Originally Posted by Boomer
This was my point. Every time we try to regulate speed, it gets overcome by innovation to recover that speed. My illustration was with WRC since that's the field of racing I follow (far more than F1). In any case, while I did not state it well, you did.
I think Josh probably did the best summary of the overall points. . .hats off Mr. Cyrul.
Ok, got it. Glad we agree
. Maybe I'll learn how to read now
I also agree with Josh's post. I think it covers most of the problems that we (will soon) face.
Some have argued that things will continue to develop and that even if we make changes like reducing the cell count we will have similar discussions a few years later. I fully agree. But contrary to using that as an argument to not bother I see that as the best argument to make changes now eventhough the problems don't seem to be having a direct effect on the number of people driving touring cars at the moment. That effect will come and we need to stay ahead of it. When the time comes in a couple of years time that some of the problems that are being discussed here surface again despite rule changes we make now, we have the discussion again and make changes again for the exact same reason.
This discussion is not really about going fast or not going fast. It is also not about wanting to push the limit. This discussion is where we put that limit for the next few years. There will allways be a limit and it is defined by the rules we adopt. Manufacturors will allways try and find ways to get the most out of their products and design the best possible products that the rules allow. That will not change whatever rules we adopt. So I suggest we quit worrying about that part of the discussion.