Imhotep Evil

- ONLY REGISTERED AND ACTIVATED USERS CAN SEE ALL LINKS - CLICK HERE TO REGISTER



Nick Heidfeld was not amused at the end of Wednesday's test at Jerez after having tested slicks and a 2009-spec aero package in his BMW. The 2009 rules cut downforce by half, and with slicks that are not up to temperature Heidfeld has warned of serious dangers.


Speaking with GPUpdate.net he said about his day of testing: "Today, we ran with the 2009 downforce package, which will be around half as effective as the one we're driving with this season. If the slicks return, they won't give as much grip as you'd expect as we will also lose grip as there is less downforce, so we will be slower in 2009."


"If it will stay like this and the tyres will stay like this, it will be extremely dangerous in 2009," he warned. "On my outlap I even thought about coming back in, because there were so many drivers flying past me. You feel like you're standing still compared to the others and it's very easy to spin the car. It's very, very dangerous."

Heidfeld suggested a better tyre might be the answer for more downforce in 2009 but isn't sure if that is going to happen. "Bridgestone could turn this around by making better tyres, but the question is: does it make sense for them?" Heidfeld said. "If there's another tyre supplier and there is competition, it would be solved. If the tyres become softer, it will help a lot. But I'm not a tyre expert, maybe the mixture of the compound should change, but like this, it will be extremely dangerous. They should change the tyres, or they should allow tyre heaters for 2009."

Next season the FIA will ban traction control on cars to make the races more exciting. But with the aero rules for 2009 and perhaps the return of slicks Heidfeld believes things won't get much easier. "Without traction control it's even worse, but if we would run with traction control (in 2009), it would still be very, very difficult. Even if the tyres are hot, you have so little grip with the new package. We have too much power and too little grip. I don't like it at all," a disappointed Heidfeld said.

450SEL6.9

Great point that Quick Nick makes. I think this cost-cutting is bogus. The teams might "save" some money, but what might be happening is that costs are being shifted around to suppliers and other technology partners. Bridgestone would incur a cost to manufacturer tyres to meet ever-changing rules. If F1 adopts clean fuels, the fuel partners will also have to spend money to make that fuel.

Taking money from one hand to give to the other is not good bidness! Cost saving measures designed to help teams save money by forcing some of the expense on other suppliers might turn out to be a zero-sum game.

NarutoRamen

^^Screw the suppliers, The teams are gonna lose money to their own drivers when people start crashing right and left. We're going to see a lot more crashes next season and a 200K engine ain't cheap.

Sunny

Man up and drive the damn thing. F1 cars are way safer than they used to be. Only difference is that next year it is up to the drivers to keep the car on the track.

Remy Zero

+10000

fully agreed. i do hope he realize he's getting millions because of this. u can crash at 300 km/h and walk away with just a sprained leg or something these days. back in the days of JS or Niki Lauda, put 2 wheels on the grass and u'll end up in the wall with burns or broken bones.

these days drivers are just spoilt.

i do hope they will improve overtaking too. i'm tired of watching a parade every 2 weeks.

coolraoul

Hey Nick!!
Watch Fangio running his piece of crap without even a helmet, and say well...it ain't so dangerous after all, this new package...

Tycoon

Nick makes a point there and you should understand it. F1's regulations few years ago (remember Ralf in Indy) concerning tires were nothing but dangerous for life of the drivers and that's a fact! You can say whatever you want how Fangio and Co. had much worse cars/conditions/tires, etc. decades ago, but i would like to see you in his place. He knows it, he's testing it, he knows if it's dangerous or not. Sure the thing with Kubica in Canada and proof how safe cars are today is encouraging, but there's a reason to be afraid obviously. And he knows it better than any of us.

coolraoul

Yeah, I was joking.
Sure he know his stuff, sure he is good.

But for the enormous salary...
Seriously, he made a good point, it is not good if it is dangerous, and hard to overtake also.

But it will be more funny to see spins and drifts in the F1...

Don't understand the FIA though, will they one day do something that makes sense or no?

Tycoon

Hardly...

Imhotep Evil

Even excluding the monocoque, crashboxes and HANS there are still differences to be considered.

Lauda's 70s Ferrari 312T2 had 500 horses per 575/640 kilos without driver/with driver, that's 869/781 horses per tonne without driver/with driver.

The 2009 cars will have 750 horses per 605 kilos with driver witch is 1239 horses per tonne.

There's a huge difference between as 781 hp/tonne car and 1239 hp/tonne car.

The 2009 cars would have to lose 300 horses to match the 70s cars power-to-weight ratio.

With neither downforce, nor electronics, nor decent compounds it won't improve the racing at all, just add a lot more crashes, witch means (like in 94, 95, 98) the drivers will resort to even more pit-stop/strategy for good results.