GPWizard F1 Forum

F1 News & Discussions => Pit Pass => Topic started by: cosworth151 on February 20, 2013, 02:42:54 PM

Title: What a Constructor Actually Constructs
Post by: cosworth151 on February 20, 2013, 02:42:54 PM

Here's an interesting list. It is the items that each F1 constructor must build themselves. Caterham team principal Cyril Abiteboul believes Formula 1 must consider easing the criteria that teams have to meet in order to qualify as a constructor.

• Monocoque
• Survival cell as defined in Article 1.14 of the F1 Technical Regulations
• Front and side impact structures used to meet the requirements of Articles 16.2, 16.3 and 16.4 of the F1 Technical Regulations
 • Roll-over structures – roll structures as regulated by Article 15.2 of the F1 Technical Regulations
• Front and rear suspension without rotating parts
• Suspension geometry and suspension members as regulated by Articles 10.2 and 10.3 of the F1 Technical Regulations
• Heat exchanges (oil and water)
• Bodywork as defined in Article 1.4 of the F1 Technical Regulations and regulated by Article 3 of the F1 Technical Regulations with the exception of airboxes, engine exhausts and any prescribed bodywork geometries
• Wings
• All parts of the steering system
• Seat
• The brake and throttle pedal assemblies and mechanisms
• Pedals
• Brake balance adjustment
• Front and rear brake duct
• Front wing adjustment actuation system
• Switchboard and paddles
• Floor
• Diffuser
• Fuel cell

Some of the things, like the monocoque, survival cell, impact & roll over structures, bodywork, floor, diffuser and wings seem obvious. I'm not so sure about things like steering racks and switchgear. I really don't see the point of insisting that the teams not be able to buy items like the heat exchangers (radiators), seats and fuel cells. Allowing teams to buy such items "off the rack" could save the smaller teams precious time, money and effort in their R&D departments.


http://www.racer.com/caterham-f1-constructor-rules-should-be-eased/article/280520/?DCMP=EMC-RACER_DAILY&spMailingID=5615537&spUserID=MjMyNjk2NjU2MQS2&spJobID=66240771&spReportId=NjYyNDA3NzES1

Title: Re: What a Constructor Actually Constructs
Post by: Irisado on February 20, 2013, 04:28:19 PM

I'm not sure I agree with everything on that list either.  Independent teams used to subcontract out a lot of parts like brakes, steering, and so on in previous decades, so I don't see why this should suddenly change.

Does he have some sort of underlying motive for making this statement?  Which of Caterham's competitors is he trying to say isn't a genuine constructor?

Title: Re: What a Constructor Actually Constructs
Post by: lkjohnson1950 on February 21, 2013, 12:54:45 AM

Lots of teams used brake parts from outfits like Girling, Ferodo, etc. Of course you used to have customer cars too. Rob Walker ran Coopers and Lotuses quite successfully for many years and Tyrrell started with March chassis for JYS to drive.

Title: Re: What a Constructor Actually Constructs
Post by: Jericoke on February 21, 2013, 02:32:27 AM

I can certainly appreciate the need for constructors to 'construct', but surely there is room for some standardised parts!

Title: Re: What a Constructor Actually Constructs
Post by: F1fanaticBD on February 21, 2013, 04:16:49 AM

I think such list ensures that each team is unique, and also a certain commitment towards the sports, that they require wide array of technical people as well as establishment and facilities which will ensure the longevity of the team. Though it does throw a challenge to the teams with spiraling cost. I have a feeling this is done to stop companies of component monopolizing the sports. They may not be able to use each others parts straight away, but I guess the co-operation still lies as certain small teams does have tie up with big teams, like Ferrari with Sauber, Marussia with McLaren, and I am not going to mention Torro Rosso and RBR, because basically they are more just two co-operating with each other. They have make sure they get their own parts done, so that ensure you have a war of technology, for which F1 is proud of.

Title: Re: What a Constructor Actually Constructs
Post by: John S on February 21, 2013, 11:19:37 AM

I'm not certain that teams must build things themselves, I'm sure they can sub contract work but it must be to their own specifications and not an off the shelf part. The list is still longer than we might expect to keep each as a unique proposition.

Good point you make about reducing monopolies BD, this prescribed list will help a lot of smaller high tech engineering companies who work with F1 teams.

I wonder how many more common parts are allowed in prototype Le Mans cars?

 

 

Title: Re: What a Constructor Actually Constructs
Post by: cosworth151 on February 21, 2013, 12:16:12 PM

It's pretty much unlimited in Le Mans racing. The Aston Martin DBR1-2 from a few years ago was mostly a Lola B08/60. Last year's DeltaWing used a later Aston tub. Lola and others provide entire customer cars.