Just read this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/8044860.stm



Firstly, how would having a budget cap lead two a two-tier F1? and unless they are blind it's already been a two-tier F1 until recently with Ferrari and Mclaren winning everything and the rest not really getting close.



Ha! What is unfair is Ferrari and Mclaren (i'm a Mclaren fan BTW) being able to spend loads more on developing their cars than the other teams.

Sounds to me like now Ferrari aren't winning they are throwing their toys out of the pram - they don't want a budget cap because it will make a more even playing field.

I think that's exactly what its all about.

A more even playing field is (I'm given to understand) exactly what's making the GP more exciting this year for the spectators at least.

Agreed I think its brilliant and long may it continue

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/8044860.stm

Update I wonder ............

Sadly its far from "brilliant". Max Mosley, aided and abetted by his little mate Bernie seen to be hell-bent on changing Formula One from the zenith of Open wheel racing to some sort of sponsor-led series like Indy cars. This £40m cap looks like it will speed-up the decline into mediocrity. The simple truth ithat designing and scratch-building highly sophisticated open-wheel racers is very expensive. Constant rule-charges, like we have seen for the last few years, increase the cost.
Capped at £40 M it is unlikely that teams will have the ability to do much development, so things will just stagnate. The most likely outcome will be some kind of one chassis series .

Sorry, but this is just wrong. Firstly Toyota have the biggest budget in F1, and IIRC have done since 2005, and they've never won a race! The size of the budget isn't the be all and end all, it's how you use it. Mclaren and Ferrari use theirs more effectively and efficiently.

Bear in mind, the FIA aren't enforcing a budget cap, they are just giving greater freedom as far as regulations are concerned for any teams that keep within it. Think about it. . . it's ridiculous. They might as well start another formula, different cars/ budgets. . isn't that what GP2 is for!

I don't think it's the £40 million cap that Ferrari are most concerened about. It's the second set of regulations that go with the budget cap. There would be 2 sets of regulations, which is just a recipe for disaster and as Ferrari have rightly pointed out will create a two tier championship. This will dilute the championship massively. People who say Ferrari are wrong for doing this should take a look at the reg changes for the sub £40 million teams. Honestly it will just be a farce. I wholeheartedly agree with Ferrari's stance here. From what I gather other members of FOTA (formula one teams association) aren't to happy with the FIA's proposals either.

F1 is the pinnacle of motor sport and should be left to be that way, if we all wanted to watch the same car cloned 22 times go around a track then we would be watching F2 or F2000.

I expect the first season would be rubbish as there's no chance they'd get the balance right between the two groups. After a season, they'd have a good idea how to penalise the big spenders to make the race even.

Ok, there's been a lot of discussion, and I'm not sure I can further what's already been said in terms of why they're against the budget cap.

But does anyone have any views on what the FIA/Mosleys Crew will do next?

Personally I think they'll ditch the idea.

I think there should be a cap somewhere a long the line but not one that creates a 2 tier system.

A cap for everyone will mean everyone has the same budget so spending will be wise (supposedly) and it will allow smaller teams to join. And these smaller teams will pull in unknown talent that would otherwise fall through the net.

Ferrari are unhappy that the FIA has, in their view, not respected rights, which were apparently agreed between the governing body and Ferrari in 2005, whereby the team have a right of veto over rule changes.

This is why the two-tier element to the 2010 rules comes in, so that Ferrari can continue to run with unlimited budget if it wishes to.

A meeting is taking place on friday to discuss so we'll wait and see what happens.

Any regulation changes should only be introduced after consultation with FOTA. As for a two tier championship, well we've already seen that to a degree this year with double deck diffusers. Teams were soon labeled as teams that have it and teams that don't. It would be the same only worse with two sets of regulations in place.

That's the problem Lev, why should they be penalised? If half the teams opt to stay within thew budget and half don't, does that mean every time a team that doesn't, wins a race they can expect further rules changes to further curtail their performance? Then what's the point in that team taking part?

As said F1 is the pinnacle of motor racing. When you see an F1 car you know it is the fastest thing someone can design within a certain technical regulation. Not, it's the fastest thing someone could design for £40 million. FOTA are working together to try and bring the cost of F1 down. It's with their consultation some of the regulations were brought in for 2008 which have already massively reduced the costs. A couple of examples, wind tunnel design teams are no longer allowed to operate in 3 shifts over 24 hours a day, only single shift 40 hours a week. In season testing banned (bear in mind Ferrari agreed to this despite them having their own testing track, so those who are quick to critisise them should look into it a little further).

FOTA are trying to reduce the costs, and who better to do it, the people themselves who have to shell out these vast amounts, what better inscentive. They are the ones who are most likely to achive the correct balance of introducing cost cutting measures without massive discrepancies on how it would affect different teams.

A £40 million budget would hamper Ferrari, Mclaren, Toyota massively and lets not forget, the teams with lower budgets such as Williams, Force India, Torro Rosso. . . . what engines do they use? Funnily enough Toyota, Mercedes and Ferrari.

Max's efforts of late have been pretty erratic. He talks green and cost-cutting, then changes loads of things every year which inevitably pushes costs UP!
As I said in my previous post, I'm convinced that Max and Bernie look to some kind of "sponsor-led" model, where the teams may be completely unconnected with either Motor sport or cars in general. They don't necessarily develop any of the cars or technology, but buy-in packages from specialists like Lola and Reynard. At various times the US series which use this model have had one-make chassis regs and so-forth.
The point here is MONEY. Forget all the claptrap from M&B about making it a better "spectacle" with more teams; the truth is that FIA get more cash from more teams, and Bernie can maybe charge circuits more for putting-on these races.

This is the essential tension in F1: between the "old guard" including many fans, who look to F1 as the "pinnacle" of both technical skill and driving ability, and the "new wave" who simply want lots of "action" (i.e. crashes, safety cars, and drama in general) either for vicarious indulgence or to screw more cash out of the "sport". Max 'n Bernie are pretty firmly in the latter camp as they reckon it will be more profitable....