You are reading a single comment by @Dammit and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
That's a really tough thing to do, I suspect, unless you totally control certain aspects - I wonder if (first thing I thought of, may be stupid) you could specify a certain number of kg of downforce at say 100, 200 and 300 kph?
Why not no downforce at any speed? Easy to test in a windtunnel. Then say you can have any engine you like as long as it has a minimum of, say, 800bhp. Manual gearbox, no driver aids. Cue proper racing.
Brommers
@Dammit
Very interesting, this raised my eyebrows but makes a lot of sense, from a certain perspective:
"We have to see if we can develop the rules to reward innovation less," Brawn said. "Because as it is now innovation is heavily rewarded and if you can afford it, the slope is still quite steep - more money, faster cars. If we can flatten that off with the regulations that would go in the right direction."
That's a really tough thing to do, I suspect, unless you totally control certain aspects - I wonder if (first thing I thought of, may be stupid) you could specify a certain number of kg of downforce at say 100, 200 and 300 kph?
Problem there is (again, thinking as I type) you still reward innovation if you maintain that maximum limit of downforce for more of the time.
The more I think about it the more I'd like to keep a reward for innovation through inductive leap of reasoning/design, but not iterative design powered by simply having more cash. Legislate for that though!