Quote from StewartFisher :

But why is it more flexible? The rules say they must be rigid, therefore the teams should never be using their flexibility to gain an advantage.

1. The rules say so, but none of the wings are strictly rigid. The FIA use tests to make sure the wings are legal. Since all teams pass the tests, then you couldn't call a particular team a cheater.

2. Ferrari has no idea how flexible other teams' wings are, they focus on their own car design given that it fits the rule, and they succeed in doing so.

3. You couldn't blame Ferrari for gaining an advantage (if any) with their wings, since they don't know whether other teams' wings are more flexible than theirs or not. FIA should improve the rule by bringing in more specific tests regarding the flexibility of wings. If anyone's to blame, it's the FIA.

Quote :

Guess who bought it. Ferrari have a significant stake in Formula 1 and as a result are able to apply pressure to the FIA in ways the other teams are not able too.

Rofl. Seldom I have read funnier bullshit. F1 is a racing series organized and run by the FIA. The FIA is a club, a non-commercial organization that cannot be sold or bought. Noone owns a stake in the FIA because there is no stakes to own. So the FIA can neither be floated nor sold nor bought.

The part that can be owned is the Formula One Administration Ltd. (FOA) and the Formula One Management Ltd. (FOM). They are owned in part by Ecclestone's wife and different banks and they are controlled by Bernie. Again, no Ferrari in this part.

Ferrari used to (or still does, not sure) own a stake in the GPWC, the breakaway series that the manufacturers (Mercedes, BMW, Honda, Toyota, Renault and earlier Ferrari) used to plan. That is not associated with F1 or the FIA in any other way that the members of the GPWC participate in the F1.

If you want to make up conspiracy theories, try to get your facts straight. Otherwise the potential for self-ridiculing is quite high.

however don't forget the state of FIA is pretty close to a one man dictatorship - by Bernie.

And I do think Ferrari personals has quite a close relationship with Bernie thus FIA, compare to other competitors.

Quote from JJ72 :

however don't forget the state of FIA is pretty close to a one man dictatorship - by Bernie.

And I do think Ferrari personals has quite a close relationship with Bernie thus FIA, compare to other competitors.

Links? Or is it just your gut feeling?

Due to their inability to build championship winning cars, Ferrari's rivals make up this GPMA thing, threaten to leave F1 to start their own series. However, just after European GP, words came out that Renualt want a break from GPMA. Link---http://www.gp2006.com/news/con ... ewsForm&news_id=19244

Quote:"Renault vice-president Alain Dassas spoke with the other GPMA teams (BMW, Honda, Mercedes, Toyota) at the Nurburgring and revealed that the French based squad wants to sign the new Concorde Agreement and therefore leave their club. However, Dassas was reminded that his predecessor, Patrick Faure, has signed a contract that does not allow any one of manufacturers to take any individual action before September."

Ferrari is a name that no one could easily write off, even in a year like 2005, Ferrari made a few surprises. The FIA even changed its rules to slow Ferrari. It's interesting to see how things change, now Renualt get what they want in F1, surely they don't care about the GPMA any more. All these are about politics in F1, which although I am not particularly interested in, I know it happens all the time. But time and time again I find it quite amazing how people claim FIA is favoring Ferrari, or Ferrari is "closer" to the FIA than other teams. Well, I suppose that's what success brings you.

I know opinions vary, but I'd appreciate it if you could provide some proofs. Sometimes gut feeling can be misleading.

Quote :

Due to their inability to build championship winning cars, Ferrari's rivals make up this GPMA thing

Originally, Ferrari was part of the GPMA.

Other than that: more rule changes in the 21st century have been made against Ferrari than in favor: new points scheme, new qualifying system in 2003, no tire change in 2005. Every time these changes came after a dominant Ferrari season and every time Ferrari struggled to adjust. And these changes were done by the FIA.

Quote from Hoellsen :

Originally, Ferrari was part of the GPMA.

Other than that: more rule changes in the 21st century have been made against Ferrari than in favor: new points scheme, new qualifying system in 2003, no tire change in 2005. Every time these changes came after a dominant Ferrari season and every time Ferrari struggled to adjust. And these changes were done by the FIA.

Thanks for pointing out the inaccuracy. Just got baffled by the antis. But by using the word antis, maybe I am hugely biased as well.

ferrari should sue for being slowed down. But the v8 engine was to save money not kill them.

i would love to see some of the non linear acceleration/velocity vs. time graphs that other teams are using to accuse Ferrari of cheating with.

anyone seen them anywhere?

speedfreak227

I'd like to intoduce a book on this subject:

"The Power Brokers: The Inside Track on the Controllers of Formula 1", it's written by Alan Henry, that would answer a lot of the questions (yet open only many new ones as well.)

I just want to say one thing about those flexing wings. You clearly see them moving. But the FIA hangs a weight of 50 Kg (50 * 9,81 = 490,5 N) on them to see if they don't flex. However, when I look in LFS, the front wing (at high value) gives a force of 4896 N down at 300 Km/h (83,3 m/s). That is the same as 4896 / 9,81 = 499,1 Kg!

So, it's not weird that the wings flex, because they get far bigger forces than that little 50 Kg from the FIA. :P

Or am I talking complete bullsh*t now?