Testing should be brought back - convince me I'm wrong
Discussion
Young drivers are struggling with the cars due to a lack of seat time and not being able to find a good setup/balance.
As the budget cap has been brought in, why not open up testing but ensure the cost comes out of the racing budget? Teams would have the option to bring less parts/ do less windtunnel work if they felt their driver needed the time or that they needed to play with setup.
Providing the teams have to hire the track at an agreed minimum cost to prevent "free hire". They'd need to pay for tires, a spare engine or two but some might benefit from the flexibility.
As the budget cap has been brought in, why not open up testing but ensure the cost comes out of the racing budget? Teams would have the option to bring less parts/ do less windtunnel work if they felt their driver needed the time or that they needed to play with setup.
Providing the teams have to hire the track at an agreed minimum cost to prevent "free hire". They'd need to pay for tires, a spare engine or two but some might benefit from the flexibility.
I quite like the current set up which adds a level of unpredictability. It levels the playing field a bit.
For example, Hamilton/MB had to work really hard in the last race in qualifying. Red Bull were near the front but MB were quite far down the grid order. If they didn't manage to find the set up within the quali period then he would have been in the mid-field.
Norris/McLaren and Russell/Williams had it nailed from the start with more biased wet race set up. But part of that was luck in having the right set up compared to other cars.
With testing there would be much more data and the set up would be more predictable from race to race. Currently different teams show strengths at different tracks.
For example, Hamilton/MB had to work really hard in the last race in qualifying. Red Bull were near the front but MB were quite far down the grid order. If they didn't manage to find the set up within the quali period then he would have been in the mid-field.
Norris/McLaren and Russell/Williams had it nailed from the start with more biased wet race set up. But part of that was luck in having the right set up compared to other cars.
With testing there would be much more data and the set up would be more predictable from race to race. Currently different teams show strengths at different tracks.
andburg said:
Young drivers are struggling with the cars due to a lack of seat time and not being able to find a good setup/balance.
Who's that then? The only driver I can see struggling on this is Danny Ric!I can't say I've seen anything that's wrong where more testing would put it right so it solves a problem that doesn't really exist.
They do still test. Pre season, two (I think) mid season and one directly after the last race. Would Latifi or Mazepin suddenly discover previously untapped form if they added in more testing? I doubt it.
I think the restrictions on testing have been a good move. Back in the day, teams would run a race team and a test team, spending almost as much testing as they did on racing. All that did was spread the field out further. Budget caps may limit this but to what ends I really can't see.
I like the idea of testing in theory but then you think about how everything is so efficient and nailed down unpredictability is needed to spice things up. Things need to be less predictable not more. I really liked the sprint race weekend. Less time to set up more unpredictable racing and theatre. Maybe next year when the cars will hopefully be able to race a bit more that’ll make things unpredictable enough so rules on testing can be opened up again
I don't think it would be a bad idea to allow teams to test if they think it would be more beneficial to them than any other type of simulation. The cost cap now makes that much easier to manage fairly, as they could make them 'buy' additional test days at something like $1m per day in the form of a reduction of their budget cap by that amount, in addition to the actual costs of going to the track and running. Limit them to testing only on approved circuits, and not before a race at the same circuit in the same calendar year.
The budget cap 'fee' would have the effect of discouraging the big teams from testing too much, as they're already feeling squeezed by the cap, but smaller teams who won't reach the cap anyway would effectively get free testing at just their own running cost expense, which might help them to develop and catch up the bigger teams.
The budget cap 'fee' would have the effect of discouraging the big teams from testing too much, as they're already feeling squeezed by the cap, but smaller teams who won't reach the cap anyway would effectively get free testing at just their own running cost expense, which might help them to develop and catch up the bigger teams.
Maybe not put kids in cars if they're struggling (not sure who you think is though) and give them a lot more experience in a lot more cars first so they can adapt.
Testing is always a tricky one in motorsport. It's pretty much the only sport where you can't practise as much as you would like but it's very expensive and the more practise that happens the duller the main event in general.
Testing is always a tricky one in motorsport. It's pretty much the only sport where you can't practise as much as you would like but it's very expensive and the more practise that happens the duller the main event in general.
You're wrong. The teams do too many days away from home now, apparently, so to bring on testing you'd need a test team dedicated to that or the existing race team members would all walk away from their jobs or end up divorced.
They can do so much testing and preparations with simulators and the dynos/test rigs they have that a lot of what they used to do is probably done back at base through the week. The simulators must be pretty good these days as they run scenarios through the simulators with test drivers over race weekends to help get the best option for the races.
Not one for true pistonheads but CO2... If you'd test teams, the trucks needed to get the equipment to the circuits would increase the CO2 outputs of the teams, the cars on track wouldn't make much difference to the overall CO2 output, it's the logistics which cause the higher CO2 numbers.
And finally, it wouldn't add to the show so why.
They can do so much testing and preparations with simulators and the dynos/test rigs they have that a lot of what they used to do is probably done back at base through the week. The simulators must be pretty good these days as they run scenarios through the simulators with test drivers over race weekends to help get the best option for the races.
Not one for true pistonheads but CO2... If you'd test teams, the trucks needed to get the equipment to the circuits would increase the CO2 outputs of the teams, the cars on track wouldn't make much difference to the overall CO2 output, it's the logistics which cause the higher CO2 numbers.
And finally, it wouldn't add to the show so why.
I'd wonder about maybe an extra couple days pre season being allowed, or open up the young driver tests to team change drivers.
Additional in season testing would either get very expensive with spare drivetrains, or component life use that the teams would want to avoid.
It's also not really a significant enough issue where they're going to rip up the rulebook to resolve it.
Additional in season testing would either get very expensive with spare drivetrains, or component life use that the teams would want to avoid.
It's also not really a significant enough issue where they're going to rip up the rulebook to resolve it.
Thinking about it again f1 doesn’t put any value almost at all on these test days. We have less and less test days, practice sessions are being reduced with the sprint weekends. I think f1 is putting more emphasis on it being good entertainment. I think this shows on next years cars which have been totally designed on making the cars easier race close.
What entertainment is there in testing apart from that one time brawn built a car in his name. Almost zero for anyone but the super die hard fan.
What entertainment is there in testing apart from that one time brawn built a car in his name. Almost zero for anyone but the super die hard fan.
One solution could be to do it like they did years ago when i think one friday session was for reserve drivers, or i think they actually could use a 3rd car for the reserve driver. I know some of them got alot of seat time with practice every weekend, then the reserve driver role would actually be very sought after.
Some do want more testing - https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/preseason-testi...
And an article on why less testing rather than more could be a good idea - https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/articles/single...
As with many things with F1 it's all been done before. There are very good reasons why testing is strictly limited these days. Many of us remember the full test teams which essentially doubled the cost of running an F1 team and created even more of a gap between the haves and have nots.
There is never a perfect solution just what the solution is at the time.
And an article on why less testing rather than more could be a good idea - https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/articles/single...
As with many things with F1 it's all been done before. There are very good reasons why testing is strictly limited these days. Many of us remember the full test teams which essentially doubled the cost of running an F1 team and created even more of a gap between the haves and have nots.
There is never a perfect solution just what the solution is at the time.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff