Technical 2014 Technical Regulations

Minimum engine weight first was mandated (at 95kg) in 2006, with the switch to 2.4L V-8s (the V-10s probably were at least 30kg heavier). Spec weight was 600kg, car & driver combined. 600 less 95 means the FIA were allowing 505kg for rolling chassis and driver.

Fast forward to 2014. 690kg spec weight with a power unit (nee: engine) spec weight of 145kg, which means 40kg more is available for roller & driver than in 2006. If you guesstimate the weight of 2013's CURSE at 30kg, then 2014 still has an additional 28kg for roller and driver than on the previous season. Plus the 2014 wings and fuel cell are smaller and (some kilo or two?) lighter. Call it an even 30kg. That so many teams are complaining about a too low spec weight gives me to believe that either they are building some extraordinarily robust chassis, or everybody's engine, not just Ferrari's, shatters the 145kg barrier.

I think 145kg was a pipe dream.

You can see on this chart how the minimum weight has changed over time. The cars have nearly doubled in weight since 1961.

I do not have a copy of the 2004 TR to know to a certainty, but I think the spec weight on the linked chart has an error. I think spec weight was changed in 2004 to 600kg, with 605kg allowed during qualies. The chart shows 595kg. But I cannot locate an "authoritative" answer, so I admit I might be mistaken.
 
Last edited:
It doesn't matter what the TD's or TR's are RedBull will totally bloody ignore them anyway, it wouldn't surprise me if RedBull started cutting off non essential drivers body parts to win a race, because there isn't a TD or TR saying specifically that it was against the rules to do so..

Don't expect to see Danny boys smile at the next race because he could be all gums to save weight.
 
Last edited:
It makes little sense to dehydrate before the race, then drink up in the car, so I'd been wondering whether any drivers were running with an empty drinks bag. Adrian Sutil says yes. He claims the team have taken away his in-car drinks system, and it only ever was half a litre to begin with.

'Nando says he didn't drink at all at Malaysia, despite the heat, because these cars are so much less demanding to drive.
 
In Australia we heard Mclaren telling K-Mag to remember to drink from his bottle so it can't be all teams.
 
Apparently Bernie and LDM have teamed up to "save" the sport from the 2014 regs, and want them changed quickly. LDM claims 83% of 56,000 fans polled disliked the current state of the sport, and want it changed. The biggest sticking point is, what else, the fuel saving format. The second is the noise, or lack of it. And they complained the regs are too complex. Bernie seems to be in complete agreement on all counts.

That isn't news, as Ferrari are one of the teams always can be counted on kvetching when they're not winning. The reason I posted this is that AMuS' Michael Schmidt has a blog today, essentially taking Ferrari's poll head-on and explaining point-by-point why their "fans" are wrong.

I find it rather comical, really, to see an F1 periodical so directly challenging the Scuderia. Have they no fear for their press credentials? I can't wait to see if Ferrari fires back!
 
We were discussing the new engines at work and I think it is the new fuel regs which aren't helping the situation.

Let them burn more fuel, the best thing about turbos is the overrun and unused fuel getting burnt off in the exhaust. They are getting more night races so change the regs, extend the exhausts out beyond the back of the car again and let us see the fuel getting burned off!
 
Martin Brundle made a very good point on why the fuel flow is restricted. The whole idea is to introduce fuel saving technology and if there is no limit on the fuel flow then thats pretty much negiated in quali and in the race you'd just end up making overtaking fairly meaningless and easy.

He put it better than me though.
 
Only two races in and 83% of the fans aren't happy bunnies and one arrogant bloke says to those 83% that they are wrong not to be happy, how are they wrong? they in effect are the customer and they are being sold something they do not like or want so once again how are they wrong?
 
RasputinLives I just about see the reasons why the FIA thought the fuel flow restriction was necessary but no one has managed to convince me that it's really needed yet. It's not/shouldn't be a fuel saving formula, it should be an efficiency formula (subtle but important distinction I think), and as for making overtaking meaningless and easy... errr.... DRS and Pirelli tyres anyone?
 
Last edited:
For umpteens of years I have been hearing the FIA banging on about how to have more overtaking in F1 and now that they have one to hand they don't want to use it....:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
What a load of shite. If Luca bitches and whines for long enough, someone might find a formula that Ferrari could out compete the other teams at.

It's not looking too likely though, is it? So they'll have to keep fighting Hulkenburg.

As for Bernard, they should lock him in a prison with 128 revolving doors between him and lunch.
 
For umpteens of years I have be hearing the FIA banging on about how to have more overtaking in F1 and now that they have one to hand they don't want to use it....:rolleyes:

I think DRS showed that what people want to see is genuine overtaking not meanimgless overtaking. Having someone scoot past someone like they weren't there because they've turned the fuel flow up will not be entertaining.

Lets be honest how many of the midfield teams would turn the fuel rate up to fight a front runner coming through the field and risk a decent result? None. Would make it all a bit one sided.
 
Back
Top Bottom