Gotta admit, i know nothing about the actual technical side of it all. I'm no engineer. It does sound encouraging that the tech will be filtering its way down to us consumers though..
Poll: 2014 F1 engines
- Thread starter andicole0
- Start date
Gotta admit, i know nothing about the actual technical side of it all. I'm no engineer. It does sound encouraging that the tech will be filtering its way down to us consumers though..
From what I understand the Audi and Porsche Le Mans cars will run 2 variations of turbo energy recovery systems. There is pace behind rumoures Ferrari will go to Le Man's with and F1 engine too. Turbo based ERS is definitely something that's coming our way.
Yes seriously. What I mean is that the quality of racing alone is not all that matters. Of course it does matter, but it isn't the only thing that matters. If it was then some of the ultra-competitive formulas, or go-karting would be as popular as F1.
People follow F1 for different reasons. There is no doubt that the new engines and regulations pose many technical challenges so from a technical perspective I agree that 2014 F1 is right up there. However, for many of us (quite a sizeable number by the poll here and elsewhere) the new engines lose an important sensory element of F1. The noise.
Not just any noise either. The wail of a high-revving, normally aspirated engine with 8 cylinders or more is something to behold. Whatever you think of the new technology that noise for me is F1. There's nothing else like it and that's one of the reasons it's so special.
Love him or hate him, Bernie is no fool, and he instantly recognised that the new engine sound will cost F1 popularity. Ultimately, as I've said before, F1 is all about money so falling popularity is bad news.
I can only speak for myself but I had planned to attend Monaco and Spa this year but I'm not going to bother now. Time will tell whether this year was the year F1 lost it's magic. For me, sadly, it already has.
Last edited:
Just put this way, if you were to see a supersonic jet fly past, what would the biggest turn on be? Is it the piece of metal just whizzing through the air, or is the sound that comes after?
..it's mostly the sound that blows you away.
Thing is with F1, just depends how far you go back, you could say it's been going down hill for a long time. The rawness of the 60's/70's was a different era again, lads filling up fuel with a fag in their mouth you know, 3/4 people would die because of crashes every year, it was tough. There was no power steering and you had to change gear still. It was just different. Same can be said for nowadays.
Last edited:
The TV never conveyed the noise of the NAs fully. So the lower volume of the turbos is going to be negligable to the TV audience.
What it will affect is the track side audience, or more specifically any track side fans who have been to a race with NAs. They will notice. Seriously notice. I'm going to be able to hold a conversation with people next to me during a race for the first time ever (that isn't a good thing).
But that is ~100,000 people per race, compared to the millions watching on TV. The body shaking ear splitting ferocious pounding the NA engine note gives you IRL is something most viewers will have never known, so won't miss it. For most people the difference is that F1 cars used to go 'neeeowwww' and now go 'bbbrrrrrrrrr pew'. Remember, most F1 viewers aren't like us.
What it will affect is the track side audience, or more specifically any track side fans who have been to a race with NAs. They will notice. Seriously notice. I'm going to be able to hold a conversation with people next to me during a race for the first time ever (that isn't a good thing).
But that is ~100,000 people per race, compared to the millions watching on TV. The body shaking ear splitting ferocious pounding the NA engine note gives you IRL is something most viewers will have never known, so won't miss it. For most people the difference is that F1 cars used to go 'neeeowwww' and now go 'bbbrrrrrrrrr pew'. Remember, most F1 viewers aren't like us.
absolute rubbish
I think the announcer got it spot on as soon as the 2014 bit starts
I got bored watching the AUS gp, may as well all be in a prius going around whisper quiet
The TV footage never came close to actually being there. If it did you wouldn't have heard a word the commentators ever said during a race.
The body shaking force of the NAs Spie describes never got portrayed through the TV.
2014 is shaping up to be the most exciting season in aeons
I couldn't give a dead rats arse about the sound.
As for "live" The only time i ever decided to go to a grand prix (Silverstone in the Mansell era) I phoned up and enquired how much a ticket would be to be told £180 for some wind swept remote corner.
I replied "I want to watch it, not sponsor it" and put the phone down.
I'll stick to TV with all the home comforts. (mates round for a BBQ & beer without the queues and worry about drink driving)
I couldn't give a dead rats arse about the sound.
As for "live" The only time i ever decided to go to a grand prix (Silverstone in the Mansell era) I phoned up and enquired how much a ticket would be to be told £180 for some wind swept remote corner.
I replied "I want to watch it, not sponsor it" and put the phone down.
I'll stick to TV with all the home comforts. (mates round for a BBQ & beer without the queues and worry about drink driving)
That clip certainly puts it into perspective. If you're at the track the show will have lost a lot of the impact but for the other 99.999% watching it on TV it'll not make much difference .
(never been to a F1, I prefer MotoGP ... the old 500cc 2 strokes were much better than the new 4 strokes
)These are some very good points, if BS can't put bums on seats, its going to be harder to sell TV rights. He's a tremendous ring-master, no doubt, and sadly he may be right about the engine sounds. If you're not going, I'm sure many others will do the same. I have to say, having only attended one live GP, the attraction has probably diminished somewhat.
Sorry to hear that you'll miss out on Monaco, Spie (and nice to see you around the forum, btw) - a track that I would've thought brings you closer to the cars and diminishes the loss of sound!?
This undoubtedly true, it all adds to the visceral experience, but if we need road-car relevance, and advanced technology, and the price is the sound then its a price worth paying for the average F1 fan (or idiots like me, at least). Sad as it is to say that.
I think is the overriding point. It never came across on the TV, but what happens if the trackside numbers fall. With that said, money talks, if the viewing numbers fall, and the almight TV revenue goes with it, I'm sure they'll do something about it. You can't unring the bell though, so how do you have advanced engineering, and the V12/10/8 high rpm sounds that are now gone? Is F1 really ruined for the dedicated petrol-head?
The biggest threat to trackside attendance is the races being in countries where nobody wants to go and see it, while the circuits in the countries jammed full of fans are dropping off the calendar left right and centre.
TV revenue has very little to do with fan numbers. The track side fan numbers affect the revenue for the circuit itself, but not the broadcaster. If Bernie could find tracks willing to pay the hosting fees without needing to make the money back from tickets, F1 could be run with zero trackside spectators.
In fact, Bahrain already does this.
And why do you have to want high revving NAs to be considered a petrol head?
TV revenue has very little to do with fan numbers. The track side fan numbers affect the revenue for the circuit itself, but not the broadcaster. If Bernie could find tracks willing to pay the hosting fees without needing to make the money back from tickets, F1 could be run with zero trackside spectators.
In fact, Bahrain already does this.
And why do you have to want high revving NAs to be considered a petrol head?
Last edited:
Nail on the head there. Interestingly Korea and India have dropped off the calendar this year.
As for revs the V6s aren't exactly a Diesel. 15000 rpm is still higher than the pre-95 3.5L formula. mk17 is most likely trying to whip up the motors forum "elite".
As for revs the V6s aren't exactly a Diesel. 15000 rpm is still higher than the pre-95 3.5L formula. mk17 is most likely trying to whip up the motors forum "elite".
If Bernie can't sort out the horrible sound teams will end up with less money at the of the year.
As Bernie said “I was not horrified by the noise, I was horrified by the lack of it."
"Luca di Montezemolo he’s never had as many emails complaining and saying this isn’t Formula One.”
I think another 100 million spectators will stop watching this season.
As Bernie said “I was not horrified by the noise, I was horrified by the lack of it."
"Luca di Montezemolo he’s never had as many emails complaining and saying this isn’t Formula One.”
I think another 100 million spectators will stop watching this season.
While i prefer the sound of the old V8s, that's balanced out by being able to hear the crowd, people talking in the pitlane, the various turbo/hybrid noises, and also new manufacturers (honda) entering the sport. And of course not knowing who will win the title.
Although IMO it would be better if F1 had a more Le Mans like approach to engines, where teams have a limited amount of fuel per lap but are free to use different fuels, cylinder counts etc.
Although IMO it would be better if F1 had a more Le Mans like approach to engines, where teams have a limited amount of fuel per lap but are free to use different fuels, cylinder counts etc.
