Team come up with good idea. Implement good idea into something that can be used on their car. Car does better. Everybody tries to copy it. FIA bans it. The circle of F1 "innovation".
@@echobounce2945 I understand having rules, but the pattern is that rules are set out at the beginning of a season, one or two teams innovate something that doesn't QUITE break the rules, then everyone who just lost the race cry foul. Also some of the innovations are sometimes legitimately dangerous.
@@shaami8622 Really.. I mean that's not the only thing that can go wrong and impale someone. I thought the point was to look for safest possible implementation. By your logic, none of the cars should even be on the grid. 🤔
F1: We want teams to innovate and create clever solutions to make faster cars! Team: *Makes incredible discovery and gains massive benefits* F1: CEASE YOUR ACTIONS IMMEDIATELY! YOU ARE BANNED!
well it is legal before and now it is not... alot of tech can not go on real car since it not on a race track and you can not go fast to get those effect...
@@cucumber_zucker Because there's nothing on the current regulation that regulate the steering wheel, lol. Not like what (commonly, I don't say all) Ferrari fans theorized, they're not just wheelie-nilly on banning parts, it's always because of the regulation that in works at the time (which is pretty ironic coming from a Ferrari fans, but that's just my opinion.) That's also the reason why DAS is banned next season, because there's already a regulation about the steering position even before Merc revealed the DAS.
To be honest in the pursuit of speed and downforce, eventually it gets too dangerous, the old ground effect, and wherever fans would have lead would simply be death traps
The basic rule of thumb for technical innovation: - Team comes up with genius solution - Everyone tries to copy it - Ferrari fail to copy it successfully - Ferrari lobby the FIA to ban it - The FIA ban it
FIA: "we will ban anything that makes cars unsafe..." Team 1: "our innovation makes grip more consistent in the corners!" Team 2: "our innovation increases down force for more grip!" FIA: "...those are banned too"
Something to consider is that whatever they're using should consistently give similar grip/downforce etc. E.g. skirts could get chipped away on bumpers/off track and then suddenly the car had massively less downforce than the drivers expected. Flying them off at the next fast turn
Storiaron oh you mean like wings and tires? Ya know, the things that get broken off and punctured mid corner all the time??? Yeah, the cars shouldn’t have those either
All these banned innovations feels like, its slowing down any innovations by doing this. Would have wondered if they did not ban them how different the cars might have become and also how much more innovations could have gone out of those innovations as they would have try to improve them over time.
most were banned after senna's death because the cars simply were too quick for the safety of that time. remember they were racing 750+hp, super light cars that didn't even have a speedometer, let alone any form of traction control etc. drivers also sat with their feet over the front axis, meaning that if they crashed into a wall they'd often break their ankles.
@@dutchclasher5471 I understand that safety is an issue. But climbing mountains without oxygen or ropes is not safe but still a thing. And it does sound a bit silly - To limit speed potential in a sport were going as fast as possible is the objective.
So many engineering solutions, all of them banned. Granted some presented actual safe issues (F ducts, X wings) but others were just a way to stifle innovation
I think the ground effects skirts and the fan car were dangerous too. Skirts were too unpredictable in bumpy situations and the fan threw small debris to the cars behind. Other than that, stuff like double diffusers and mass dampers are genius.
@@kutayarcan911 the main issue there was the loss in downforce in case of damage, which to be fair was a safety risk. That too I can understand but the third pedal, the mass damper and double diffuser were banned because it was easier for the other teams
What safe issues did the F-duct had? And if you mean because the drivers had to use their hands that was the teams fault being stupid by using their hands. There´s a reason Mclaren´s system used the side of the leg and not their hands...
@@abdurrahmanusman2498 yes but something like a wheel vibration dampener could be very beneficial at these speeds, so we cant just apply that to everything
Exactly it’s a constructors championship if you don’t want innovation and new ideas they should just make everyone run the same engines and chassis like Indy car.
@@TheEvapiiShow the regulations stated that a fan whos primary use was to provide aerodynamic effect was illegal. When designing it Murray went for the loophole that its primary use was for cooling. Although difficult to disprove this was obviously bullshit so they agreed to remove it before court proceedings etc
Porkchop Sandwiches especially the dampers. It minimises take off as cars can’t fly up into the sky when hitting kerbs and definitely minimises loss of control. There has been multiple cases of cars hitting kerbs at high speed making micro bounces and sending them to their other side. If a car just behind it is going 180 mph. Lets say it wouldn’t be the most fanciest thing...
ye, and 9 out of 10 of these things were clever engineering solutions and indeed LEGAL! as per the rules at the time. yet the video title calls them CHEEKY.... which is frankly retarded title for this video. It should be celebrating the engineers and their cleverness.
unfortunately back in those days the active suspension computers wherent smart/fast enough to handle the data... so there where crashes involving the active suspension THINKING it was on a different part of the track than it actually was...
If unlimited ground effects, combined with 4 wheel drive and fans at the back, f-ducts and all kinds of aerodevices the cars would be too fast for a human to handle. Not sure how that would be to watch
@@kenlykkeslett7501 more interesting than today. think of the engineering marvels that would used to create the insane tracks required. im surprised there has not been a no restriction series yet.
The Brabham Fan Car was neer banned. In fact, Gordon Murray has a letter from the FIA saying it was legal. They withdrew it because the other owners told Bernie they would quit F1 if he didn't end the program.
That makes no sense. Brawn won the whole season because of one innovation and people were complaining that it was boring. Now you are seeing the same with Mercedes, Red Bull before and Ferrari before it. This people is the exact reason why fans should never be making the rules. It's just knee jerk reactions.
Yes team can extract as much performance, from set off writen formula of rules. Not just outrageous innovation war which lead to whichever got the most money win and no small teams interested in competing. Loose regulation will just create wacky racing.
@@ardijanuar2036 These are not outrageous and more often than not, poor teams that are desperate get the most out of them. Tyrrell and Brawn for example.
@Yt_User#911 umm do you know how F1 works everyone but the big three are poor by comparison. So in my opinion these sneaky advantages leveled the playing field between rich and poor teams
The double diffuser and the mass damper were absolutely GENIUS innovations by small teams, and look at the results. Either the FIA or bigger teams' protests made it illegal.
6:18 “It shouldn’t be illegal, but because we’re not as good as they are we don’t want them racing unless we all get to copy them, but that’s to expensive, so just retire the car”
If the price is prohibitive to the rest of the teams, it creates a monopoly, not good for the sport. I know it's "unfair", but otherwise the sport would be boring with the same team winning everything always.
This video is missing the last 6 years, where it goes like this: - "Mercedes invented it and FIA approved it" - "Some other team invented it, Mercedes complained and FIA banned it"
Love it. Just imagine what we could have, had a few these developments and innovations been kept in the sport and given time to develop If we had today's F1 leadership in 1968 they probably would have banned downforce-generating wings altogether when Lotus first used downforce to gain an advantage
@@skyscall It's sad about the majority of the developments being banned, although I am happy to not have 6 or 8 wheeler F1 cars, that'd be way too bizarre.
@@MyFamilyFoodGarden lol I was thinking the same, but in the end I'd be like "ahhh hell, let's allow it to see what they come up with next". I mean they can always split the racing category in 2, normal and 20 wheelers lol
The FIA seems to think the way to revolutionize the sport and shake up the grid is to just redo the whole chassis every few years rather than letting teams just invent new things to keep things fresh. I guess it's because the FIA's interest is close racing but the constructors' interest is in constructor points. Those two things work against each other when it comes to establishing rules that allow inventive solutions but promotes wheel-to-wheel action.
Hugh Jass Hate Ferrari much?! Ferrari only complained about the 1 innovation (#6), bud(?). Other teams did their fair share of whining over other ideas too. Changing weight with water was flat-out cheating, while Alonso's driving ability was pure genius!? Mostly, it was just easier to whine about some innovations and have them banned than to have to spend resources catching up(?) - not enough races to test and implement, maybe? We can only speculate.
@@jeokagem8002 Sooo if someone innovates and creates something nice. For their time, effort, money and genius the FIA just ban it so other teams don't spend time, effort and money? Makes sense...
@@dedecus7111 Dude, that's not what I said at all! (I don't know why I'm even responding to your comment because it's just plain dumb!?). I suggest that you should try to UNDERSTAND the comment/s better before you say something(?). I didn't mention ANYTHING about not innovating; of course, innovation is important - EXCEPT when it comes to flat-out cheating (like changing the weight of the car with water). My point was why is Hugh Jass singling out Ferrari when they are only guilty of complaining about 1 of the 10 items? He sounds like a Ferrari-hater. They are ALL guilty of complaining when they think another team has an unfair advantage, or if they think they can't catch up in time for that season. Finally, try to remember this in the future: "It is better to be quiet and be THOUGHT a fool than to speak out and dispell all doubt"
@@christythambithurai8814 Not at all saying he did or implying he did. Are you not familiar with the "I think you misspelled _" Joke format? If I have to explain it, Ferrari doesn't like when other teams make innovative and unique changes to their car that make their car really good and then they go crying to FIA to ban it. I can name multiple times where this was exactly the case, if you'd like.
As a novice to F1 I learned from this video that the governing body of F1 is primarily interested in limiting competition between the top tier teams and the mid tier teams. As soon as a mid tier team comes up with an innovation to get an edge on the top tier teams the governing body steps in due to influence by the top tier teams to outlaw these new innovations. As an engineer this practice seems competitively counterintuitive to the spirit of motorsports
@@yaxo11 50 years of History says, it's only ferrari that fails to keep up and innovate, thus bans... like the another commenter said, The basic rule of thumb for technical innovation: - Team comes up with genius solution - Everyone tries to copy it - Ferrari fail to copy it successfully - Ferrari lobby the FIA to ban it - The FIA ban it Ferrari: We can drive without hands but a wing damper is unacceptable. similar to the DAS system by Mercedes.
Team 1: This is revolutionary for us! Team 2: That’s illegal, ban it! *Next season* Team 2: This is revolutionary for us! Team 1: That’s illegal, ban it!
The media and people in the paddock didn't know what to call it so they just said "have you seen the duct on the f of vodafone on the front of the McLaren?" "F-duct" was born.
@@ialexleb7245 he staunchly followed the engineers number one rule...if it loks right, it probably is...if it looks fast...ditto...the winglets didnt look fast to him...or me...he was right though
"The risk of ground effect causing cars to take off was high..." *shows a low speed wheel to wheel contact caused flight that ground effect would have nothing to do with*
This could be said of any motorsport series, really. Any innovation that might upset the inverted pyramid of rich teams staying on top while spending as little as possible usually dies on the vine before it can be fully developed.
@GamerFrancis TV I agree the halo is safe (albeit ugly), I just don't think the side wings were unsafe. heck, they banned bmw sauber's twin towers for the same 'obstructed visibility' reason, even though drivers didn't mind them any more than they mind the halo. just feels hypocritical of them, like visibility is the excuse they pull out of their hat when they don't like a creative solution.
With the Lotus 88 they had the right to ban it, since the outside chassis did move to adjust its height. As for why the original Team Lotus died, they just stopped being a competitive team. They lost the Honda engines for 1989, and from there, the team just became less and less competitive, despite having a young Mika Hakkinen in their line up for 1991 and 92. Hell in their last season in 94 they scored no points despite getting engines from Mugen-Honda.
The f-duct may have been banned, but its effect of stalling airflow over the rear wing to reduce drag was the inspiration behind the DRS system added the following year.
Except most of these innovations were dangerous and/or impractical. For example, the skirts contributed to the down force so much that if it were to break the cars will suddenly lose a lot of grip & downfoce with the high probability of causing a crash. Another example is the weighted front wing. Weight is so important that eventually the teams would have probably removed it even if it wasn't banned
@@Akniy What are you even saying? The front wing is the most important aero element in the car because it is what dictates the flow of the rest of the whole car aerodynamics. If by dampening the vibrations you get a more stable front wing, you can tune it more precisely to move airflow and vortices to wherever you want, hence improving the performance of the car as a whole. More so when you have less downforce because you're running on a kerb at mid speed while cornering.
@@NicholasStrand If I recall Gran Turismo/Red Bull did the same with their X2014 fan car. Theoretically it was possible to build but would be almost impossible to drive due to the g-forces it was capable of.
A random team: (creates an innovation that greatly enhances the car's performance) FiA: "It is... acceptable" That random team: (wins once with the car) FiA: *Excuse me what the fu-"*
@@KnockKnockNeo except the rulebook didnt say no. Remember the part of the video that said "WITH FIA PERMISSION they fitted the system to the rear of the car aswell".
"It's been a whole less than a year since you've won a championship, and we aspire to parity. We only want you winning the championship no less than 6 times in a row."
I could understand if any other team than redbull or ferrari complained and they banned it. but it was those two, with equivalent budget, that complained first, and they knew what merc was doing beforehand, and did not bother to create a similar contraption.
@@bluevayero7269 well with or without das Mercedes wouldve still won.Maybe max would have second place in the WDC but they would've still won the constructors
@@nasseralkhelaifi1853 nah first reason why mirror attached on halo because driver comfort first then everybody complaining it because winglet and mirror instead installed at the halo so yeah, that also counted as taking aero advantage too from winglet at halo
The entire original turbo era could make this list. There was so much crazy tech in those cars. Active suspensions, blown exhausts, rocket fuel, and some even experimented with nitrous.
Mass dampers should be legal. Extra Triple brakes should be legal. Double Chassis ground effects should be legal. Triple and Double diffusers should be legal. Six wheels should be legal. The fan car should be legal. None of these innovations compromised the safety of drivers and spectators. “Pinnacle of Motorsport” my ass. The budget caps will balance everything out.
Porridge Boss, this is why equalized budget caps should exist for both big and small teams, and be very strict. No money left for 2019 due to poor budgeting? Save up and fight again in 2020, everyone has the same cards to work with
It would, quite simply, not be as fun. Have a look at the Can-Am cup in its early years. Eventually they started having to ban the innovations that Jim Hall from Chaparral Cars was coming up with, since his cars were consistently winning by entire laps. Chief among them included Fan-Cars and Active Aerodynamics, both of which are banned in most forms of racing.
Nowhere near as far as we are now tbh. Half of these innovations were only made because other things which were easier were banned. You'd never have the F-duct if active aero was still legal. Things like X-wings wouldn't be put on cars if ground effect skirts were still legal. Renault's tuned mass damper wouldn't be necessary if you could just have active suspension. Mclaren's 2nd brake pedal is also unnecessary if you have electronic stability control that can brake each wheel individually without driver input. Most of the time an innovation gives you one year of dominance and then it's either banned or copied by everyone else. The point is to force teams to continuously invent new things, not coast off one successful innovation for years.
@@jitendragarg what about the mass dampers? The double diffuser? The mass damper reduces the vibration of the car and makes it easier and safer to drive. The double diffuser increases the downforce. I don't see anything bad about it
@@cinegraphics Fia is not anyones bitch, why would they do that? Mercs are not guilty they started developing 2014 half decade before their rivals. and Fia can't just throw those engines now out, because they are already the cars very core. if they just ban 'em now it'll force teams to build the whole new cars, rebuild factories and etc. imagine the costs. in the time when F1 so desperately tries to lower it. plus ecology which is the reason they brought them in the first place. so considering that Mercs started developing those hybrid engines even before coming to f1, it is no wonder they nailed 2014. and people like you just hate mercedes for being the best. im not a Mercs fan too and i'm tired as well of the Mercedes dominance. but what they've got is deserved and i accept it. besides, F1 tried to stop 'em in 2017 already, which is by the way only 3 years after the darkness rising, compared to early 2000 when the rule changes to kill Ferrari came only 5 years later. so in 2017 they brought those aero in hope to bring the importance of engines down. but Mercs again showed their brains, and although Ferrari and Red Bull stepped very close, thanks to those rule changes, they still domehow saved the ability to fight for the championship. so to conclude Fia and F1 are trying to stop Mercedes but they can't just violate their own rules to stop them. with those 2022 rule changes though it will be their second attempt. doubt any team in history survived even Fia's first attack. so you have to understand that Fia never backs anyone, their main target is always to increase popularity of the F1 and thus make more money from it, and the dominance of a one team hardly helps it.
@@Sedlo64 are you on drugs? FIA has chosen the type of engine EXACTLY by the specs that Mercedes already had. They could have chosen something else, but FIA chooses Mercedes type of engine, against all other teams. Sure they can throw those engines out. Same as they introduced them, they could equally as easily outlaw them. And bring back V10 engines, with the sound that audience likes. Because racing should be about audience. And NOT rigging everything to make a big commercial for Mercedes. I don't wanna watch a Mercedes commercial, I wanna watch honest racing. I don't hate Mercedes, I hate injustice. They could as well take Tesla into competition and then one day just switch to electric motors. And guess what, Tesla and similar companies would beat the crap out of Mercedes and everyone else. Maybe the next world champ would be Alexander Albon driving for Rimac Concept X Racing. Would that be a honest twist in the story? Nope. That would be plain corruption and cheating. Just like it is now. Mercedes didn't show their "brains". Other teams came up with clever innovations too. But FIA banned them. While they allowed almost all innovations by Mercedes, even if the other teams were complaining. FIA just doesn't care about the audience, or other teams, they are Mercedes bitch. There was never such a dominant car in the recent history of F1, for such a long time. This is just perversion. I bet that each steward gets a new Mercedes every year, "for no reason at all". No wonder that Safety Car is also a Mercedes. They should rename F1 into "Mercedes racing series" so that people know what it's really about.
@GP2_Engine Mercedes started developing V6 engines a few years before other teams. By the time other teams learned about the switch, Mercedes already had 3 years of development of the new engines. By 2014 other teams had 4 years of development, while Mercedes had 7 years. That's how they became so dominant. The best decision by FIA would be to change the specs in 2010 to nullify the Mercedes efforts. But instead they went along with the Mercedes specs, giving them unfair advantage in 2014. Also, Mercedes was burning motor oil together with fuel, to produce extra power and work around the fuel consumption limitation. Also, any aerodynamic improvement developed by other teams were banned by FIA. Maybe you have learned there will be big changes in 2022 "to make racing better". Naive people think this will make teams more even, and enable more fair competition. Wrong. The main change is to reduce dirty air behind the cars. That sounds good, right? Less turbulence means more overtaking. That's good, right? And then you learn that Mercedes cars are the most sensitive to turbulence. Hence, they will make all cars produce less of dirty air to additionally increase the dominance of Mercedes. Not to make racing more fair, but to make it even more unfair. The biggest area of Mercedes dominance is the V6 hybrid engine, so if they really wanted to equalize teams, that's where they had to make changes. But they didn't. Instead they made changes in the only area where other cars were better than Mercedes. FIA wants Mercedes to keep their dominance they unfairly gained in 2014 (again by a FIA decision). That means Mercedes is cheating since 2014. It's basically identical to catching an athlete using doping. So, what does Olympic Board do when someone is caught cheating? They take away their rewards and medals, and all the media talks about it. That's exactly what should happen to Mercedes and their drivers. All their results from 2014 to 2020 should be deleted, awards removed, and they should be publicly ashamed. But FIA would never do that while they are on Mercedes payroll.
