Changes I would like to see in F1

[Quartz]

Herewith three changes I would like to see:

The cars: narrow wheels. Make the wheels the same width as those on normal road cars. This will make the race more relevant to normal drivers and means that technologies will filter down to road cars more easily. It will also give the cars less grip which will slow the cars down and make races more exciting.

Qualification: cars that finished in the top 8 or 10 of the last race get a bye on Q1. This will allow more track space in Q1.

The race: eliminate grid place penalties for component changes. Rather, impose pit stop time penalties or (possibly multiple) drive-throughs. Grid place penalties are too severe and often prevent a fast driver from winning.

What do you think? Do you like my suggestions?

 

[MrKnifey]

Bad Suggestions.

Wheels/Tyres - Go watch DTM/WTCC/BTCC

Qually - Will have the same outcome, lower end teams out of qually early on

Race - The penalties system does need re-jigging.. but not sure how/what to do

 

[Quartz]

Bad Suggestions.

Wheels/Tyres - Go watch DTM/WTCC/BTCC

You're assuming I don't already.

Qually - Will have the same outcome, lower end teams out of qually early on

I disagree: more space means lower chances of interrupted laps.

 

[ThestigGT999]

some ideas from the other thread

1) Add another tyre Manufacture (Have them compete against each other), this will create more competition overall.

2) Additional race Performance points.

• Bonus point for leading a lap. (not a point per lap)
• Bonus point for leading the most laps.
• Bonus point for fastest lap.

3) Points for qualifying (top ten) and top ten reversed


4) remove the Monaco GP

5) optional Free practice four before the race like fp3 is before qualifying for the lower half of the teams based previous season constructions championships

so if it remains the same as it is next season these teams would get additional testing -
Toro Rosso
Renault
Haas-Ferrari
McLaren-Honda
Sauber-Ferrari

although this may not work with other races that go on

 

[GravyMonster]

Apart from Monaco, I cannot think of an instance where anyone was put out of Q1 due to traffic, and even then it was only because they screwed up their first runs.

Narrow wheels/tryes would make things worse IMO. The cars need more mechanical grip, not less.

 

[Calm]

I think this knock out Qualification we have at the moment just serves to needlessly drag out the session, I'd like to see them reduce it to 30 minutes and just let people run their laps whenever.

Component restrictions have always bugged me. Supposed, pinnacle of motor sport, and the drivers have to mollycoddle they're engine because that has to last you seven races! Let them blow a few up in practice so they can find where the limits are (good to watch), then bolt a new one in for the race.. (which will probably blow up too, DRAMA!! \o/)

 

[GravyMonster]

You must be new to F1. The current qualifying system is by far the best we've ever had. It does not need any changes.

What you propose is basically what we used to have until the early 2000s. In those sessions no one would venture out of the pits for the first 1/2 of the session as the track was too green and had little grip. Then you'd see the rear gunners come out to set some banker laps. Then in the last 10 minutes the big guns would come out and set some times. If you weren't asleep by that point, you may see some action, but probably not.

With the way it works now there's always that constant excitement not knowing if someone's going to get through to the next session or not, and the final flurry of laps in Q3. Plus the strategy of faster cars trying to use slower tyres in Q1 to save the best for the race.

I agree about component restrictions and penalties, though. People seem to miss the fact that the cost of engines is in R&D, not pure material costs and manufacturing. The FIA mandated the 4 (and now 3) engine rule per year to save costs, but the effect its had is marginal. Teams are still spending at least $10m+ per year on 3 engines and ancillaries per car instead of 20 or more. Give drivers more engines and let them blow it up 100m after the finish line, and don't penalise anyone if it does.

 

[MagicBoy]

Herewith three changes I would like to see:

The cars: narrow wheels. Make the wheels the same width as those on normal road cars. This will make the race more relevant to normal drivers and means that technologies will filter down to road cars more easily. It will also give the cars less grip which will slow the cars down and make races more exciting.

Yeah, there's lots of relevant tyre technology crossover possible between single seater cars that weigh 600kg, have 800+hp and enough downforce to drive upside down ... and a normal road car.

Those who want relevant racing can go watch saloon/touring cars.

Qualification: cars that finished in the top 8 or 10 of the last race get a bye on Q1. This will allow more track space in Q1.

Track space isn't an issue anywhere other than Monaco.

The race: eliminate grid place penalties for component changes. Rather, impose pit stop time penalties or (possibly multiple) drive-throughs. Grid place penalties are too severe and often prevent a fast driver from winning.

What do you think? Do you like my suggestions?

I think they're terrible.

 

[Calm]

You must be new to F1. The current qualifying system is by far the best we've ever had. It does not need any changes.

What you propose is basically what we used to have until the early 2000s. In those sessions no one would venture out of the pits for the first 1/2 of the session as the track was too green and had little grip. Then you'd see the rear gunners come out to set some banker laps. Then in the last 10 minutes the big guns would come out and set some times. If you weren't asleep by that point, you may see some action, but probably not.

With the way it works now there's always that constant excitement not knowing if someone's going to get through to the next session or not, and the final flurry of laps in Q3. Plus the strategy of faster cars trying to use slower tyres in Q1 to save the best for the race.

I remember back then, infact i vaguely remember Qualifying being held over two days at one point.

All the recent qualifying formats have been devised to try and fill a 1 hour time slot, because, as you said, people used to sit around doing sod all most of the session.

I just think even with the current format, if you were to ditch Q1, knock out a few more people in Q2, and have Q3 the same. You could easily half the time, and get near enough the same results.

 

[MissChief]

You must be new to F1. The current qualifying system is by far the best we've ever had. It does not need any changes.

What you propose is basically what we used to have until the early 2000s. In those sessions no one would venture out of the pits for the first 1/2 of the session as the track was too green and had little grip. Then you'd see the rear gunners come out to set some banker laps. Then in the last 10 minutes the big guns would come out and set some times. If you weren't asleep by that point, you may see some action, but probably not.

With the way it works now there's always that constant excitement not knowing if someone's going to get through to the next session or not, and the final flurry of laps in Q3. Plus the strategy of faster cars trying to use slower tyres in Q1 to save the best for the race.

I agree about component restrictions and penalties, though. People seem to miss the fact that the cost of engines is in R&D, not pure material costs and manufacturing. The FIA mandated the 4 (and now 3) engine rule per year to save costs, but the effect its had is marginal. Teams are still spending at least $10m+ per year on 3 engines and ancillaries per car instead of 20 or more. Give drivers more engines and let them blow it up 100m after the finish line, and don't penalise anyone if it does.

The current limitations on components were put in place to reduce overall spending by engine manufacturers and reduce their options and bring them in line with their customer teams. Previously engines used to be changed after every session with upwards of 30 engine blocks and associated parts arriving at the track every race. Clearly with the expensive engines these days that couldn't continue and customer teams couldn't afford to pay for this too.

 

[MagicBoy]

I remember back then, infact i vaguely remember Qualifying being held over two days at one point.

Yeah, there were hour long Friday and Saturday Q sessions until 1996. When TV started regularly showing the Q sessions then they changed the format to improve the show, as it didn't make much sense to the viewers if it rained on Saturday and no-one ran and a lap they didn't see from Friday took the pole...

 

[chrcoluk]

F1's biggest problem is so many different things wanted by different people, in particularly different teams.

To me I want the following

refuelling
race fuel in Q3
reduced front aero
increased engine power
testing allowed again
P1 P2 removed.
P3 limited just to ensure cars work safely. Quali and race less predictable due to cars not been optimised in practice.
Replacement of P1 P2 is testing sessions on monday after race.

 

[The_Abyss]

F1 would have better chance of improvements actually turning into improvements if people stopped thinking about what changes they want and began thinking about what outcomes they want to achieve before thinking about the changes that might deliver them.

 

[MagicBoy]

Why do you want P1 and P2 removed? There's no testing allowed, it's borderline dangerous with cars that develop from race to race.

 

[MissChief]

F1's biggest problem is so many different things wanted by different people, in particularly different teams.

To me I want the following

refuelling
race fuel in Q3
reduced front aero
increased engine power
testing allowed again
P1 P2 removed.
P3 limited just to ensure cars work safely. Quali and race less predictable due to cars not been optimised in practice.
Replacement of P1 P2 is testing sessions on monday after race.

Refuelling has been proven EVERY TIME to reduce on track passing. You don't want it back, you really don't.
This one I can agree with as it forces a higher element of strategy and means cars behind have a better chance of catching the front runners.
Also agreed, but without reducing the wake turbulence from the rear of the car this would make it harder for a car to follow than easier.
Testing unfairly treats smaller teams with lower budgets. How often do you think Williams will be able to go testing compared to Ferrari who used to have an entirely separate testing team with dozens of engineers pounding round Fiorano every week?
The practice sessions are there to get the drivers used to the track and check for any issues. It's also unfair on fans who pay for weekend tickets too.
Testing after the race isn't always possible, especially on street circuits and back to back races.

 

[chrcoluk]

Even brundle says it MagicBoy, the problem with 3 practice sessions is the teams work out who is fastest over those sessions, they know where each are, and you much less likely to see a mixed up grid because by the time quali comes the drivers have tuned themselves to the track.

I prefer to see errors been made, drivers still trying to find limits etc. in quali. Then we get mixed up grids more often, not just in freak sessions and wet weather.

Most people think refuelling reduces overtaking, but the overtaking stats coincide with other changes in the sport. Refuelling means cars will be pushed more in their stints, and adds more of a strategy element if there is more stops, more stops also means tryes can be pushed harder I hate the current endurance long runs we have now.

The removal of testing seems to have done nothing to reduce costs, as generally if you got no testing you bringing more dud parts to races which makes r&d costs skyrocket. The proper way of reducing costs is stop banning everything thats innovative then teams can stick to new features on their cars for longer. Also F1 isnt F1 if its done on a budget.

But as I Said before, I didnt expect people to agree with my ideas, people wont ever agree on the future of F1, but lets hear your ideas guys.

 

[MikeTheNative]

I'm sure the season after refuelling was banned there was no DRS or hybrid and yet overtaking increased. Narrower tyres would be the cars are more aero dependent and more affected by dirty air. I also agree that current qualifying is much better than the one long session they used to have.

 

[MagicBoy]

Even brundle says it MagicBoy, the problem with 3 practice sessions is the teams work out who is fastest over those sessions, they know where each are, and you much less likely to see a mixed up grid because by the time quali comes the drivers have tuned themselves to the track.

Brundle usually speaks sense, but I don't agree with him on that one. Friday is also an opportunity to run junior drivers, which is a good thing given the limited testing.

Bringing unlimited testing back would be a retrograde step. It would benefit Ferrari and Mercedes, all the other teams just see the costs spiral out of control. F1 needs cost-control with some teeth and the head count limit that comes with it, otherwise it's a two team race while everyone else tries desperately to stay solvent.

 

[mmj_uk]

Refuelling has been proven EVERY TIME to reduce on track passing. You don't want it back, you really don't.

I'd argue that with DRS and KERS there's less need to overtake via the pit lane these days and actually when refuelling is allowed you have cars carrying different levels of fuel at any given point in the race so passing happens more often due to different car weights. What seems to happen these days is when one team pits to try and get the 'undercut' the car it's trying to undercut just shadows the strategy 1 lap later and more often than not you wind up in the exact same position as before - both cars on same fuel, same tyre, same strategy. There's nobody taking any chances with strategy because due to fuel/tyre rules there is only really one strategy that works - there's no point in making 3 pit stops if you don't have the advantage of carrying less fuel to gain 2 seconds a lap etc. I think it would make F1 much more interesting particularly today when you have 2-3 teams on par with one another, the main reason people hated it was because Schumacher/Ferrari dominated the sport for years and used the undercut all the time but Vettel and Red Bull dominated the sport for years under the current rules and him driving off into the distance and cruising with everyone unable to catch him due to fuel level/tyre wear limitations and no differences in pit strategy was far more boring to watch imo.

 

[MissChief]

I'd argue that with DRS and KERS there's less need to overtake via the pit lane these days and actually when refuelling is allowed you have cars carrying different levels of fuel at any given point in the race so passing happens more often due to different weights. What seems to happen these days is when one team pits to try and get the 'undercut' the car it's trying to undercut just shadows the strategy 1 lap later and more often than not you wind up in the exact same position as before - both cars on same fuel, same tyre, same strategy. Nobody taking any chances with strategy because due to fuel/tyre rules there is only really one strategy that works - there's no point in making 3 pit stops if you don't have the advantage of carrying less fuel to gain 2 seconds a lap etc. I think it would make F1 much more interesting particularly today when you have 2-3 teams on par with one another, the main reason people hated it was because Schumacher/Ferrari dominated the sport for years but so did Vettel and Red Bull under the current rules and him driving off into the distance and cruising with everyone unable to catch him due to fuel level/tyre wear limitations was far more boring to watch.

Why pass on track when you can wait or pit early and take on less fuel and then pass when your rival pits for fuel? How exciting!