateer teams and AM drivers.
@@DefinitelyNotEmma I agree with this partially. LMP1H had good rules, one kind of BoP that worked and most people didn't consider it as BoP because there was lots of freedom there, more than F1. They should have learned from that class when making the new one. But as things are now with the mess that creating LMH was, WEC needs BoP, otherwise there would be no WEC.
F1 should also learn with LMP1H. Energy per lap from LMP1H mixed with lift to drag targets from current rules would allow F1 to open regs, put the grid closer and allow different budget sizes to compete more than now.
This isn’t about BOP, its about Renault being sucky. Sounds like some obfuscation around how powerful Alpine’s engine is. With Bruno Famin, the F1 Alpine engine boss, being the only Renault VP left standing, you’d assume the engine is fine and its certainly more reliable than last year. If that reliability came with too much extra weight or width then that’s their problem really. The car seems competitive enough, its often racing ability (strategy, tyre choice, collisions) that’s let them down this season. Very thin grounds for engine change.
Renault made a bad car and wants handouts to improve it while other teams cant basically
@@russell6075Its not even a Bad car
I feel like it's pretty undeniable that the Renault engine sucks.
Alpine's great performance in Monaco and Spa, and timesheets in general...It all points to a car that's aerodynamically competent but sluggish with power. In Spa both Ocon and Gasly had to pull those great overtakes in technical sections because they couldn't move past people in straights even with DRS. Every time an Alpine runs into a Williams on track this season, the Williams is a roadblock because of straight line speed and power delivery, but as soon as Alpine gets past they pull a gap. No other team has this much issue putting the power down on the straights.
I don't doubt that Alpine is down on power, the real question is whether something should be done about it. And if the answer is yes, what? Fuel flow regulation seems absurd to me.
As a alfa Romeo fan i can say that😂
@@allu4145 its crap. Has been for years
Best way for teams to get close is… actually not having major regulation changes every 4-5 years.
Thank you. I think they should ditch everything save for safety regs, and see what we get.
The sport losses its soul if we punish teams for inovating
The sport lost its soul the year after Senna died
Punishing teams for innovating is what F1 has always done and will never stop doing, this is the soul of F1 that I hope will never change.
@@MK-sw7dopeople always forget teams getting pulled back in line once they came up with a good idea in the name of competition. We'll now have to wait for new regs to break another domination streak
@@davidcummings2020For me 2009 was the real start of the downfall.
Ironically, it makes a full circle back to why the word "Formula" was used to name the sport, rather than "Prototype".
Alpine can bore off. They've never been a serious team since their return to F1.
Hey! Their dirty money is as good as every other crook there bud!
@@CathodeRayNipplez yeah but they are shit with their money and as a team
F1 should always be about innovation and the getting the best out of current technology or pushing boundaries.
I'm getting sick of teams that have done a good job being punished.
Who was punished for doing a good job?
@@mrsoisauce9017 Every single team that wasn't last in constructors championship and got less wind tunnel time because of that.
@@mrsoisauce9017 Rule charges designed to level the playing field as teams like Mercedes dominated. Although nothing compares to the current Red Bull levels of domination.
@@ElEmElEkv13 and how much effect does that really have? RB still designed a dominant car under the cost cap regulations with reduced wind tunnel time. I wouldn’t call that punishment if it realistically has little to no effect on the top teams. If anything, it separates the best from the mediocre
It doesn't really matter if it has big effect or not. The fact is, that teams are being punished with reduced wind tunnel time for doing good job and designing competitive car. Williams has almost double permitted wind tunnel time compared to Red Bull. And the fact, that RB is still better than Williams just means that RB' RnD is just more than two times better than Williams'.
BOP works in WEC for reasons that it wouldn’t work in F1: Those races are long and frantic 6-12-24 sprints. BOP rewards reliability, because your car can still be slow, but BOP makes you just competitive enough that reliability can be rewarded consistently over the longest races.
Edit: That’s how Peugeot had a legit chance of winning at Le Mans until the car crashed. It goes to show that even with BOP in its favour, human error can still be decisive.
9:55 Toyota is mainly furious due to the fact everyone agreed to have no BoP changes until Monza which was the round after Le Mans. While lap times from the race suggest ACO did a good job and Toyota ultimately lost the race due to crashes, it's still a highly questionable move to break the thing you set up and all manufacturers agreed to.
Yeah, now that the precedent has beed set, BMW and Alpine can just take it slow for the first races and hope for a lil BoP bump for Le Mans. The BoP was great, no question but the more or less unannounced "Fuck you" to manyteams was incredible unprofessionel.
When I think about why I love F1 so much, I think it actually has a lot to do with why the racing sometimes sucks… the engineering of the cars. I’d rather see an open book for car design with a spending limit. Indycar is awesome as a “performance balanced” series so to speak and the racing is fantastic. Let Indycar do that and let F1 be a development playground
You know this isn't a good idea when mercedes, ferrari, and red bull are against it, especially if Toto and Horner agree with each other
Lol you're right.
I think there needs to be a line drawn when it comes to trying to bring the field closer together. Budget and aero constraints are fine because ultimately it's still down to the teams to make use of those resources the best way (case in point Alpha Tauri have a lot of aero time and probably run at budget cap yet look at where they are now). But directly making adjustments to the engines just because one engine was created stronger than another is too much already.
Also if Renault/Alpine knows or thinks that other teams are making improvements in the guise of reliability, so why isn't Alpine also doing that instead of just complaining teams are technically following the rules by improving reliability? This feels like another case of teams complaining that one team is too far ahead when in reality it's their own doing why they're even in this situation in the first place. Putting it bluntly to Alpine, stop complaining and step up (not just for the engine but the team as a whole).
Alpine aren’t doing the same thing because they believe it’s unfair. I applaud them for trying to play the fair game, *but that’s under the assumption that it’s even true in the first place.* Personally, I think it’s a big truckload of bullshit
F1 has always been like this rember DAS was 100% legal but got banned Purley because it was super effective and the other teams didn't have the money or brains to copy it
@@jackvv757 there's also been the 3-pedal McLaren F1 car, the Brabham BT46 fan car, and the 6-wheel Tyrell P34. Those were all innovations that were banned
Like the other teams directors said, it would be fine to allow some time for renault to develop its engine to parity with the others, but that requires hard data laid in the open for everybody to see.
Precisely, the aim of the game is to try and have as much fair, healthy competition as possible. If this is done totally honestly and can be evidenced and proven then great let's help.
If not, then sorry bud tough luck, go to the back of the line and better luck next time, I.e 2026.
For me it's depressingly simple: if they BOP it, I'll pretty much instantly lose a massive chunk of what I get out of following the sport in the first place, and at that point I'd much rather watch rally or Indy or something.
Agreed !
If you consider a 'true sport' such as tennis where the player is 100% the determining factor, do the results differ statistically to those from F1 ?
Would be interesting to see if anyone has done this comparison...
I love the engineering part of F1. As I have said before, if your engine is not up to standard, switch your engine manufacturer! McLaren did that with their switch as well.
the engine is not frozen forever so either switch powertrains or wait for the freeze to stop.
Development is half of F1 and it is as much of a competition as the drivers championship is to me.
I do not want balance in performance in F1
Couldn't really imagine a Mercedes with a Ferrari engine or a Ferrari with a Mercedes engine, or either with a Renault or Honda engine.
i'm a sports car fan , and i think that having a BoP in F1 is the dumbest thing to do
i mean F1 is a engeneering and political championship , every team is a manufacturer and every car is diffrent.
i don't watch F1 to see Sport car racing , because i'd watch Sport car racing instead. it has no more intrest to watch F1 if there is a BoP
This talk was inevitable the minute F1 enacted an Engine Freeze, as it meant that a PU behind when the units were locked in meant that they wouldn't be allowed to catch-up until 2026.
Liberty media pushing f1 into nascar style rules. Always said American audience simping would make this happen
I watch Nascar too. This particular issue isn't anything like Nascars rules. Poor comparison
🗳
This is nothing like NASCAR. The base which would eventually grew into BoP was created by Europeans in the mid 00s.
For once, I agree with Toto, this is a horrific idea. But the answer is not to go standard parts, look at Indycar now for how that works. Newey and RB have mastered the rules. Newey had ground effect experience from his days at March 40 years ago, and Alpine....have not at all, They don't have the same experience, the same smarts and genius design department that has a ton of experience.
BoP won't fix that. It'll just hide the real issue,i.e. Alpine are not even trying at this point. Somehting something, deck chairs, ocean liner and an iceberg and music playing. Alpine have barring one win, not been consistent or even putting effort in. This isn't the early/mid 2000s Renault, this is Alpine that are limping along so Renault can go look, we are in F1. Renault and Alpine have plenty of other places to go race in. IMO it's best for F1 if they pull out as a works team, and only supply enginesn
"Alpine are not even trying at this point."
Renault hasn't ever since Briatore was ousted for Crashgate. In that sense, the team is just like Ferrari; when people like Jean Todt left, Ferrari slowly slipped away from being a title contender, because the people who understand the sport had left the team. Nowadays, both teams are overseen by businessmen, who look at things from a monetary perspective and don't understand how F1 works, and team bosses like Fred Vasseur can't or won't really put their foot down and tell the higher-ups how things are going to be done.
Just remember that BoP in Sportscars and Endurance racing is very minimal BoP adjustments. There are not big swings. The last time there was a big adjustment swing was when Ford came into the GTE class and were crying how slow they were but were sandbagging heavily at test times. They got a performance advantage from the BoP and magically they were over 1.5 second/lap faster than everyone else. By then, it was too late to adjust the BoP and Ford went on to easily win Le Mans in the GTE class. ACO learned from that mistake so BoP can happen at every track now, but it will be with minimal weight increases of say 50 pounds or give a slightly higher fuel rate to help a team close the gap.
And then they got screwed the next three seasons! They easily had the best car and everyone knew it.
F1 has really tight regulations(specially with the costcap and wind tunneland and CFD allocations), There is no need for BoP. If there is going to be BoP, then teams should have more free hand. If you cant build a fast car with higher a costcap limit and more wind tunnel allocation thats your own fault
The better alternative is definitely to allow engine development again over this.
Teams could just say at somewhere where power isn't the be all and end all (Hungaroring, Zandvoort, Monaco), "hey, look, our engine is performing badly, give us a higher fuel flow rate!" when in reality, they just tuned the engine to produce a little less power, and then they turn up at a power hungry circuit like Spa, Monza or Baku with an extremely powerful engine.
One suspects Ferrari are the experts with regards to fuel flow rates.
Bop is perfect when you are aiming to equalise lap times between cars of different configurations of construction, layout and power outputs.
Other than that it has no place in professional motorsport, especially single seater where their basic lay up is within extremely narrow constraints to begin with.
Toto and I'm sure other teams that manufacture their own engines will make their powertrain department redundant.
Interesting conversation to have during an engine freeze.
Easy solution to this , The 1st place team in the constructors gets the lowest budget for next season , while 2nd and beyond gradually increases in budget, which means the last place , gets the highest budget for development , the lower you are the higher your budget gets , so its a good balance without penalizing anyone , as top team won't sprint further and the bottom team gets left behind. Because equal cost cap only benefits the top teams , not the bottom team , if a team wins the engineering development , they won't have to spend much on upgrades which is a disadvantage for the bottom team
Bring back qualifying engines, no engine freeze, no cost cap and unlimited use of engines and tires. That was spectacular and yes, there were dominant teams here and there... just like today.
In fact, after the freeze there was a super dominant team (Mercedes) for 7 years and less teams than in the 90s/2000s.
@BernatNacente i agree totally.
With only a couple of years until the new engine regulations, Alipne have run out of time on this issue already, they need to focus on 2026.
If they were to bring BOP in to F1, They must not call it Formula One. F1` s essence basically is like you said, outright
competition. BOP will send F1 even more into disarray. I dont know if BOP ever was an option in pre quily days? If anyone knows about that I`m shure it would be very interesting
people keep repeating this "outright absolute competition" thing, but somehow forget that for almost 40 years there have been measures to slow down the cars for various reasons: end of the turbo era, end of ground effect, end of slick tyres, and so on and so on. whenever that happened, everyone was in uproar for 4-5 races and after that, everything was fine again. its also funny to me that the narrator of the video asks himself the question if it would be more exciting racing with bop, said yes, but without an actual reason was against it :D sums up the matter perfectly.
It's actually amazing to me that the rest of the teams were just shrugging their shoulders about Renault needing to redevelop in the first place. Maybe they knew that Renault simply couldn't and figured they'd look reasonable in comparison if they gave Renault the opportunity. Now that there are quick fixes on the table, the other teams are adamantly opposed.
Also, the fact that sports car teams are explicitly forbidden from publicly complaining about BOP decisions is news to me. And the fact that such a prohibition had to be written in stone is reason enough to fear what BOP would do to Formula 1.
Throughout F1 history there are eras of a team, or two, dominating. It keeps changing. Sounds like Alpine are throwing their toys out of the pram because it’s not their era right now.
OK, I need to debunk this.
That is actually not the case. That only really started with McLaren from ‘88. Before then, teams and drivers seldom went back-to-back, and none lasted for three years. Fangio is an odd-case because he kept changing teams; 4 of his 5 titles were with different teams.
Right now is a serious issue, however, with two teams winning either championship for the past 15 years. Just compare that with the 90’s and even the 00’s where 4 teams won either the Driver or Constructors Championship in that decade alone.
@@greatsageclok-roo9013 ya know what…I stand corrected. I should have done my research before I just opened my pie hole and said things. Thank you sir. Though I still have serious misgivings about Renault and their handling of Alpine and Otmar.
@@CX0909 Point taken.
I think it's more accurate to say that complaining has been in the sport longer than dominance.
Still, 'modern Formula 1 history' does have this dominance problem.
McLaren's 4-in-a-row...
Ferrari's 6, plus Schumacher's 5...
Red Bull's/Vettel's 4...
Mercedes' *8* for crying out loud...
Can we just have a break from this and go back to when the champion was different every other year?
@@greatsageclok-roo9013you’re are right but I’ll say this to all the lower teams especially alpine. “Make a better car!”
@@greatsageclok-roo9013 lol fair enough!
what i don't understand is, there is cost cap, so why is there development freeze on engines? why doesn't f1 treat engines the same way they treat aero parts? just give the engine manufacturers that did worse than others more time on engine dev. if the y can police CFD usage of each team, they can surely police engine development.
@@CathodeRayNipplezi dont know if you have watched at all, but as the cost cap has been implemented, mercedes are on the backfoot, and they were caught by two of their customer teams. Thats not something that ever happened in f1 before the cost cap era. Why? because mercedes cant just throw money at the problem and unveil a new car after the 5th round in the season
@@CathodeRayNipplezyes…
@@CathodeRayNipplez that's exactly what a homeless person would shout to random people passing by. "them shady corporates" am i right? lmao
@@Ballacha there is a freeze because in 2026 the engine is changing. Instead of spending that money to upgrade engine that will not be use post-2026, they decided to use that budget to build an entirely new one.
@@CathodeRayNipplez cool story. i'm out of coins though. go bother someone else.
well technically there's always been Balance of Power but its in the form of technical rule changes for ALL teams and usually happens inbetween seasons. (e.g. the technical change that helped Red Bull close up to Merc in 2021)
While this is indeed a thing that happens, the change for 2021 is a poor example. That change wasn't meant to close the pack, but to slow down the entire field for safety purposes (cars were getting too fast for the tyres). No one expected the end result to be what it was, even Mercedes.
that's not really BoP though
but at least that gives every the same opportunity, the issue is that once you start this sort of BoP those involved in the 'showbiz' side start trying to manipulate the sport constantly. If you thought the Abu Dhabi 2021 furore was bad wait until one team gets a big BoP adjustment just before a title decider!
@Arthur_axmannI mean...rather than to just change the construction like they did this season which affected Aston Martin and in WSBK🤦♂️🤷♂️
Is steward AI or human. Why I always wonder it is AI.
Why wouldn't Toyota be furious? They spent a ton of money and built a damn fast racecar and then some new teams turned up, lacking the experience, capacity or funds to reach their level of performance and exactly because they were faster than them, they were forced to take on weight. WEC, F1 and any other type of racing series using non-spec cars, has shown that for a given set of regulations, there is always one team that is ahead and eventually the field bunches up. It's nearly impossible to give teams the same set of regulations and have their cars be so closely matched that it is interesting from a fan's point of view. In F1 RB is half a second per lap faster than anyone else, that's a lot by F1's standards but still close to incomprehensibly close for a 60-100 second lap. In WEC by the 4 hour mark Toyota can be close to a minute ahead of everyone else, that's a considerable margin but it was developed over the course of about 100 laps, that's still 0.6 tenths a lap excluding pit stops, which is again, tiny. When those margins become smaller than tenths of a second, that's when a championship battle becomes possible, not certain.
BoP works to enhance competitiveness in other series...but it's contrary to much of what F1 is about (that is, the part that's an engineering competition). F1 needs to tread very carefully here.
If BOP was introduced in F1, then they would have to allow for a more open formula in terms of car design and such which I personally quite like about Hypercar.
Imagine doing this in the Olympics. Yeah this guy is really fast, so let's give everyone else a head start. 😅
it makes no sense to me at all how people didnt mention a level playing field untill now that red bull is dominating when merc was dominating even more when they were winning. I think it may come down to max having a much less competitive teammate
F1 really need to take a big reality check! None of the engine manufacturers are going to be interested in spending millions on development, when in the very near future, they won’t be selling any in the real world. Many countries already have dates set for the end of selling petrol cars, so there’s no need for F1 as a testing ground anymore. I’m actually amazed new teams want to get involved. Performance balancing would create closer racing and more winners, who can honestly say the last decade of F1 has been that exciting. There was one season where 2 cars were close and it led to some actual close racing, imagine that but with the full grid!
Every time I hear about the new regs something gets worse...
I know the FIA want to do everything they can to stop any kind of innovation and make the cars slower so at this point I don't get why they don't just make it a spec series 🤷
Red bull dont wanna
@@SD-mi2vc you sure ? Who's the team that insisted on that engine freeze ?
@@yugarten8523 i meant the big teams
FIA doesnt do anything, people complain about single team domination. FIA tries something, people complain that they're stifling innovation.
If I were in charge of the FIA, I'd just quit.
@@rodracer4567 I'm not complaining about single team dominance. I mean I will admit the merc years went on for abit to long.... But In general 🤷that's how F1 works always has so is it what it is.
alot of sport can end up like that anyway
All of this nonsense is directly counter to what F1 is supposed to be. The cost cap, this potential nonsense, all of it leads to a spec series. I enjoy plenty of spec series, but if it comes down to that Id rather watch Indy than some crap watered down version of F1. Oh, and Alpine and the trash Renault engines can go soak their heads.
Doesn't look like a spec series to me.
If they could just make the regulations surrounding power trains more simple this would not be an issue. I would like to see naturally aspirated inline 6 (incredible sound, simple design, natural balance) somewhere around 2.0 - 2.4 liters. Let them rev without limits. Then regulate battery size and allow MGU development. This creates electric motor development, good for manufacturer road relevance for both hybrids and EVs. F1 needs to reintroduce refueling to free up the tire supplier to produce a higher quality tire that doesn’t need to degrade for the sake of pit stops. Removing the entire e-turbo, it’s ancillary ducting, cooling and such would considerably reduce weight. A simple NA motor could also use Motorsport caliber particulate filters which could work in tandem with the new fuels to be extremely clean burning machines. Please like if you agree!!
Outstanding text and voice over Glenn!!! Please let him know that he have a fan here admin
Your channel should start a WEC/IMSA version. the Hypercar era is competitive and exciting with more to come
No top class should have BoP. LMH/LMDh is even goofier because the regs are pretty strict and have targets in basically every aspect meaning the finished cars are pretty close. Which is exactly how it's going in IMSA as BoP there barely changes anything from round to round. 963 gets a kilo, ARX-06 gets 2 kilos less, things like that.
WEC is a bit different, Toyota and Ferrari are pretty close, Peugeot tried a risky design for PR and it's gamble doesn't seem to have payed off, Glick built an ass car and refused to use the Evo jokers to make it better and ByKolles while have the spirit are completely hopeless, as they couldn't finish a single LM with their own car a single time since they started building them in 2013.
Everyone is so caught up on red bulls dominance and the fear of another engine war. But what people fail to recognize is that this sport is built on innovation. I'm a merc fan, but still respect and admire the win streak/history being made by red bull. This cannot be denied to them, They built a rocket ship way ahead of it rivals and they deserve to reap the rewards. Yes the FIA try to change the rules to screw over the top team, but history has shown this doesn't always work. Red bull is very concerned over it power train program because its a baby in the field, and renault is crying because they can't make an engine to save their life.
Red Bull only started developing their own engines because Honda quit (and then announced a partnership with Aston), Renault sucks and Mercedes and Ferrari won't supply engines out of fear of being beaten with them.
I’m confused. Your arguing that the freeze should stay in place because innovation is the key to F1. Isn’t that an argument for removing the freeze? I agree RB’s dominance is impressive but if some or all of their competitors have an inferior engine it’s gonna be unfairly hard for them to catch them in aero alone.
Giving those that are behind development time: Sure. Different rules for different teams: No way. It would destroy the sport, other motorsports categories are already uninteresting because you never know if someone won because they did good work or because the BoP just favored them
I don't necessarily think the aero testing rules are perfect, but they work in part because they're a limitation on development, not on the actual operation of the car. To sit there and tell teams "You can only use so much fuel," especially in light of something like the 2026 regulations where they're specifically limited by flow rate, only to then turn around and say "Oh, your engine sucks? Well then you can just burn more fuel to catch up" is not only unfair to the other teams that have spent the time and effort to do the job properly, it's also entirely against the spirit of the sport itself.
Think about it for a second: you take 3/4 of your budget spent on your engine and you put that elsewhere. Then you go racing and you find out that your engine is a turd. But it's okay, you don't need to spend anything to fix it, because you can just dump more fuel into it and the problem is solved. (It's also worth noting that dumping fuel into the combustion chamber also helps make the engine run more reliably, too.)
Toto is right on this one. No BOP
I'm so glad that even teams that are not doing well these past 2 years (other than the idiots at alpine) hate this idea. It would be a terribly short sighted idea. No team ever again would be able to have a streak of championships like it tends to happen now. Good job guys. I appreciate the ability to want to stay a meritocracy and not devolve into socialism.
What’s socialism got to do with this ? Sounds like an American education based on the Dunning-Krueger style of writing
Apparently one team having a streak of multiple championships is a good thing now 😂 some F1 fans have some kind of Stockholm syndrome
Surely the answer for Renault or any other manufacturer ‘falling behind’ is to use an engine from a different manufacturer while you fix your engine without limitations then revert back. M🇦🇺
The whole not being able to develop the engine is ridiculous, teams should be able to do what ever they want as long as it's within the rules and of course the cost cap.
Completely agree. If you're going to do anything, keep close tabs on costs. Don't reward failure, and punish hard work.
10:06 - now come on, you watched LeMans 2023 and know that Toyota would have won except their fastest car had an unexpected slow zone collision in the dark and their second car lost 90 seconds in the last couple of hours when chasing, as their least experienced driver locked a wheel braking, an issue they’d been managing half the race. That Ferrari win was never assured, the winning car even stalled during its final pitstop and for a moment wouldn’t fire up.
That was a farce. Ferrari only won through BoP .. basically handicapping in favor of mediocrity. If F1 goes this way they’ll lose their self-proclaimed status of innovative excellence, with the “world’s best drivers” driving the world’s best machines
After the BoP adjustment, Ferrari only got about 20KG less of a weight increase compared to Toyota. It was very minimal at most. The Ferrari has shown a lot of promise even before Le Mans so it wasn't like it was a fluke that it was fast all of a sudden. People seem to forget that with the BoP adjustment. Toyota, Ferrari, Porsche, Peugeot, and I think Cadillac were all in the lead at some point during the race. Which was a huge plus instead of one team dominating.
@@steve4880 If you force Usain Bolt to wear a backpack with 100 kilos of bricks and then someone else beats him in a race, is that a "huge plus" or is that literally the opposite of sport?
@@RoeShamBoebut it wasn't an extra 100kg, it was only 20kg difference between the two
@@RoeShamBoe You can't engineer Usain Bolt. Yet.
The teams who are complaining are those who previously used their financial muscle to dig themselves out of trouble.
Let's see how the new rules concerning aero tests and computation power works out after a couple of years. I believe it will work after a couple of years, not necessarily sooner
If you apply BOP on the PU, then aero becomes even more critical, and aero already has BOP in the form of aero testing limits.
Engine development needs some kind of parity but should require innovation and work
It's actually surprising that Ferrari, Red Bull and Mercedes goes against this because if anything they can easily manipulate this rule to their advantage. It just show that Renault is just desperate at this point.
I've been watching F1 since the mid 80's and grew up with the sport, and I promise you, I will never watch a single BoP F1 race. I will just stop caring about the sport. Liberal American politics coming to F1 😂
"Liberal American politics coming to F1"
You mean Socialist European politics.
Maybe they should just be an engine freeze, no modifications can be made except for a list of changes that have to be described beforehand, that way when you prepare an engine, you have a worst case scenario if your engine is really unreliable. This would mean you can't add new tech that wasn't known when you worked on the engine previously. This would require more work to produce an engine. I would argue you could do this for the chassis and body work as well, which would result in a modular car, all the work to build the car would have to be done prior and just messing around which modules the car uses would be the differing factor. Once you push your modules you should now be working on the modules for the next year and letting the drivers and their engineers work on how to use their existing modules together. The only issue is that there maybe some teams aren't very good at working towards a deadline like this, and slowing the cars down because it's much harder to customize a car for each track, and if there's a team who does really well probably won't be caught up. But it allows teams to prepare a car which is more reliable, makes it almost impossible to add new tech to cars mid-season, greater variety of cars since you cannot just copy the current leader mid-season, make it more strategical when it comes to preparing for a year, make it easier for drivers to have a choice since they will have a list of all possible changes they can make, reduce costs as requirements don't change mid-season and instead don't change until the year ends.
The cars have become too damn expensive to race. That's why drivers are repeatedly told to slow down to save parts. I remember when drivers were told to take it out and beat the hell out of it, just win. Whatever breaks, we'll just fix it. I miss those days.
@@CathodeRayNipplez Absolutely on point correct. We saw just recently when they told photographers to run across the pits DURING A RACE how important the fans, the drivers and the teams are to Formula One and the FIA.
*Time to unsubscribe.* ⛔
These _"we are not going to tell you what the article is about in the headline or preview"_ approach to labeling you videos is worse than *Taboola* ads.
Just bottom-tier clickbait. Have some self-respect, you're journalists, not Logan Paul or Boogie 2988. This is cheap manipulation of your viewers.
Sadly bottom tier clickbait is where YT does it's best work.
Who came up with this, Lulu so he can attempt to win again?
Watch the video you simpleton.
RENT FREE
This guy is definitely a teenage virgin 😂
Alpine’s engine vs chassis boss comment at 6:20 I think really paints a picture of Mac vs Lisa at Apple in the early 80s
So, I don't believe BoP is a good solution. Innovation is, and always will be, a key factor in F1. I believe a non-retroactive document release of 5 years would be a good idea: keep documents private within the team for at most 5 years, then release it to the other teams after 5 years. It allows any innovations or concepts to be reverse engineered by other teams, but keep innovated teams true by not allowing another Pink Mercedes situation. The innovations would be outdated and essentially useless since everyone will have them, but they could make their way down to road cars and focus on new ideas instead of primarily on catching up. I dunno, I understand that ideas can work well in theory and not practice *cough* cost cap *cough* but the more ideas are out there to improve the sport, the better.
Very interesting debate.
Why dont we just allow them all to work on them but within the cost and stop all these limitations which is killing F1
Bring back refuelling, then don’t restrict the fuel used, Bring back the tortoise and the Hare scenario
have a fuel flow limit that changes every 4th race based on team position in championship?
doesn't have to be massive, just enough to bring RB into the sights of 'Best of the Rest' for a few races and lift back markers for a few races.
teams may use 2nd driver to sand bag though. maybe each driver gets the fuel flow limit based on driver standings in championship - perhaps excluding the last 4 races?
You could propose some half way house where if you're struggling at the back you could be pulled up to the mid field... But in F1 you should never be given the opportunity to win without putting graft.
I mean considering everything else being limited/restricted I'd say no
They could put every car in Park Ferme’ after the last race, and then independently put the engines on a dyno. I’d like to see the numbers.
You can drop 25% of the next year CFD if making an engine change. Or if you're bottom 2 team, you can revise power unit.
Make the cost cap a sliding scale like the wind tunnel. Then let them work on whatever parts of the car they need within those 2 restrictions
My idea.
Give teams the option to develop their engines further if they are down on power. But to prove they are down on power they need to publish their engine design and power output from a dyno to other teams. If they are truly down that should not be a problem. You don't need to disclose further development just the original down on power design.
Easy way to test that. Add ballast, adjust engine and fuel specs and fir restrictor plates, for the sprint races and sprint quali. See how that goes. Let them race as proper F1 cars for the main race and quali.
Imagine telling Red Bull that they weren't allowed to develop their aero because Williams can't generate enough downforce with their current facilties...
That's how idiotic this request is by Renault.
How to allow a team to "catch up " with their engine program and not gain an advantage when they fix their problems?
Of course, it's an advantage.
How about you allow the teams to work on their engine program once every year.
This allows a team to catch up or get better.
Simplify the rules. Simplify the technology. Reduce costs where possible. Then you get 30 cars turning up for each race and can just dump the slowpokes. Problem solved.
i can already see most of the midfield teams sandbagging every weekend during practice, then get the extra boost they want come qualifying and the race. but i guess that’s what Horner means about making the data or telemetry public. the FIA can actually see if teams are going slow on purpose, which should make them decide to not grant them a BoP adjustment, therefore making it a deterrent.
yes i think when people think about bop, they always have this scenario in mind, while there are already other mechanisms in place in different series. the video kind of mentioned it, but they didnt btoerh actually elaborating on it. for me its safe to say something has to change, f1 gets more dominated by a certain team witch each new reg era. it takes away from the winning drivers achievement and thats something everyone should be bothered about, but for some reason noone talks about it.
Why don’t they have the same amount of races but have say 4 non championship races at different tracks where they try it and see how it turns out. They spent so much time developing these new cars and nothing has really improved or we wouldn’t be talking like this. Better to have an opinion on something tried than not. Non championship races used to happen all the time.
We already have wind tunnel and CFD restrictions based on success, and we've yet to see the long term effect of this - and probably won't until next year at the earliest. The cost cap is a good idea, BOP or homology of then engines would just stifle any innovation. Yes, we want great racing - but we also want to see the best cars that each team create.
The Pinnacle of motorsport should have no rules on car design's
F1 is an engineering competition but the drivers are now the ones who drive people into watching F1. Schumacher had a huge impact in Germany, Hamilton in the UK, Verstappen in the Netherlands and so on. Nobody want to admit that most drivers who won the championship did it because of the superiority of their car.
If F1 wants to keep both and engineering competition and drivers that are marketed as superheroes we need to talk about differenciating team and drivers. Each driver should drive for each team twice a year or something like that.
We would know the best driver, we would know the best team all of this while allowing more engineering competition.
F1 is and should stay, IMO, a technical meritocracy. Either freeze the development or unfreeze it. Everyone has the same regs to read and the same deadlines. If you’re not smart enough to stay up to speed with the top brands then that’s not my issue. Nobody gave me balancing of score when I didn’t do well in accounting class
Perhaps provide the teams a choice, weekend to weekend... would be easy enough to implement, and we'd see some creativity out of the engineers and strategy folks
- allow more fuel, at the cost of some DRS usage or fewer tyres for the weekend
- allow more DRS at the cost of fuel or tyres
- allow more tyres at cost of DRS or fuel
3:33 because it’s Harrison Bergeron?
F1 should absolutely avoid direct BOP on cars. Off the cars it can use some more of that. For example maybe give the bottom performaning cars like 5-10 minutes more in FP sessions to help tweaking the cars and getting their sponsors more exposure.
i mean i can understand a roof to how powerful engines can be so it isn't just a "whoever makes a bigger engine wins" but i don't see a reason to boost engine suppliers to catch up, if they fall back it's on them to catch up
The problem is freezing the engines at all - you wouldn’t freeze aerodynamics, so why the engine? Much better would be to treat the engine the same as the aero - ie not with fuel flow but with a cost cap and a sliding scale (based on championship position) for dyno time.
I actually agree with Toto and Vasseur on this one
Give them extra dyno hours to catch up on development, so long as the FIA has clear data of what they need to achieve for parity.
It's not a blank whiteboard, it's "We need to adjust X component to increase HP"
Got to wonder if Wolff and Vasseur are worried about Red Bull are worried about the Honda power unit if something like this happens. I'm still not convinced that the Honda engine is quite up to the Merc and maybe even Ferrari PU. If the PUs were balanced, those teams would have to beat Red Bull with aero... Good luck
Pinnacle of motorsports should NOT have cost caps or rules that restrict innovation.
So in short, "we need an allowance became we weren't good enough to create a competitive engine"
if we're doing this for engines, then why aren't we doing it for aero?
exactly, dont do it for either cause otherwise RedBull should be hit with an aero freeze right this second so the other teams can eventually catch them. Even then it would probably take more than a year to catch them tbh
Tbh I think that they might be slightly down but they act like they are because they might open up the opportunity to develop the engine again because they might have found something
remember when Alpine (back then Renault) were bragging they were the first to get over 1000 BHP from their engine (2019)?