Design your own prototype class

As somebody who really likes the engineering side of racing I would want a rule set that encourages lot of different strategies.

For each racing season I would have a completely new set of rules announced 6 weeks before competition. No team would be allowed to re use a design from last season.

The rule sets each season would be simple, things such as:

• Open engine and aero but you can only use 4 195 width tires

• Open wheels, no wings, and engines must be Normally aspirated and no larger than 1/2 a liter

• Three liter engines, no aero, and the sum width of all tires installed on the vehicle can be no more than 1000 mm

Some how I would want to work in a engineering presentation at the end of each season by each team..

bravenrace wrote: In reply to z31maniac: How would a salary cap prevent $150M in a wind tunnel? And how is it that engineering changes base on a wind tunnel test are not innovative? I think some F1 teams might have an argument with that statement. However, I agree with what I think you were getting at. And I'm not for aero on race cars. It's like Mario Andretti said a few years ago - You want lower speeds and more excitement? Take the aero away and separate the men from the boys...Or something similar to that.

It's not that it would "prevent" per se, but it would force you to compromise on the other aspects of your design.

Now you're using a production based, engine with forced induction vs some 20k RPM pneumatic valved monster, etc.

Capt Slow wrote: As somebody who really likes the engineering side of racing I would want a rule set that encourages lot of different strategies. For each racing season I would have a completely new set of rules announced 6 weeks before competition.

I think you've pretty well described the current F1 atmosphere.

I was recently involved in a semi-related discussion about motorcycle racing.

One of the conclusions was that top-tier racing is tightly regulated because neither manufacturers nor sponsors are willing to gamble on completely unknown outcomes. Everybody wants a polished, close show for the consum, uh, spectators.

It basically made me wonder (read: daydream) about what if everybody who actually cares about racing simply gave up on F1/NASCAR/Indy and simply turned our attention to forms of racing not involving sums of money only available to huge multinationals. Racing is always expensive, but seriously, why regard a tightly regulated soap opera as the pinnacle of anything? Not that I'll stop watching F1, but I find other areas of motorsport more interesting.

Reapplying it to this discussion, I'm curious about the notion of keeping the ruleset in the realm of possibility for tiny manufacturers and one-offs. Sure, very few backyard builders would have a chance, but we might see some interesting ideas if that number were greater than zero.

bravenrace wrote:

Maroon92 wrote: 3 liters. 4 wheels. Enclosed wheels. Enclosed cockpits. NO OTHER RULES! PERIOD!

I could be persuaded to agree with this. A free beer would do it, I think.

What I was thinking except maybe 2-3 classes based on displacement (1.6/2.4/3.8, I dunno) And must be a production block. Can do whatever with, but must start there.

carguy123 wrote:

Capt Slow wrote: As somebody who really likes the engineering side of racing I would want a rule set that encourages lot of different strategies. For each racing season I would have a completely new set of rules announced 6 weeks before competition.

I think you've pretty well described the current F1 atmosphere.

Yes that's why I would want a very short period of time between the announcement of the rules and the start of racing.

These ideas have all been mentioned but here is what I suggest:
Fuel energy limitation (not for the race, but the entire event). Plan your trade off of practice time vs available power consumtion for the race.
Overall tire width limit. you figure out where you want the rubber. Probably a limit to 4 wheels - no more, no less.
Frontal area minimum. No matter the shape of the car, there must be a cross section at mid wheelbase that is X units wide by Y units tall for all cars. Bigger is allowed, smaller is not. This could play into the hands of the aero guys (like me) while still providing for some saftey zones and advertising space. You have to figure out the best shape for the transition to and from the mid-section box shape to get drag and downforce balanced.
Wheelbase and Track are open, to allow varaitions of stability and maneuverability.
I think closed wheels would help draw big manufacturers in better. There are not too many certified open wheel car in mass production...
Lets get back to a mandatory cargo volume requirement like Lemans used to have as well. Make it big enough for a spec suitcase/box.
Just a few silly ideas, but that what I think.

Just bring back the IMSA GTP series.

Or.

Closed cockpits. Engines must use a production block, but other components are unrestricted. No displacement limit so that I can see Ford and Chevy V8s compete against smaller forced induction engines. The only fuel will be 93 octane pump gas or E85. Cars must use the headlights/taillights from a mfr's production vehicle to have some sort of design/brand relevance. Sequential shifters not allowed--real manual gearboxes only.

Argo1 wrote: Make it relevant to manufacturers so that they will want to participate. It needs to advance road transportation in order to provide value back to them. Racing by BTU usage and emissions. Most efficient gets the most power from the allowed limits. Within safety limits, anything else goes. Let the engineers create inovative solutions. You would get stuff like a hybrid powered delta wing, etc.

Manufacturers don't need relevance to participate. What does NASCAR have to do with relevance? Manufacturers want eyeballs, which means racing that gets people's attention. Group B and Can-Am, those are the sort of classes that people remember.

I think an open rulebook would lead to closed wheel cars. Open wheels are just aerodynamically bad.

You can't ban aero. Unless we're racing in a vacuum, that genie just isn't going back in the box. Aero is going to happen. So let it happen.

If you really want to make it interesting, have it take place over a variety of surfaces.

Keith wrote: If you really want to make it interesting, have it take place over a variety of surfaces.

OR subtract time for number of a "spec" alcoholic beverage consumed. You can have various companies throwing money at you to be the "spec" drink, and who wouldn't want to watch a field full of drivers who have just crushed a 40?

Kimi Raikkonen, of course, would be banned from this series. It's only fair to the other drivers.

In fact, new race series:
-No real car requirements but min/max dimensions, closed cockpits and wheels, and reaaaaaal berkeleyin' safe.
-Every shot of Jack Daniels gets you credited a lap, no more than three drinks a pit

You could do a rally version with unknown courses, sober drives, and wasted navigators, too.

Spec tires. Everybody uses the same 4 tires, say 12" wide on a 17x12 wheel. Have 1 driver, crash structure, safety stuff. Otherwise wide open. Gimmee turbines, hydrogen fuel cells, wind sails, you name it.