107% Rule

slickskid

Points Scorer
Supporter
Does anyone know if the 107% rule during qualifying still exists, or could you see it being implemented/reintroduced from a saftey point of view if the new back of the field really does turn out to be that slow! :thinking:
 

Galahad

Not a Moderator
Valued Member
There is no 107% rule any more - it was removed when F1 went to single-lap qualifying in 2003.

Could it be revived? I suppose so, if it worked on the basis of being within 107% of the fastest time in Q1, rather than the pole time (which is obviously unknown at that stage).

Will it be? I doubt it. Having your cars non-qualifying makes it much more difficult to get and retain sponsors. Since the other teams already stand accused of having done little to help the new teams I can't see it happening - even less that the FIA will introduce it, given their stance.

In any case, I'm not sure that it would even be required. 107% equates to around 4-5 seconds at an average circuit. The Lotus and Virgin cars look like they should be able to manage that, just about? And their drivers are at least proper racing drivers, rather than rich businessmen or aristocrats. Safety is always an issue, but I think it will have to be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. You can be quick and dangerous (Kobayashi?) just as much as you can be slow and dangerous...though admittedly only up to a point.
 

LifeW12

Podium Finisher
The 107% rule was first introduced in 1996 (replacing the 110% rule) to prevent really slow cars making the grid being 8 secs off the pace. It was removed in 2003 when 1 lap qual was introduced.

Alex Yoong is the last driver to fall victim to "DNQ" in the record books.

Its the third worst rule in F1 history (behind no in season testing and grooved tyres) and happily its not around anymore.
 
If they brought back in the 107% rule, then the teams that don't qualify should have unlimited testing.

that way they can actually get their cars up to speed rather than languish in failing GP after GP without the opportunity to improve.
 

FB

Not my cup of cake
Valued Member
I don't see what benefit the 107% rule would bring. The new teams are the only ones likely to fall foul of this and having spent large sums of money getting a car ready to take part how is not letting them race going to help in their attempt to make the car quicker. I can't imagine their sponsor woudl be too happy.

I have to agree with Fungus, the ban on in season testing is just plain stupid, especially for the new teams, so if Jean Todt wants to introduce this rule what are his proposals for helping the teams get up to speed?

One final point, other race series have cars of varying speeds on the same circuit (sportscar racing in particular) what's the problem in F1?
 

rufus_mcdufus

Champion Elect
I can absolutely see the 107% rule being re-introduced ... for the sole reason it is totally pointless! F1 seems to be excelling at pointless rule changes lately. Thumbs up to the in-season testing comments too - that's possibly ruining F1 more than any other ruling at the moment (apart from maybe the problems caused by the aero properties of the cars).
 

snowy

Champion Elect
The FIA (or at least Jean Todt) is now saying it is in favour of reintroducing the 107% rule. Which got me thinking 107% of what?

Since the slower teams don't get to run in quali 2 or 3 they are at an extreme disadvantage because virtually every circuit rubbers in and gets quicker toward the end of qualifying. How will they address variations in how much a circuit comes to the drivers over the session? If they use just quali 1 times as the basis for their calculation how will they determine if the quicker teams actually set competitive times?

Seems to me that anyone that gave it a moments thought would dismiss the 107% fule out of hand...

(rule/fule interesting typo).
 

Brogan

🦶 Leg end
Staff Member
How are any new teams which are off the pace supposed to improve by getting valuable data during races if they can't compete in them?
After all, pre- and in-season testing is all but banned now.

It seems like a self-defeating rule to me as all it will do is put any prospective new teams off from joining F1.

Why would they bother stumping up the £50 million required to enter if all they can do is run in a few practice sessions and then get knocked out during Q1?

Sponsors will desert them in droves and the teams will go under.

I expect it will be introduced very soon then
 

Muddytalker

Points Scorer
Some very good points made above.

I would like to see one of the following adopted, though I know they never will.

1 hr qualifying, free for all.
Cars can be used by either driver.
The hour is divided into 3 continuous 20 minute segments.
In the first segment, failure to complete a lap within 107% of the fastest lap set within that segment will eliminate you from the meeting. - Remember, at Bahrain this would have been around 8 seconds off the pace. If you can't do that, you really shouldn't be there. Similarly, Interlagos will see you about 6 seconds behind.
In any segment, failure to complete a lap within 105% of the fastest time within that segment will eliminate you from the next segment.

It may require the end of the engine rule, or altering it to be 16 engines per team per season if they have to keep a limit, but other than that it requires all the top cars to be out in all sessions, whilst removing the mobile chicanes, with a 107% rule that is relevant to the current conditions.
Further, being able to borrow your teammate's car gives you a lifeline in case you stuff it in the wall/have a failure.
 

Galahad

Not a Moderator
Valued Member
I agree with Bro completely - with testing banned, the 107% rule would condemn the new teams to oblivion.

I heard Mark Webber was in favour of bringing it back...strange for someone who spent his first season struggling to get through the same rule himself
 

Brogan

🦶 Leg end
Staff Member
I don't think it's really feasible to use a teammates car these days is it?
The seat is custom made and fitted, not to mention the setup.

Besides, would you want your teammate borrowing your car after they'd just stuffed their own into a wall? :D
 

snowy

Champion Elect
That's as or almost as harsh as the system they have now with anyone who fails to get on track in quali 1 being excluded from the whole event. Damned if I'm giving my teammate my car during quali 1 and risk not making quali two!
 

Muddytalker

Points Scorer
Brogan said:
I don't think it's really feasible to use a teammates car these days is it?
The seat is custom made and fitted, not to mention the setup.

Besides, would you want your teammate borrowing your car after they'd just stuffed their own into a wall? :D
All of that happened in the past though, they just got on and did it. It's either that or allow spare cars again.
 

Muddytalker

Points Scorer
snowy said:
That's as or almost as harsh as the system they have now with anyone who fails to get on track in quali 1 being excluded from the whole event. Damned if I'm giving my teammate my car during quali 1 and risk not making quali two!
But don't you see, if you can't prepare a car for the main event, then what are you doing there? My proposals may require a few tweaks, but allowing swapping/spare cars will cover the engine failure on the outlap scenario. Either that or relax the engine rule, which would bring other benefits.

How else are you going to keep F1 the pinnacle of motorsport? There is a lot to be said for keeping out the dross... (Mastercard Lola, anyone?)
 

cider_and_toast

Exulted Lord High Moderator of the Apex
Staff Member
Premium Contributor
Even when we're down to 18 cars? 16? 14? ;)
That would trigger some teams having to run a third car which is supposed to be part of the concorde agreement on maintaining race numbers?

There was an interesting bit in this weeks Autosport that looks at how teams faired against the 107 percent rule on their debuts.

Bar 102.682%
Toyota 103.916%
Sauber 103.921%
Stewart 104.147%
Virgin 104.924%
Lotus 105.040%

Pacific 106.726%
Super Aguri 106.540%
Simtek 106.877%
Forti 107.727%
HRT 108.001%
Lola 112.983%

Seems like HRT worked a minor miricle given that they never turned a wheel in testing.
 
Top Bottom