***Official 2010 F1 thread***

Sumanji said:
The World Cup should hammer turn out for the summer races... so I might investigate which GP's fall on big match days :p
Click to expand...

Lol. Silverstone then.

Cant belive they let that happen. I was there 4 years back when England played in a world cup qualifyer on the Saturday. They showed the game on all the big screens round the track, so I had no idea what was going on in the GP2 race that was on at the same time!

Atleast the Final will be on after the F1, and hopefully before the Music Concert. If England make it it might be a good atmosphere (i.e. a Motorsport crowd, rather than a football crowd, so no bar fights), but if we dont and they still show it it will be 2 hours of boredom for me.
 
It's about time someone high-up mentioned the crappy circuits... why does Herman Tilke keep getting hired to design these glorified ovals?!
 
Sumanji said:
why does Herman Tilke keep getting hired to design these glorified ovals?!
Click to expand...

Well that's a bold statement, and not quite so clear cut as that, though I understand you're making a point so that's OK. I have to agree though, the best races invariably come from the classic tracks we all love in my opinion.
 
Kermit said:
I don't often read this thread off season but do keep upto date on crash and autpsport and saw this on crash.net

http://www.crash.net/f1/news/155688...rcuits__not_cars__for_lack_of_overtaking.html

I think Adrian Newey (Red Bull Racing) and Sam Michael (Williams) are spot on. What do you reckon?
Click to expand...

With the risk of getting fence marks on my behind, I would say they're mostly right.

Almost all of the Tilke-designed circuits have been snooze-fests, aside from the odd gem of a corner such as turn 8 at the Istanbul circuit. Looking at more established venues, the slow-speed corner before and/or after a long straight does seem to be the key: look at the Melbourne Hairpin at Magny Cours, Turn 1 at Interlagos and to a lesser extent the hairpin (turn 10) at the Montreal circuit for example.

However, there is little doubt that the cars have become far more aerodynamically sensitive, especially in the last 15 years or so. Looking back (thanks to YouTube) to races such as Mexico 1990 - where Prost won from 13th on the grid - you can see the cars able to follow one-another closely through corners. Also, the effect of the aerodynamic hole in the air (or 'tow' as Murray Walker and James Hunt used to refer to it as) is much less evident in recent years, mainly because the cars aren't able to follow one-another closely enough through anything other than low-speed corners and chicanes where any aero penalty is negligible to take advantage of the 'tow' down the straight.

My 2p anyway. I'd love to see them go back to the car designs of c.1989/1990 as they were so beautifully aerodynamically 'clean' unlike the flip-up clad beasts of the noughties.
 
alexhull24 said:
Well that's a bold statement, and not quite so clear cut as that, though I understand you're making a point so that's OK.
Click to expand...

I was just playing amateur dramatics for the lulz :D

Although my core point still stands - Tilke circuits make for boring races.

Su
 
Last edited:
Tilke tracks often confuse and dissapoint. Take Abu Dhabi. On paper, you had a tight hairpin, followed by the longest straight in F1, followed by a tight bend... great for overtaking!

But in reality you got a chicane before the hairpin that single filed everyone, then the long straight then another chicane... and then another long straight, a tight bend, and then another chicane.... :(

The new layout at Hokenheim works because its simple, tight corner - long flat out bit - hairpin. Sticking all these fidly crappy bits everywhere just means if you do get alongside someone, you then have to drop back in behind them or risk bashing some curbs.
 
Posted this in the launch thread but thought I'd put it here as well:

59537099.jpg


63894408.jpg


69829212.jpg


53039915.jpg
 
Last edited:
It is understood that efforts are now being made to sort out the wording of the regulations to ensure that there are no loopholes that will allow anyone to continue using a double diffuser.
Click to expand...

That's easy. Find the current loophole and just add an asterix to the end.

Then a mahoosive "no double defusers or variants thereof kthnxbye" in the footer.
 
I'm growing tired of them trying to make the cars slower. It takes a bit of shine off of the sport in my opinion. I just wish they'd find an alternative fuel and leave it at that. I'm all for making the sport safer, but Schumacher and Hakkinen did just fine with their cars.

If it's true that all the cars in the world don't do as much damage to the Earth as they want to make us think, then I'd wish they would stop gimping F1.

Were there money worries during 90s? It just seems "we must cut costs!" has become their slogan these last three years or so.
 
Last edited:
I (think) I've said this before, and I'll say it again.

Minimum weight limit
Physical dimension limit
Engine capacity limit
(Maybe a reasonable budget cap - say €100m)

Everything else unrestricted - let the best team win :D

Think of all the funky car designs that would emerge... it would be like Wipeout / F-Zero / Extreme-G!

Su
 
Last edited:
.Sean said:
I'm growing tired of them trying to make the cars slower. It takes a bit of shine off of the sport in my opinion. I just wish they'd find an alternative fuel and leave it at that. I'm all for making the sport safer, but Schumacher and Hakkinen did just fine with their cars.

If it's true that all the cars in the world don't do as much damage to the Earth as they want to make us think, then I'd wish they would stop gimping F1.

Were there money worries during 90s? It just seems "we must cut costs!" has become their slogan these last three years or so.
Click to expand...

The problem is that if they didnt tighten/change the regs, every year, cars would eventually be going at 600mph or even faster. With this in mind, the FIA have to repeatedly reign back car designs to ensure their top speed and lap times remain similar, from year to year.

With regards to costs: During the last 17 years budgets have increased substantially. To give you an idea, in the early 90s, Ferrari were the team with consistently the biggest budget in F1. This was around the US$80M-US$100M. The top team at the time was Williams, with a budget of around US$50M. If you compare this with last year, where Toyota had a budget of around US$450M. This gives you an idea of just how high F1 budgets have increased over the decade and need to be reduced or at least kept in check.
 
sunama said:
The problem is that if they didnt tighten/change the regs, every year, cars would eventually be going at 600mph or even faster. With this in mind, the FIA have to repeatedly reign back car designs to ensure their top speed and lap times remain similar, from year to year.

With regards to costs: During the last 17 years budgets have increased substantially. To give you an idea, in the early 90s, Ferrari were the team with consistently the biggest budget in F1. This was around the US$80M-US$100M. The top team at the time was Williams, with a budget of around US$50M. If you compare this with last year, where Toyota had a budget of around US$450M. This gives you an idea of just how high F1 budgets have increased over the decade and need to be reduced or at least kept in check.
Click to expand...

Inflation doesnt affect F1 teams then? Petrol was about 40 pence per litre in 1990 and average of 112 pence now which makes the budget jump look a lot better than your post suggests.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom