Teams not in favour of in-season testing

[Dare]

Well I thought it was a gooidea,maybe RedBull think they have a
advantage with no testng

.
   Red Bull team boss Christian Horner is not in favour of Jean Todt's proposal to introduce limited in-season testing.

In-season testing was banned in 2009 in a bid to cut the cost of competing in F1, however, Todt recently stated that he would like to see it return.

The FIA President wants three lots of two-day testing, saying it would give F1's young drivers a chance to master their craft.

"For me, it is a stupid decision to have no testing during the season," he said.

"In the past it was crazy to have unlimited testing during the year, but to go from unlimited to completely banned, it is not the right measure.

"It doesn't allow young drivers to test, it doesn't give the opportunity for young drivers to learn some experience in F1, and I will make sure that this situation will change for the future."

The teams, though, don't want it to change, saying they are happy with the situation as it is.

"I think that the balance that we have is right," Horner told Autosport.

"Maybe we could do a bit more running on a Friday, or have a few more sets of tyres, which would encourage teams to run with more young drivers.

"The problem with testing is that as soon as you reintroduce it, you reintroduce test teams and the cost will escalate.

"One of the biggest cost savings we have seen is the reduction in testing, so I think the balance we have with the pre-season and the young driver test at the end of the year is right - and fiscally beneficial not just to the big teams but to the small teams as well."

Meanwhile, Force India COO Otmar Szafnauer says reintroducing testing - even limited testing - would go against the grain of trying to reduce costs.

"We don't want to do it. Why go backwards?. There are some fundamental things that, when I was at Honda, at first we disagreed with but looking back I think we were wrong and Max (Mosley) was right.

"One of which was getting rid of the qualifying car - we used to run qualifying engines. What an expense? For what? Nothing.

"Pace ferme. Another fundamental thing - to get rid of not just qualifying engines but cars. Great thing. It didn't hurt the show.

"Engines lasting more than they used to last. A fundamental thing that is right. Gearboxes lasting more than they used to last. A fundamental thing that is right. All of these things brought costs down and didn't ruin the show.

"No in-season testing saves a lot of money. We don't have a test team now. What would happen if we brought in-season testing back?

"We already do 19/20 races and our crew are stretched already. Now you are going to ask them to do another two or three tests. You will have two teams again and, once you have two teams, the costs escalate.

"Why go backwards on that front? Then you have to add on the cost of testing per kilometre as well."


.

[Jericoke]

It's true, probably only McLaren, Ferrari and Williams want testing.  While they're all mindful of their bottom lines, they're all RACE teams, and testing is (was) a fundamental part of racing.

This new breed of race team, that sees racing as weekend advertising... the millionaires with their (company) name on the car... is this a problem for the sport?  I'd hate to slag Mallya, Mateschitz and Branson, they've helped keep F1 afloat, but what happened to the guys like Jordan, Bernie or Enzo who made their millions from the sport?