The near future of F1 is looking dull..

Yup, every point of every track doesn't have to be wide, and a wide track has nothing to do with overtaking. Mexico was a dire track with extremely little overtaking despite most of the track being wide and a very long straight. Baku looks interesting, there are no overtake points, like every track, there are plenty of points that look fine.
 
The Running Man said:
If they want closer racing - they need to start adding ballast. If you win +20kg, 2nd 10kg, 3rd 5kg for 2 races and stack as they win..
Click to expand...

Balast was suggested, it was rejected by most of the teams.

Also, stacking? Really? So after 10 wins the teams will be needing to shorehorn 200kg of balast into the car?! :eek::rolleyes:
 
Good god, what a terrible idea almost as bad as berries.
Just sort the issues out, they're pretty well known and reasonably easy. It's just no one can agree, except for stupid idea apparently.
 
UTmaniac said:
Make the ballast penalty extra fuel, so they start the race heavier, but can race without having to save fuel and comply with the 100Kg rule. :D
Click to expand...

The problem with that, is that not everyone starts with 100kg, so you don't have a baseline on which to apply any additional fuel.
 
F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of motorsport but it's incredibly dull these days because of all the rules and restrictions.

What they need to do is give the teams a simpler spec - "must be a long x b wide x b tall and be crash tested". Let the designers go mad. Let the drives race properly.

Why are they trying to save fuel when they're using a fleet of trucks and 747's to fly teams around the world? Let's have 10l V16 engines with 4 turbos thumbing out 4,000bhp and exhausts so loud they have to replace the circuits glass with plexi to stop it shattering. The extra excitement with generate plenty of revenue to provide all fans at the circuits with ear protection.

KERS for a few seconds a lap? Nope - lets have a 500bhp boost as often as you like as long as you can keep the battery charged.

DRS only in specified zones? Nah, use it whenever you want. It'll encourage more mechanical grip so they can hoon it round corners with the wings open. Or just drop the wings completely.

Limited sets of tyres? That can go too. Use any manufacturer you want and burn through as much rubber as you please, the penalty will be increased pit stops so it'll balance out.

Refueling - now allowed, and dedicated refueling cars are allowed out on track to refuel mid-race (but only on the straights).


Of course nothing like this will ever happen but F1 REALLY needs some extra excitement kicking in to it, especially now we're having to pay to watch it live.
 
AndyCr15 said:
If they're still winning races with 180kg, why not!

I quite like the idea, but at the same time understand why is not a good idea...
Click to expand...

Theres an argument that some sort of "balance" mechanism could be brought in to equalise machinery (like in GT racing). The problem with that is the most obvious way is to adjust the engines output, and that will never happen while engine manufacturers are also team owners.

Cyanide said:
F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of motorsport but it's incredibly dull these days because of all the rules and restrictions.

What they need to do is give the teams a simpler spec - "must be a long x b wide x b tall and be crash tested". Let the designers go mad. Let the drives race properly.

Why are they trying to save fuel when they're using a fleet of trucks and 747's to fly teams around the world? Let's have 10l V16 engines with 4 turbos thumbing out 4,000bhp and exhausts so loud they have to replace the circuits glass with plexi to stop it shattering. The extra excitement with generate plenty of revenue to provide all fans at the circuits with ear protection.

KERS for a few seconds a lap? Nope - lets have a 500bhp boost as often as you like as long as you can keep the battery charged.

DRS only in specified zones? Nah, use it whenever you want. It'll encourage more mechanical grip so they can hoon it round corners with the wings open. Or just drop the wings completely.

Limited sets of tyres? That can go too. Use any manufacturer you want and burn through as much rubber as you please, the penalty will be increased pit stops so it'll balance out.

Refueling - now allowed, and dedicated refueling cars are allowed out on track to refuel mid-race (but only on the straights).


Of course nothing like this will ever happen but F1 REALLY needs some extra excitement kicking in to it, especially now we're having to pay to watch it live.
Click to expand...

How would you fund any/all of that?
 
Skeeter said:
How would you fund any/all of that?
Click to expand...

Absolutely no idea, maybe some sort of elaborate ponzi scheme? It's all a moot point, even though I can almost guarantee that the popularity of the sport, and therefore the revenue, would increase if teams were allowed to make cars "more entertaining" it's not going to happen.

Companies like VW with their 1,500bhp, w16 monster would be frothing at the mount to enter if someone said "hey, you can just shoehorn that in to a small chassis and come race"
 
It depends entirely on what you consider "more entertaining". Everyones view will differ, and the FIA have shown they have no idea.

Judging by the 2017 rules the FIA think more entertaining is cars that go faster while never passing each other and costing loads. Meanwhile I was thourouly entertained last weekend at Brands watching a load of "slow" hatchbacks, shopping cars and track day cars, using a range of standardised parts or single makes entirely, nudge and bash each other around the track.

I'm not sure making F1 a visual spectacle while not improving the racing is a good idea.
 
Skeeter said:
I'm not sure making F1 a visual spectacle while not improving the racing is a good idea.
Click to expand...

Giving teams free reign with the only proviso being "go race" would improve the racing though.

They either need to take the route of making all the cars identical (thus being a true judge of who's the best driver) or let the teams do the best they can.

Having tight restrictions and petty arguements over tyre pressures or the thickness of skid pans is hardly improving the experience for the general viewer.

I get that a lot of people on here will be diehard fans but if the sport's going to continue and expand it needs to get back to being something interesting for the general public. And most of the public don't care than the new 1.6l engines can get x more laps on a lower amount of fuel because they're more efficient - we want snarling, fire breathing world class cars that go out and get round the track as quickly as possible.
 
Cyanide said:
And most of the public don't care than the new 1.6l engines can get x more laps on a lower amount of fuel because they're more efficient - we want snarling, fire breathing world class cars that go out and get round the track as quickly as possible.
Click to expand...

I disagree on this bit. Anyone who follows WEC knows all about the hybrid engines, energy recovery and all sorts, and they think they are great. But they are effectively the same as F1 engines. You could put a current F1 engine and its ERS in the back of a P1 prototype and it would pass the ACO WEC regulations.

The issue with the hybrids is not the technology, its the marketing. WEC embraced the technology, promoted it, and everyone involved sung its praises and made everyone watching get enthused by association. In contrast, F1 set about slating the hybrids from the moment they were conceived, with people up and down the grid and throughout all areas of F1 management and governance taking every opportunity they can to take a pop at them. The result is a general feeling of negativity towards the engines that has spread out into the fans and general public. A lot of people don't even know they are hybrids, and those that do think they are crap because, well, everyone says they are.

F1 engines are great. They are faster than any engine before it, and crammed full of really interesting and exciting technology. The Mercedes split turbo is an award winning masterpiece, and if the rumours about how Honda are approaching turbines is true its a real step into the unknown. But nobody seems to care about this, they are too busy complaining that they aren't loud.
 
Skeeter said:
F1 engines are great. They are faster than any engine before it, and crammed full of really interesting and exciting technology. The Mercedes split turbo is an award winning masterpiece, and if the rumours about how Honda are approaching turbines is true its a real step into the unknown. But nobody seems to care about this, they are too busy complaining that they aren't loud.
Click to expand...

I don't doubt that they're great, but you've just said yourself that it's not what people want? :confused: A huge chunk of people won't be bothered about or won't understand the technology that's in the cars - they just want them to be fast and with speed comes an expectation of noise that's been ground in to people over their entire lifetimes.

"It's just as fast but now it's a lot quieter" is a surprisingly big thing for people to get over.
 
Again, "noise" has only become an issue because people have made it one. Nobody complained that the turbos of the 80s were too quiet. Nobody complains that the diesel Audi R18 is almost silent. IndyCar still crams however many hundreds of thousands of people into Indianapolis every year even though they are all relatively quiet V6 turbos now.

In fact, track side, I've seen more people complain that the GP2 cars are just to loud and unpleasant than I have heard people saying F1 is too quiet.

The noise issue is one created by people who are complaining about it. Just like the falacy that "F1 should be a sprint, its not about managing x!". F1 has NEVER been a sprint, it has ALWAYS been about managing something.
 
Cyanide said:
Giving teams free reign with the only proviso being "go race" would improve the racing though.

They either need to take the route of making all the cars identical (thus being a true judge of who's the best driver) or let the teams do the best they can.

Having tight restrictions and petty arguements over tyre pressures or the thickness of skid pans is hardly improving the experience for the general viewer.

I get that a lot of people on here will be diehard fans but if the sport's going to continue and expand it needs to get back to being something interesting for the general public. And most of the public don't care than the new 1.6l engines can get x more laps on a lower amount of fuel because they're more efficient - we want snarling, fire breathing world class cars that go out and get round the track as quickly as possible.
Click to expand...

It might improve the racing, but personally I doubt it. As is usually the case and has been many times before, when there's a significant regulation change one team adapts best to that change and everyone else plays catch up, often for several seasons. For example, the latest engines, Mercedes were ahead at the beginning and still are although the gap is slowly coming down. It's telling though that the manufacturer with the highest budget is the one that's catching up. I'd hate to see Ferrari's engine development bill for the past two years. Hundreds of millions of Euro probably.

Imagine how one sided the Brawn championship year would have been if Brawn had the money to continue to develop the car throughout the year, or if they knew the Mercedes engine was going into the car from the start? Also how dominant Red Bull have been in previous years thanks to the Renault engine being best at exhaust blowing over the diffuser.

With the 2017 aero rules Adrian Newey must be rubbing his hands together with glee.

IMO the 2017 rules will do one thing, and one thing only. Improve lap times. Will anyone actually be able to tell without looking at the clock? I highly doubt it.

Personally I'd reduce downforce, reduce tyre width and scrap the fuel flow limit to increase power. If they want to push 150kg/HR through the engine for a short time to give them 1,200HP, let them. But they'll need to carry more fuel to do it.
 
What you really have to do is provide things that aren't going to be used equally amongst all drivers
Maybe unlimited DRS.. Who has the balls to open it down a small straight, and brake late! Maybe even that wouldn't do it.

The tyre rules have helped as most people knew they would

But it's hard to break the driver from the car. To be able to let a good driver in a poor car beat an OK driver in an OK car

It has to be too hard to model pre race. And we all know how much money and resource goes into that
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom