2005 United States Grand Prix
- Thread starter Flibster
- Start date
'FIA Designated supplier' is currently top of my list of phrases that annoy me. F1 is not stock car racing (just look at the coma-inducing Nascars...).
And the money say, Ferrari will 'save' from restricted testing, they'll plough into chassis design and wind tunnel hours, and still produce a field-beating car. I don't think it'll affect the larger teams that much at all.
And the money say, Ferrari will 'save' from restricted testing, they'll plough into chassis design and wind tunnel hours, and still produce a field-beating car. I don't think it'll affect the larger teams that much at all.
More seriously...
Well I said before that in my view they should just abolish all aerodynamic downforce and re-introduce slick tyres. I see that this is sort of in there, although I'm not sure why they're talking about reducing downforce by 90%, why not just go the whole hog and eliminate it?
The main advantages of this would be:
1. Massively reducing costs as the huge aero budgets and wind tunnels would no longer be needed
2. Removing all the negative aerodynamic effects of following another car closely, thus aiding overtaking
3. Slowing the cars down a bit, although the re-introduction of slicks would offset a large part of the aerodynamic losses
I really can't see why they don't just do this and forget about all the other nonsense. Flibster is right about this becoming more like a single-make racing series, with standard ECUs and tyres, together with the continually increasing restrictions on engine configuration, design and longevity, F1 is hardly the pinnacle of motorsport that it purports to be.
Well I said before that in my view they should just abolish all aerodynamic downforce and re-introduce slick tyres. I see that this is sort of in there, although I'm not sure why they're talking about reducing downforce by 90%, why not just go the whole hog and eliminate it?
The main advantages of this would be:
1. Massively reducing costs as the huge aero budgets and wind tunnels would no longer be needed
2. Removing all the negative aerodynamic effects of following another car closely, thus aiding overtaking
3. Slowing the cars down a bit, although the re-introduction of slicks would offset a large part of the aerodynamic losses
I really can't see why they don't just do this and forget about all the other nonsense. Flibster is right about this becoming more like a single-make racing series, with standard ECUs and tyres, together with the continually increasing restrictions on engine configuration, design and longevity, F1 is hardly the pinnacle of motorsport that it purports to be.
Mechanical gearbox and clutch linkages? **** YES!
Slicks and low downforce are a VeryGoodThing®. As Vertigo1 noted, lower aerodynamic downforce allows cars to race closer as they can follow each other more closely. Higher mechanical grip from nice fat slicks means that cornering will be much more interesting.
High mechanical grip and low downforce leads to a higher chance of overtaking.
As for being unable to overtake a car identical to your own, evidently you have not watched a single-make series...They prove to be some of the most exciting, close and tightly-fought series around. The onus is being shifted from the car to the driver which is, in my opinion, a good thing.
*n
Slicks and low downforce are a VeryGoodThing®. As Vertigo1 noted, lower aerodynamic downforce allows cars to race closer as they can follow each other more closely. Higher mechanical grip from nice fat slicks means that cornering will be much more interesting.
High mechanical grip and low downforce leads to a higher chance of overtaking.
As for being unable to overtake a car identical to your own, evidently you have not watched a single-make series...They prove to be some of the most exciting, close and tightly-fought series around. The onus is being shifted from the car to the driver which is, in my opinion, a good thing.
*n
Flibster said:
That's one I kind of disagree with, as I'm interested in trying to get into F1 engineering, and the FIA turning around and saying, no, you've got to hold back the potential of this car, as the public don't give a damn about how well engineered the car is. I can see why they would want that, but there are plenty of people out there that are interested in the very technical things which go on.
Saying that, I didn't like any of the new changes for this season, but my god, it's been one great season so far
Last edited:
ConfusedTA said:
If you haven't watched since the late '90s then how do you know that?
This season is the most exciting one in years. It's like '92/'93/'94 all over again.
With the 2008 rules, will we see a return to Gilles Villeneuve/René Arnoux-style scrapping that you get with high amounts of mechanical grip.
*n
I think these rule changes are generally positive - by 2008 the world is likely to be falling into global recession, large sponsorship budgets will evaporate and F1 as it is funded today will be imposable. Dramatically reducing costs in the future is the only way F1 is going to be able to continue.
From the viewing point of view it makes no difference to me if the cars are lapping in 1:30 or 1:40 min:sec, so absolute speed isn’t that important. I think the spectacle would be improved if there were less difference between the cars. I'd rather see 20 cars only 5 sec apart on the grid rather than 10. It's no fun watching the Jordans and Minardis getting lapped on lap 20 – give everyone the same gear box, breaks, tires etc it'll look better.
From the viewing point of view it makes no difference to me if the cars are lapping in 1:30 or 1:40 min:sec, so absolute speed isn’t that important. I think the spectacle would be improved if there were less difference between the cars. I'd rather see 20 cars only 5 sec apart on the grid rather than 10. It's no fun watching the Jordans and Minardis getting lapped on lap 20 – give everyone the same gear box, breaks, tires etc it'll look better.
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 1,601
- Location
- Fab36 Dresden
Reminds me a lot of the ground effect era. If that promotes two racing lines around a corner then okay. But I think FIA has missed half of the problem, boring circuits, if you put in a 5% bank on the outside of corners, then does this allow side by side racing, ( scalextric anyone ?)
It's a shame that we've got to this point, but at least the FIA are very open for input from a wide range of people. Just to echo some comments, this season has been fantastic, not only the arrival of more teams fighting out at the top, but in terms of the actual on track racing.
F1's at a crossroads, does it carry on being the pinnacle of motorsport technology at the cost of huge funding & 'on track' excitement. Or does it change many rules to even the field, reduce the costs & increase the viewing pleasure. A tricky choice I can't make.
F1's at a crossroads, does it carry on being the pinnacle of motorsport technology at the cost of huge funding & 'on track' excitement. Or does it change many rules to even the field, reduce the costs & increase the viewing pleasure. A tricky choice I can't make.
Am I the only one who likes the sound of this proposed changes? Personally I think it will make F1 much more competitive and really give the drivers a chance to shine given the great emphasis being put on their performance rather than the cars.
Also, for the last number of years I have always regarded F1 as a super 'safe' sport in terms of the drivers not being injured. But for the last couple of races I've had to question if that really is still the case. The teams are pushing the envelope so far this season that it just needs that 'what-if' to happen...
Granted F1 has always been built around the high-speed danger, but it just feels more present today than it has been in recent times.
Granted F1 has always been built around the high-speed danger, but it just feels more present today than it has been in recent times.
Trojan I suggest that you watch the new A1GP thing as they all have the same car - the whole point of F1 iis that every car is different and the different designers and engineers do battle to try and get their car as competitive as others. Yes some changes do need to be made to reduce the ever increasing costs, but what Max Mosley is suggesting is madness.
Also everyone - quick question about the qualifying times tomorrow. Do you want me to post the qualy times after it takes place or what until after ITV have shown their program? I cant remember what Simon/Flibster normally does. Majbe provide a link to the times from 6ish until midnight then update the post with the times after the program has finished? Sound OK?
Also everyone - quick question about the qualifying times tomorrow. Do you want me to post the qualy times after it takes place or what until after ITV have shown their program? I cant remember what Simon/Flibster normally does. Majbe provide a link to the times from 6ish until midnight then update the post with the times after the program has finished? Sound OK?
They look like a good thing to me really...
Wider cars, slick tyres, and less aero - brilliant idea. Remember the narrower cars, grooved tyres that came in in '98? That, for me was when F1 got boring. Reverting back to wider cars with slicks will be great. Also, they're proposing bigger wheels - fantastic, we can look forward to huge 70s style slicks on the back of the cars!
Also - mechanical clutch and gearchange linkeages. Great! An actual clutch pedal - amazing! We probably won't see actual gearsticks, but a paddle shift mechanical linkeage would be cool.
Standardised gearboxes and brakes won't make that much difference anyway. Most teams (I think) pretty much use the same(ish) brakes anyways (there's only so much braking force that can be applied, and I doubt any teams are using sub-standard brakes), and in the grand scheme of things, we won't even notice the standardised gearbox thing.
Driver operated start button - again, ace. Just 'cause of a spin and a stall, you'll no longer be out of the race. Also, less hassle with mechanics on the grid, starting cars like they do atm.
Standardised ECUs etc., again we probably won't even notice the difference this makes to F1 - all the teams ECUs pretty much do exactly the same job, as well as it's possible to do it anyway, so it's not going to make much of a difference there.
From those regs, it does look a bit like dumbing down...but back in the 60s, everyone used the ZF gearbox and the Coventry Climax engine...then everyone used the Ford DFV... It was optional, but pretty much standard, and the racing was great. Standardised parts usually means closer racing, and with 90% of the downforce going, we'll doubtless see closer racing again.
IMO, all the teams are so close to the pinnacle of what a car can actually do on the track at the moment, that standardising things like gearboxes, brakes, tyres, ECUs and things like that will be pretty transparent to us.
Wider cars, slick tyres, and less aero - brilliant idea. Remember the narrower cars, grooved tyres that came in in '98? That, for me was when F1 got boring. Reverting back to wider cars with slicks will be great. Also, they're proposing bigger wheels - fantastic, we can look forward to huge 70s style slicks on the back of the cars!
Also - mechanical clutch and gearchange linkeages. Great! An actual clutch pedal - amazing! We probably won't see actual gearsticks, but a paddle shift mechanical linkeage would be cool.
Standardised gearboxes and brakes won't make that much difference anyway. Most teams (I think) pretty much use the same(ish) brakes anyways (there's only so much braking force that can be applied, and I doubt any teams are using sub-standard brakes), and in the grand scheme of things, we won't even notice the standardised gearbox thing.
Driver operated start button - again, ace. Just 'cause of a spin and a stall, you'll no longer be out of the race. Also, less hassle with mechanics on the grid, starting cars like they do atm.
Standardised ECUs etc., again we probably won't even notice the difference this makes to F1 - all the teams ECUs pretty much do exactly the same job, as well as it's possible to do it anyway, so it's not going to make much of a difference there.
From those regs, it does look a bit like dumbing down...but back in the 60s, everyone used the ZF gearbox and the Coventry Climax engine...then everyone used the Ford DFV... It was optional, but pretty much standard, and the racing was great. Standardised parts usually means closer racing, and with 90% of the downforce going, we'll doubtless see closer racing again.
IMO, all the teams are so close to the pinnacle of what a car can actually do on the track at the moment, that standardising things like gearboxes, brakes, tyres, ECUs and things like that will be pretty transparent to us.