FIA looking to make F1 cars harder to drive
Discussion
Whitefly Swatter said:
This!
bring back the kitty litter and catch fencing, I know they are dangerous but so do the drivers and they should stay out of them
Why stop there?bring back the kitty litter and catch fencing, I know they are dangerous but so do the drivers and they should stay out of them
I'd bring back straw bales, lamp posts, park benches, grass banks, sheer drops, footpaths and all the other hazards that once lined race tracks.
angrymoby said:
williamp said:
I think i read somewhere years ago that viellneuve didn't get on with carbon disks in the williams, so they tried steel. Same breaking effect, however un-sprung weight was noticeably higher so they kept the carbon disks and told him to adapt
It was Zanardi in '99 iircIforB said:
Oh wow that'll be fun. Why not just dust off some '80's F1 cars instead?
F1 should be about pushing the technical limit as well as the driver's. Whilst I'm a fan of less downforce and more power, going back in time to manual boxes and steel brakes seems to be an unnecessary retrograde step just for the sake of it.
It's pretty amusing, lots of complaining that F1 is not the pinnacle of motorsport since a teenager can drive in it. So let's make it the pinnacle by getting these old skool technology into replace the stuff we have now, F1 should be about pushing the technical limit as well as the driver's. Whilst I'm a fan of less downforce and more power, going back in time to manual boxes and steel brakes seems to be an unnecessary retrograde step just for the sake of it.
Have to say I think what we have now is a pretty good balance. Lots of pushing at the technology boundaries, but also now seeing some cars squirming around. If you want to watch cars moving around far more requiring muscles of a heavyweight wrestler then watch historic stuff. After all, you'll just complain they're making F1 slow for the sake of it if they do stuff just to make things slower (see everyone loving the sparks from the past but complaining when they tested spark blocks recently etc. etc.).
rdjohn said:
I think that banning power steering would make F1 more of an endurance event for the driver. It would also encourage drivers to carry a little muscle. The current arrangements encourage ever-more imaciated drivers, the recent photos of Max Chiltern were quite shocking.
I think the current drivers have a lot of muscle as it is, however it is the wiry type and so not the visible "arms the size of your thigh" type muscles. How many ironmans have you completed for example?Weren't people whinging at start of this season that the cars weren't fast enough lap time wise.
Now people want less aero and less grip
So the cars will be slower again :-)
I dont really care either way to be honest. They can't forget the technology and still be the "pinnacle".
Just stopping the FIA fiddling for a bit would be nice.
Now people want less aero and less grip
So the cars will be slower again :-)
I dont really care either way to be honest. They can't forget the technology and still be the "pinnacle".
Just stopping the FIA fiddling for a bit would be nice.
IforB said:
Oh wow that'll be fun. Why not just dust off some '80's F1 cars instead?
F1 should be about pushing the technical limit as well as the driver's. Whilst I'm a fan of less downforce and more power, going back in time to manual boxes and steel brakes seems to be an unnecessary retrograde step just for the sake of it.
Except F1 is now artifically decreasing the technical ability of the cars by the downforce restrictions. Most lap records still stand from 2004, so it could be argued the sport has not moved on technically for a decade(speed is the name of the game afterall!)F1 should be about pushing the technical limit as well as the driver's. Whilst I'm a fan of less downforce and more power, going back in time to manual boxes and steel brakes seems to be an unnecessary retrograde step just for the sake of it.
I certainly don't think that current F1 cars as pushing the technical limits atall. There are far too many restrictions on the designers that's why Newey is fed up. So if the current F1 cars have been artificially restricted on speed and downforce to 'spice up the show'. Then the FIA may aswell bring back manual gearboxes!
Modern F1 certainly isn't about going as fast as is technically possible anymore, which is a shame.
The issues with F1 are not going to be fixed easily because apart from anything else no one really knows what is wrong in the first place.
I dont have time to explore the F1 Broadcasting blog in great detail now to see what has happened woth viewing figures but is generally recognised that they are down this year. I suspect that this is more to do with the move to pay TV than anything else. The problem as I see it is that some (maybe a majority) of your dedicated fans will move to pay per view, some fans wont, and of course those that watch F1 but are not fans won't.
Being on free to air means you pick up the channel hoppers, and these might actually become fans. If the races aren't on free to air then they wont see it. You could perhaps compare it with BTCC in the late 80's plenty of media interest, on the BBC, manufacturers taking part etc, but now look ai, hidden somewhere on the channel, jsod all media interest etc.
F1 is meant to be the pinnacle of motor sport, but is it right you can drive a car and be in the pinnancle of motorsport at te age of 17?
I dont have time to explore the F1 Broadcasting blog in great detail now to see what has happened woth viewing figures but is generally recognised that they are down this year. I suspect that this is more to do with the move to pay TV than anything else. The problem as I see it is that some (maybe a majority) of your dedicated fans will move to pay per view, some fans wont, and of course those that watch F1 but are not fans won't.
Being on free to air means you pick up the channel hoppers, and these might actually become fans. If the races aren't on free to air then they wont see it. You could perhaps compare it with BTCC in the late 80's plenty of media interest, on the BBC, manufacturers taking part etc, but now look ai, hidden somewhere on the channel, jsod all media interest etc.
F1 is meant to be the pinnacle of motor sport, but is it right you can drive a car and be in the pinnancle of motorsport at te age of 17?
Gaz. said:
mattikake said:
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/116031
About bloody time! Less downforce, more power, manual gearboxes, steel brakes, no DRS, no access to telemetry, safety-only radio...
Ah what a relief. I saw this topic yesterday on my phone so didn't follow the link and was worried that all of your suggestions were mentioned in the autosport article.About bloody time! Less downforce, more power, manual gearboxes, steel brakes, no DRS, no access to telemetry, safety-only radio...
Gaz. said:
Less downforce = so less G-force and slower in the corners.
But OTOH this means more control from the driver and more manlines = skill.Gaz. said:
Manual boxes - can't see the teams chucking away these seamless shift boxes when everyone but ndycars, NASCAR & some touring cars are using them.
Hasn't everyone who can afford it? But has this been to the benefit of the all-important spectator?Gaz. said:
Telemetry - as old as the hills and has never been a problem before.
Yeah I realise this, but I as a matter of naturalism, it feels like a cheat. Precision is everything, but I wonder just how good a racing series would be if a driver was forced to understand the dynamics, exploit it, and prove their worth by their own personal understanding on the physics? Imagine if it was banned? Imagine how much more Fangio, Clark, Senna... and the next could cleave the head off the crop? Imagine the whorship. It's Prost v Senna all over again. 
Lewis and Fred? The best drivers were always the ones who could get in a car, feel it and rag it like no other. These are the guys that are the best... imo!Gaz. said:
Steel brakes- would make no difference, carbon is used because it's lighter.
Yeah it's matter of downforce, not material, so they say. But then there is also the "feel". No break-by-wire, not computer. Just a man and a break pedal. Muscle and material. Sounds sweet to a man who has seen it and felt it for decades!Gaz. said:
Radio- this has only become a problem in the last few years with significant driver coaching, even NASCAR has a two way radio...
Pitboads are all a driver should need. It's all I ever had! Consider safety-only - you have a puncture etc. The rest is about the size of your pants = skill + interpretation.Chrisgr31 said:
The issues with F1 are not going to be fixed easily because apart from anything else no one really knows what is wrong in the first place.
I dont have time to explore the F1 Broadcasting blog in great detail now to see what has happened woth viewing figures but is generally recognised that they are down this year. I suspect that this is more to do with the move to pay TV than anything else. The problem as I see it is that some (maybe a majority) of your dedicated fans will move to pay per view, some fans wont, and of course those that watch F1 but are not fans won't.
Being on free to air means you pick up the channel hoppers, and these might actually become fans. If the races aren't on free to air then they wont see it. You could perhaps compare it with BTCC in the late 80's plenty of media interest, on the BBC, manufacturers taking part etc, but now look ai, hidden somewhere on the channel, jsod all media interest etc.
F1 is meant to be the pinnacle of motor sport, but is it right you can drive a car and be in the pinnancle of motorsport at te age of 17?
With the advent of 'bambino' in karts, a 17 year old has already been competing for 11 years, and could have been driving for 13 years. The goal posts have moved, regarding drivers ages.I dont have time to explore the F1 Broadcasting blog in great detail now to see what has happened woth viewing figures but is generally recognised that they are down this year. I suspect that this is more to do with the move to pay TV than anything else. The problem as I see it is that some (maybe a majority) of your dedicated fans will move to pay per view, some fans wont, and of course those that watch F1 but are not fans won't.
Being on free to air means you pick up the channel hoppers, and these might actually become fans. If the races aren't on free to air then they wont see it. You could perhaps compare it with BTCC in the late 80's plenty of media interest, on the BBC, manufacturers taking part etc, but now look ai, hidden somewhere on the channel, jsod all media interest etc.
F1 is meant to be the pinnacle of motor sport, but is it right you can drive a car and be in the pinnancle of motorsport at te age of 17?
CART cars used to be H-pattern and steel rotors.
Steel rotors don't make them any 'harder' to drive in reality -> Jaguar F1 tried this a number of years ago and the only real difference was unsprung mass. The braking distances were roughly the same. Cooling would be the important factor, like carbon-carbon.
Steel rotors don't make them any 'harder' to drive in reality -> Jaguar F1 tried this a number of years ago and the only real difference was unsprung mass. The braking distances were roughly the same. Cooling would be the important factor, like carbon-carbon.
In a sense the FIA have already made good basic steps to making the car harder to drive by changing the rule on refuelling and mandating both tyre types be used and introducing DRS. This made it harder for the engineers to set up the car, too.
I think they can achieve the effect of making them harder in lots of little steps rather than one huge radical step of taking the cars back to the 60s (which is just not going to happen for many reasons).
I think they can achieve the effect of making them harder in lots of little steps rather than one huge radical step of taking the cars back to the 60s (which is just not going to happen for many reasons).
zac510 said:
In a sense the FIA have already made good basic steps to making the car harder to drive by changing the rule on refuelling and mandating both tyre types be used and introducing DRS. This made it harder for the engineers to set up the car, too.
I think they can achieve the effect of making them harder in lots of little steps rather than one huge radical step of taking the cars back to the 60s (which is just not going to happen for many reasons).
Those changes don't make the car harder to drive, they make it harder to drive economically. Just like when you're driving on a motorway and the car computer tells you the range left is five miles, but there's 25 miles to the next petrol station, that's hard to manage but hardly entertaining.I think they can achieve the effect of making them harder in lots of little steps rather than one huge radical step of taking the cars back to the 60s (which is just not going to happen for many reasons).
!Stream of consciousness alert!
It's undeniably a tricky topic, but is only part of the wider debate needed to ensure the continued popularity, and therefore survival, of F1 in a challenging global economy where there exist many more media channels than of old and many more sports/interests/activities competing on those channels for the attention of the enthusiast and/or consumer.
Yes F1 is the self-styled pinnacle of motorsport, but (deep breath)the pursuit of that technical peak leads to eye watering costs that risk making the sport unsustainable as the teams find it harder to land sponsors in the current climate to sustain those costs, the sport chases money by going to new countries where the F1 circuit is a vanity project that fails to attract local spectators or win the interest of the enthusiast watching on TV, the division of prize money makes the business of hosting a grand prix the kind of business proposition that would have the Dragons all laughing, and more and more cost is shifted on to the TV viewer or on the spectator (a family day out at a GP vs a holiday for the family is what the decision can come down to), the new countries that are visited and bizarre sequence of races (when balanced against geography) means that teams need several pit/garage kits in constant transit around the globe...
Minor rant over, for me as a fan a simple start would be:
- the sport taking itself less seriously and talking English - not "prime" or "option" but just supersoft/soft/medium/hard;
- the sport not changing rules on an apparent whim - as a previous poster mentioned, no other sport has an apparent rule change part way through a season. The imposition/clarification/partial backtracking on the radio message rule looked completely amateur;
- if the sport changes the technical regulations, I think the leaders of the sport should back them, not b
h about/undermine them. I think what the teams have managed to produce performance wise from the new powerplants should be celebrated, not derided because they sound different;
- a total ban on the use of "for sure" in response to any interview question.
It's undeniably a tricky topic, but is only part of the wider debate needed to ensure the continued popularity, and therefore survival, of F1 in a challenging global economy where there exist many more media channels than of old and many more sports/interests/activities competing on those channels for the attention of the enthusiast and/or consumer.
Yes F1 is the self-styled pinnacle of motorsport, but (deep breath)the pursuit of that technical peak leads to eye watering costs that risk making the sport unsustainable as the teams find it harder to land sponsors in the current climate to sustain those costs, the sport chases money by going to new countries where the F1 circuit is a vanity project that fails to attract local spectators or win the interest of the enthusiast watching on TV, the division of prize money makes the business of hosting a grand prix the kind of business proposition that would have the Dragons all laughing, and more and more cost is shifted on to the TV viewer or on the spectator (a family day out at a GP vs a holiday for the family is what the decision can come down to), the new countries that are visited and bizarre sequence of races (when balanced against geography) means that teams need several pit/garage kits in constant transit around the globe...
Minor rant over, for me as a fan a simple start would be:
- the sport taking itself less seriously and talking English - not "prime" or "option" but just supersoft/soft/medium/hard;
- the sport not changing rules on an apparent whim - as a previous poster mentioned, no other sport has an apparent rule change part way through a season. The imposition/clarification/partial backtracking on the radio message rule looked completely amateur;
- if the sport changes the technical regulations, I think the leaders of the sport should back them, not b
h about/undermine them. I think what the teams have managed to produce performance wise from the new powerplants should be celebrated, not derided because they sound different; - a total ban on the use of "for sure" in response to any interview question.
It's an Odd sport when you think about it. You don't see any sport so constantly in need of change. Football turns up year after year with the same old ball and 11 men and the same rules.
Now I know Motorsport is way way more complex that Football but even so why does F1 have to be at the pinnacle of technology? Why can't it be about simple or indeed simpler very fast animal cars that sound like demons unleashed from hell racing each other?
Now I know Motorsport is way way more complex that Football but even so why does F1 have to be at the pinnacle of technology? Why can't it be about simple or indeed simpler very fast animal cars that sound like demons unleashed from hell racing each other?
Soul Reaver said:
It's an Odd sport when you think about it. You don't see any sport so constantly in need of change. Football turns up year after year with the same old ball and 11 men and the same rules.
Now I know Motorsport is way way more complex that Football but even so why does F1 have to be at the pinnacle of technology? Why can't it be about simple or indeed simpler very fast animal cars that sound like demons unleashed from hell racing each other?
Because you have that in the classics.Now I know Motorsport is way way more complex that Football but even so why does F1 have to be at the pinnacle of technology? Why can't it be about simple or indeed simpler very fast animal cars that sound like demons unleashed from hell racing each other?
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff