Bahrain GP 2009 - Race 4/17

They should ban over the air tactics during the race and leave it up to the drivers to work out their strategeis if conditions or fortunes change.

Also, is by some flying mirace Piquet is here next year, I put £10 on him running out of fuel first.
 
AcidHell2 said:
why?
Click to expand...

More driver involvement rather than them being mollycoddled by the team and be told to do XYZ to save fuel. Otherwise I envisage teams settling for a place and less racing going on.

We also haven't heard any more about this medals rubbish. With more at stake for the win, could see a lot of racing up the front (although it is a stupid system for teams not capable of a win).
 
What happens if you're stuck behind a safety car for 15 minutes, going slow and weaving and thus tanking your way through the fuel - everybody runs out of fuel (or Piquet wins :eek:)?
 
fini said:
What happens if you're stuck behind a safety car for 15 minutes, going slow and weaving and thus tanking your way through the fuel - everybody runs out of fuel (or Piquet wins :eek:)?
Click to expand...

The cars use far less fuel under the safety car, so that scenario is unlikely to play out :)
 
JRS said:
WOOHOO!!!!!!!!! Refuelling's gone! Only 15 years too late, but never mind. Presumably this will bring about some changes for qualifying as well.
Click to expand...

Couldn't be happier about that TBH and if they bring back low fuel quallies I will watch it again. Instead of turning on the last 5 minutes.

All they need to do is low fuel runs 12-18 laps per car, atleast 4 laps which have to be used in the first 15 or you lose them, 8 in the first half hour.

Also then get rid of the stupid rule of being blocked in qualifying because someone happens to be within 100 yards of you.

Really pleased with the budget as well. Hopefully F1 can now become desirable for new teams and sponsors like Coke, Pepsi, McDonalds etc.
 
I'm all for changes that promote over-taking etc, put more emphasis on the driver, but I don't see any of the changes really having a more positive impact on those criteria.

e.g. I would have thought that fuel consumption is much more a factor of the engine's design, and not the drivers right foot..
 
Demon said:
I'm all for changes that promote over-taking etc, put more emphasis on the driver, but I don't see any of the changes really having a more positive impact on those criteria.

e.g. I would have thought that fuel consumption is much more a factor of the engine's design, and not the drivers right foot..
Click to expand...

The emphasis on the driver is if you don't overtake you won't win. No more waiting til a pitstop window putting in 3 fast laps and coming out in front. Which to me has always been the biggest gayest form of cop out racing.

I can understand why they did it, zero risk but as a fan who likes to see the passes done on track I hate it. Perhaps some of these monkeys might now actually learn some race craft to stay in a race instead of cutting the track off to a car alongside.

Heavy cars, Slick tyres and passing needed on the track, I'd be phoning up to check the availability of Montoya. This series is going to made for someone like him.
 
montoya didnt like formula one because it was far to serious and stressful for him, he went back to nascar because it is aparently more fun
 
dannyjo22 said:
The emphasis on the driver is if you don't overtake you won't win. No more waiting til a pitstop window putting in 3 fast laps and coming out in front.
Click to expand...

There's a reason for that running in clean air = faster lap times. I can't see this having much at all on the overtaking. There already is a lot of overtaking. you will never have as much as motorbikes or saloon racing. As they punch a bigger hole in the air and they have very detailed aerodynamics. meaning dirty air hurts them a lot more. Than over car series.
Passing on track is needed and has been needed for years and it happens.
 
I like tactics to do with pitstops, and the fact that lighter cars get slowed behind heavier ones etc - and some cars using other tyres better so using them at different parts of the race

Im not at all sure about no refueling - as I think this will slow down racing as a whole (instead of some cars going as fast as possible two or three times per race - just before each fuel pitstop, it will only happen at the end of the race) not only that but there will be less differential of speed between most of the cars - because they will all be on no fuel (ok tyre usage will come into it but not that much) - at least now during pitstops you get the different levels of fuel affecting lap times and messing other strategies up

As demon said, it could end up MORE processional rather than less

with additional minimum weight of 1/2 a KERS system, is this forcing teams to develop it - its already been proven that you can win without it ... or is that just because those teams with it have dropped the (design) ball this year?
 
Overlag said:
now we going to have fat and heavy cars lumbering around the track doing 1minute 50seconds instead of 1minute 20 etc. Seems a backwards step to me.
Click to expand...

The pre-'94 cars were hardly lumbering behemoths. And they had larger, heavier, less well developed engines than the current crop so probably needed to carry even more fuel. We aren't about to see wallowing hippo-like cars take to the track.

If they don't mandate a fuel tank size, I can see three schools of thought emerge:

1) run a less powerful engine that requires less fuel, car is therefore lighter for most of the race.
2) run a more powerful engine that requires more fuel, car is heavier initially but faster once the fuel burns down.
3) a halfway house between the two that in general won't have the initial getaway speed of the lower powered cars or have quite as much finishing pace as the higher powered ones.

Hopefully I'm right and we'll see something like that. It'd certainly add back a dimension that F1 lost a long time ago.
 
So more rule changes from 2010 :rolleyes: When will they ever stop with the rule changes!

Anyway, regarding the refueling. Im abit disappoined that its gone. Ive always like to see the different tactics and fuel loads used by the teams for a number of reasons. It always gave us some unexpected qualifying pole positions / grid positions and good race viewing.

So, larger fuel tanks needed then? Hence why they have increased the minimum weight limit. Race distances to stay the same? Surely this is going to make the cars slower with the manufacturers designing 'greener', more fuel efficent engines.

Saying that though, I guess with it gone, it will make qualfiying more balanced across the board. It will be down to the raw pace of the car. Qualifying change will definatly be needed.

Regards the tyre warmers, why take them away? I dont really see the point in it tbh. Isn't F1 trying to be more safter?


Just got this from Lee McKenzie's twitter page. Talking about the budget caps.

Teams who join up will be allowed more technical freedom,movable wings,no rev limit for engines,unlimited out-of-season track testing
Click to expand...

Huge benefits if you stay within budget. No brainer really!
 
AcidHell2 said:
Should close the gaps up. I imagine only a few teams would not do that. Ferrari, mcLaren. Large teams with secure large funds.
Click to expand...
McLaren might not be able to. With Mercedes having some financial issues they might tell McLaren to go for the budget option. They get to stay in F1 but without shelling out loads of cash.
 
Ban on refueling, bad idea.

Ban on refueling, return to low fuel qualifing, and other things that can provide a mix in cars pace to replace the speed differences differing fuel loads have, good idea.

Untill the FIA expand upon the ban on refueling, im sticking to it being a bad idea. On its own it makes no sence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom