Reliability...

[clv101]

This is how 2011 turned out:

The top three drivers only had four retirements between them, from 57 starts (7.0%).

Compare it to 1998:

Here the top three had 10 retirements from 48 starts, 20.1%!

Or 2000:

Here it was 9 from 51, 17.6%.

I actually preferred the high attrition rate. Does anyone else think F1 would be better with a higher, say double this year's 7% to 14%, attrition rate? That's still not as high as it was a ~decade ago.

 

[Glaucus]

Yep, said it in one of the posts last weekend.
Due to rules they aren't pushing the boundaries , retirements also as you say provided exit ent and unpredictability.

Bring back the reliability issues. But then if rules relaxed would teams do it. Or realise that finishing every race they can gain huge points, even if they aren't the fastest.

 

[joem1983]

Because of the fewer engine/gearbox rules the cars have become more reliable.
Has done nothing to stop costs as they simply spend money on development rather than replacing engines.

I really dont know if it would be better with more reliability issues. Doubt it.

 

[utajoker]

cars also arnt racing as hard looking after the tires so arnt pushing the equipment as much.

 

[Skeeter]

No, I don't think seasons where the results were defined by the luck of the drawn on reliability are better than ones where manufacturers have made enormous strides with reliability letting engines run at 18,000rpm for multiple races, reducing costs and letting driver skill shine without being undermined by bad luck.

 

[arknor]

cars also arnt racing as hard looking after the tires so arnt pushing the equipment as much.

yup managing the tyres for nearly the whole race and managing fuel.

lower rpms aswell

 

[FrankJH]

Doesnt quite tell the whole story though - some of those Retirements are from driver error / crashes rather than mechanical breakdowns

 

[clv101]

Doesnt quite tell the whole story though - some of those Retirements are from driver error / crashes rather than mechanical breakdowns

Sure - but generally speaking, the top three finishers don't make many driver errors and people still make errors in 2011 as they did in 1998. The main signal in that dataset is mechanical reliability.

 

[OpenToSuggestions]

Make an engine work at 19,000 rpm then reducing it to 18,000 rpm is going to (obviously) make it more reliable .

I want F1 where engines blow, wheels come off, gearboxes give in.

For Vettel to have almost no oil left in his gearbox and come 2nd is a sign of how F1 is year upon year getting more boring.

 

[Skeeter]

Reliable cars is making racing boring ?

How are races determined by complete luck better? You lot are always complaining that racing should be about driver skill.

 

[Duke]

When supporting Jordan I always wanted the top teams to have failures, so they could get a point Mechanical failures are pretty much a thing of the past but don't mind either way really. Maybe with the new engines coming in there maybe a few issues I guess.

 

[Deleted member 651465]

Let's be honest, watching schumachers engine go with 2 laps remaining is always going to be more exciting than a procession for 30 laps.

 

[arknor]

Let's be honest, watching schumachers engine go with 2 laps remaining is always going to be more exciting than a procession for 30 laps.

watching knowing someones car could break down at any time in the next 30 laps is always going to be much more exicting than knowing someone is in the lead and going to win the race in 30 laps aswell.

i could have turned off the tv after 10minutes of most races this year and guessed the top 6 and probably have been correct 80% of the time

 

[King Damager]

watching knowing someones car could break down at any time in the next 30 laps is always going to be much more exicting than knowing someone is in the lead and going to win the race in 30 laps aswell.

i could have turned off the tv after 10minutes of most races this year and guessed the top 6 and probably have been correct 80% of the time

Isn't it something like 5 drivers have been on the podium for the lat 20+ races or something.... Stupidly easy to predict anyway...

I must say, less reliability was nice... It would be nice if it wasn't Ferrari/red bull/Mclaren on the top... Saying that i wouldn't like to drop back to the same reliability for the end runners as we used to have....

I mean look at 13th and down in 1998 and 16th and down in 2000....

It'd be nice for less reliability in the front runners but still maintaining a reasonable level in the back/mid pack....

kd

 

[arknor]

i dont know i wouldnt mind the hrt blowing up and bringing out the safety car but without refueling theres no real stratergy anyway , safety car comes out the whole field pits for new tyres yawn
the whole field is always in sync and to me its boring i loved the 3-4 stop stratergy wins some drivers used to manage while everyone else was on 1-2stops.

watching a strategy unfold = brilliant
watching knowing everyone is basicly on the same stratergy = boring

 

[MissChief]

Bring back refuelling but also make the tanks big enough to run the whole race AND make a tyre hard enough to last the whole race. Then you'd see some strategy calls! Safety car? Leaders pit for fresh tyres, Lotus stay out, lead the race with Caterham and Sauber behind them. Or something.

 

[FrankJH]

Bring back refuelling but also make the tanks big enough to run the whole race AND make a tyre hard enough to last the whole race. Then you'd see some strategy calls! Safety car? Leaders pit for fresh tyres, Lotus stay out, lead the race with Caterham and Sauber behind them. Or something.

I see where you are going - but I dont believe you would.

All the top teams would still start (for the most part) on the softer / faster tyre and just enough fuel to get to the first stop (as that is most likely) going to be the fastest way (apart from heavy tyre wear circuits, which arent that many)

I also believe that they would be WAYYYYYYYYYYYY ahead of Sauber (let alone Lotus / Caterham) so unlikely they would ever lead the race anyway


edit - sorry you meant Lotus as in old Renault team lol ok well still unlikely to be leading the race (even amongst usual pit stops), Merc are more likely to (regularly) before Renault / Lotus


edit 2 - I guess its possible that if that were to happen we could og back to long and short wheel base versions of the cars (like happened a while ago for a few seasons on and off) to allow different fuel cell loads depending on the track - but I suspect they would stretegise during the design phase and possibly would never go for a fuel cell thats big enough for the whole race

 

[englishpremier]

Lets just give them a fuel allowance like in motogp and open up the engine development.

I loved it when we had different types of engines competing, e.g the v12 ferrari vs v10 renault

 

[clv101]

Lets just give them a fuel allowance like in motogp and open up the engine development.

I loved it when we had different types of engines competing, e.g the v12 ferrari vs v10 renault

I think this would be a really good idea. Maximum fuel allowance of say 150kg and do what you want with the engine. We'd see the full R&D effort trying to simultaneously maximize power and efficiency. Unfortunately, costs would spiral.

 

[Skeeter]

Unfortunately, costs would spiral.

And this is the killer blow.

The FIA are very aware of what happens when costs start to run out of control. They have to keep a leash on them to stop the sport killing itself.

I know we would all like to see more open development, but the options currently are a restricted F1, or no F1 after it kills itself with spiralling costs.