Cyril Abiteboul: "Formula One needs to rediscover it's DNA"
- Published on 18 May 2018 09:55
-
- By: Danny Sosef
Formula One needs to rediscover its "DNA", according to Renault boss Cyril Abiteboul. The Frenchman says that in recent years, as the popularity of Formula E and the world endurance championship increased, the core message of F1 has become confused.
"We can't just mix it all up," Abiteboul told Speed Week. "The life of the engine, the durability of tyres, the amount of fuel, this is for me no part of the Formula One DNA. Le Mans was always about reliability, but Grand Prix racing should always be sprint racing from the lights to the flag."
However, Liberty Media is open to changes, as it considers a big shake-up for 2021. And the aero rules are changing for 2019 to help spice up overtaking.
"We took care of the aerodynamics for 2019," Abiteboul said, "but important issues remain untouched. We have not talked about tyres. I understand that with a targeted degradation, the race should be exciting, but what does it mean if drivers have to save fuel?"
"In my view, Formula One must be clear about what it represents for the fans. With hybrid technology we have breathed a modern wind but I do not understand what the real message is," he continued. "We have a very good saying that to me applies in Formula One -- you should never fix something that is not broken."
1
Replies (7)
Login to replymbmwe36
Posts: 533
I actually agree with him... that was unexpected.
Especially the part about F1 being a sprint race, not an endurance race.
In terms of tires, that would sort itself out by having more than one supplier.
Refuelling would add a much needed extra tactical option. I miss the days where the smaller teams would qualify on fumes to look good in their home GP. Refuelling would help break the monotony.
maalibu
Posts: 17
I totally agree, Brave Man Cyril, on point.
Save Fuel - Yes = Lighter car = Quicker!
An engine that would be all on the performance side, lets say a N/A V6 or S6.
Freguz
Posts: 160
Yes well spoken, have a look at 1994 and just go with that.
calle.itw
Posts: 8,527
F1 is a sprint series, I fully agree with that , which is exactly why we shouldnt have refuelling. A car thats in an endurance series is bound to need refuelling, they are out on track for ages, and there is a limit to how far they can go. F1, a sprint series, shouldnt need that. And we shouldnt need to have the drivers fuel saving like this. This isnt the fuel guzzling era we used to have, and refuelling really didnt add anything I find beneficial for F1 back then.
calle.itw
Posts: 8,527
One thing I do however I agree with him on is the reliability on the engines. Its BS that they should have to make do on 3 (of some parts... 1 for others) allocations. It just doesnt make sense, and since most will likely not or barely will be able to hold that limit, that rule isnt saving costs, its robbing teams with less reliable engines of important points and money while retaining the old costs. And thats bollocks. 5 were okay, 4 were barely acceptable, 3?! Thats utter nonsense. Pure, undilluted donkey scrotum.
mbmwe36
Posts: 533
By that logic, tire changes shouldn't be allowed either, because after all, it's not an endurance race. The thing is, for all I care the teams could be fueled to go the entire race without refuelling. But if a team wanted to qualify on fumes, and run the entire race light (having to refuel once or twice) I think they should have that option.
In terms of engine allocation, they shouldn't have an upper limit at all - because it's a sprint. And the thing is, the cost of producing an actual engine pales in comparison to R&D costs. So if they could just agree on a long term engine formula where they'll actually get to "diminishing returns", it would make for a more level playing field, and eventually drive engine costs down.
calle.itw
Posts: 8,527
No thats not really true. While similar in nature, a tyre change and refueling are different things and I think they should be treated as such. I like SGT as you know, and they have refuelling in some races. How much more strategy does it introduce in that endurance series? Not enough for me to care. Imagine whats it'd be like in modern F1 then.
Now I absolutely think a limit is needed to adjust costs, because these current PUs are like it or not pricey as heck. but 4 or 3? Nah mate. At least 5.