Symonds: 2017 cars look great


Formula 1 has succeeded in avoiding another ugly mess like the stepped-noses of 2012 with the 2017 designs; that’s according to Pat Symonds.

Although Symonds will not be present on the grid this season having left his role as Williams’ chief technical officer, the former Renault man played an integral role in the design of this year’s car.

“I think the cars look great,” he told

“I’ve said before I was really worried that they’d look quite retro, but they don’t. They look quite nice.

“As with all these things, we could have tidied up a few areas and done things better to improve the aesthetics of the cars. But it’s not like the horrible [stepped-noses] things we had in 2012 or that sort of time.”

But while the sport is confident that the new cars will be faster than their predecessors, it remains to be seen whether the increased downforce will improve the racing, or alter the pecking order.

“In terms of the racing I think the jury’s still out,” Symonds added, “but I do believe it has a very good chance of altering the status quo, and I think that’s quite a good thing, just because it’s a reset.

“One can understand why Mercedes were perhaps not quite so keen on any change.”

Looking to the future, which is now in the hands of F1’s new owners Liberty Media, Symonds has urged the new bosses to think about and implement a three-year strategy rather than changing the rules on a whim.

“I hope that if nothing else we have a strategy in F1,” he said. “We had a Strategy Group but they didn’t really understand the meaning of the word.

“Hopefully things can be thought through, and in addition to thinking it through you can be looking at where we might be in years to come.

“I’ve always worked on three-year plans. I revise those three-year plans, I don’t wait until the end of them and start again – I look at them at the end of six months, extend them by six months, and see what’s valid and what isn’t valid.

“I think F1 needs to do something similar – five years rather than three years because of the complexity of it.”