The Official 2017 Australian Grand Prix Thread **Spoilers**
Discussion
jsf said:
In a lot of cases the cars are going quicker than they were in period. They are being pushed as far as the tyres will let you Eric. There are some very good drivers in Historics who often drive modern kit also and run up the front in those too.
Of course you have a majority of very good amateur drivers who will never match the pace of a talented young kid, but you also get some drivers who would absolutely spank some of the recent guys who made it to F1.
I have no doubt some are very fast. But it always strikes me how quick an ex F1 driver can be when they have a go in a historic category. I was watching Mark Blundell thrashing an Escort around Goodwood a few weekends ago and he was really quick - even though Of course you have a majority of very good amateur drivers who will never match the pace of a talented young kid, but you also get some drivers who would absolutely spank some of the recent guys who made it to F1.
a) he's not exactly a youngster these days
b) he's probably a bit on the heavy side
c) he'd not raced an historic Escort before
The fact that the cars can perhaps run a bit faster now because they are on better tyres or have other better quality bits and pieces than in period is meaningless.
The original drivers pushed them as hard as the technology and circuits of the day allowed them too.
Also, take into account the dangerouseness of the circuits that were being used in period too. Thrashing a 1972 Surtees around modern Silverstone is not quite the same as doing the same thing in the same car at the Nurburgring of 1972.
Eric Mc said:
jsf said:
In a lot of cases the cars are going quicker than they were in period. They are being pushed as far as the tyres will let you Eric. There are some very good drivers in Historics who often drive modern kit also and run up the front in those too.
Of course you have a majority of very good amateur drivers who will never match the pace of a talented young kid, but you also get some drivers who would absolutely spank some of the recent guys who made it to F1.
I have no doubt some are very fast. But it always strikes me how quick an ex F1 driver can be when they have a go in a historic category. I was watching Mark Blundell thrashing an Escort around Goodwood a few weekends ago and he was really quick - even though Of course you have a majority of very good amateur drivers who will never match the pace of a talented young kid, but you also get some drivers who would absolutely spank some of the recent guys who made it to F1.
a) he's not exactly a youngster these days
b) he's probably a bit on the heavy side
c) he'd not raced an historic Escort before
The fact that the cars can perhaps run a bit faster now because they are on better tyres or have other better quality bits and pieces than in period is meaningless.
The original drivers pushed them as hard as the technology and circuits of the day allowed them too.
Also, take into account the dangerouseness of the circuits that were being used in period too. Thrashing a 1972 Surtees around modern Silverstone is not quite the same as doing the same thing in the same car at the Nurburgring of 1972.
Mark has driven more historic cars than you may realise.
Anyway, this is all a bit OT, probably best to get back to the modern era.
George29 said:
None of them made a 3 litre V10 or 2.4 V8 either? Doesn't mean the technology doesn't filter down
Dear My ToddIf I want to see Hybrid Turbos driving around in a line, not overtaking, I just need to go to my local Sainsbury's car park on a Sunday afternoon. In which case, are you selling grandstand tickets as it's as I don't see any difference between this and F1?
3Points
another 3 points said:
Dear My Todd
If I want to see Hybrid Turbos driving around in a line, not overtaking, I just need to go to my local Sainsbury's car park on a Sunday afternoon. In which case, are you selling grandstand tickets as it's as I don't see any difference between this and F1?
3Points
3points or 3pints when you typed that? If I want to see Hybrid Turbos driving around in a line, not overtaking, I just need to go to my local Sainsbury's car park on a Sunday afternoon. In which case, are you selling grandstand tickets as it's as I don't see any difference between this and F1?
3Points
Crafty_ said:
DrZ is right in that as teams gather data they'll start to push the limits of the tyres, they might even start gambling on different strategies.
After reading James Allen's analysis I'm inclined to feel pessimistichttps://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2017/03/the-game-ha...
In the last Bridgestone era the tyres were too hard and you could do a race on a set of tyres if you could.
Pre-1994 you pitted once at most and in the '80s - unless you had a tyre problem - you raced on a set of tyres.
So strategically it's going to be crap not helped by more downforce and more dirty air. Should have kept last year's car with wider tyres.
entropy said:
Crafty_ said:
DrZ is right in that as teams gather data they'll start to push the limits of the tyres, they might even start gambling on different strategies.
After reading James Allen's analysis I'm inclined to feel pessimistichttps://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2017/03/the-game-ha...
In the last Bridgestone era the tyres were too hard and you could do a race on a set of tyres if you could.
Pre-1994 you pitted once at most and in the '80s - unless you had a tyre problem - you raced on a set of tyres.
So strategically it's going to be crap not helped by more downforce and more dirty air. Should have kept last year's car with wider tyres.
entropy said:
Crafty_ said:
DrZ is right in that as teams gather data they'll start to push the limits of the tyres, they might even start gambling on different strategies.
After reading James Allen's analysis I'm inclined to feel pessimistichttps://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2017/03/the-game-ha...
In the last Bridgestone era the tyres were too hard and you could do a race on a set of tyres if you could.
Pre-1994 you pitted once at most and in the '80s - unless you had a tyre problem - you raced on a set of tyres.
So strategically it's going to be crap not helped by more downforce and more dirty air. Should have kept last year's car with wider tyres.
entropy said:
After reading James Allen's analysis I'm inclined to feel pessimistic
https://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2017/03/the-game-ha...
In the last Bridgestone era the tyres were too hard and you could do a race on a set of tyres if you could.
Pre-1994 you pitted once at most and in the '80s - unless you had a tyre problem - you raced on a set of tyres.
So strategically it's going to be crap not helped by more downforce and more dirty air. Should have kept last year's car with wider tyres.
It is a tad early to right-off these tyres after one race.https://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2017/03/the-game-ha...
In the last Bridgestone era the tyres were too hard and you could do a race on a set of tyres if you could.
Pre-1994 you pitted once at most and in the '80s - unless you had a tyre problem - you raced on a set of tyres.
So strategically it's going to be crap not helped by more downforce and more dirty air. Should have kept last year's car with wider tyres.
However, I do believe that most races this year will be one-stop and in an era when it is nearly impossible to overtake, it is imperative that 2-stops are regulated to neutralise the advantage of a single under-cut.
As the qually tyres will only last, comparatively, fewer laps, it means the latter 2/3rds of the race will inevitably be processional. Using 3-sets of tyres means that drivers will be pushing harder fore more of the race, making it more of a spectacle.
Ross Brawn keeps talking about unintended consequences of regulation changes killing " the show". The switch to Hybrids and aero regs seem to be very good examples of the regs being changed without thinking about the expectations of the consumers (fans). Doing this at a time when switching from free-to-air to pay-per-view is tending towards suicidal.
Horner - ""A hopeless 12 year-old Minardi sounds better" - http://www.crash.net/f1/news/243163/1/a-hopeless-1...
The car in question the two seat Minardi:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVmAfLhpTwo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ww5o9BHc4kw
The car in question the two seat Minardi:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVmAfLhpTwo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ww5o9BHc4kw
rdjohn said:
It is a tad early to right-off these tyres after one race.
However, I do believe that most races this year will be one-stop and in an era when it is nearly impossible to overtake, it is imperative that 2-stops are regulated to neutralise the advantage of a single under-cut.
As the qually tyres will only last, comparatively, fewer laps, it means the latter 2/3rds of the race will inevitably be processional. Using 3-sets of tyres means that drivers will be pushing harder fore more of the race, making it more of a spectacle.
Ross Brawn keeps talking about unintended consequences of regulation changes killing " the show". The switch to Hybrids and aero regs seem to be very good examples of the regs being changed without thinking about the expectations of the consumers (fans). Doing this at a time when switching from free-to-air to pay-per-view is tending towards suicidal.
The fans had been moaning about fake racing for ages - I don't think it was unintended consequences - it was giving the fans what they asked for. No tyres that wear out quickly etc. It's just the fans don't seem to understand that often one thing will affect the other in a negative way. Faster cars generally has to mean more aero, which then means harder to overtake due to turbulence and shorter braking windows etc. However, I do believe that most races this year will be one-stop and in an era when it is nearly impossible to overtake, it is imperative that 2-stops are regulated to neutralise the advantage of a single under-cut.
As the qually tyres will only last, comparatively, fewer laps, it means the latter 2/3rds of the race will inevitably be processional. Using 3-sets of tyres means that drivers will be pushing harder fore more of the race, making it more of a spectacle.
Ross Brawn keeps talking about unintended consequences of regulation changes killing " the show". The switch to Hybrids and aero regs seem to be very good examples of the regs being changed without thinking about the expectations of the consumers (fans). Doing this at a time when switching from free-to-air to pay-per-view is tending towards suicidal.
I have to say I personally preferred the midfield "fake" racing we have had recently where it lead to a balance of racing and strategy, and often cars were out of sync with each other for pit stops etc leading to questions if they could stay ahead until the end or not.
NRS said:
The fans had been moaning about fake racing for ages - I don't think it was unintended consequences - it was giving the fans what they asked for. No tyres that wear out quickly etc. It's just the fans don't seem to understand that often one thing will affect the other in a negative way. Faster cars generally has to mean more aero, which then means harder to overtake due to turbulence and shorter braking windows etc.
I have to say I personally preferred the midfield "fake" racing we have had recently where it lead to a balance of racing and strategy, and often cars were out of sync with each other for pit stops etc leading to questions if they could stay ahead until the end or not.
Most often fans seem to want racing where the power available is somewhat greater than the chassis's ability to exploit it. Put simply the drivers need to look like heros - gladiators fighting tooth-and-nail in simple chariots.I have to say I personally preferred the midfield "fake" racing we have had recently where it lead to a balance of racing and strategy, and often cars were out of sync with each other for pit stops etc leading to questions if they could stay ahead until the end or not.
I do not recall ever hearing fans saying that they wanted refuelling to end, hybrid engines, or high-deg tyres before they were introduced, only that they were retrograde, once they happened. This also seems a pretty inevitable consequence of introducing halos, next year.
But what do the fans know? The fact that most drivers seem to agree should have far greater bearing on future developments. There are only 20 of these guys that ever get to drive the cars in anger.
DanielSan said:
Tiff Needell has some good ideas in the Motorsport Magazine podcast this week, simplify the engines by going back to just petrol turbo engines and let WEC and FE donthr electric/hybrid thing. Make it more about the driver than trying to be at the forefront of technology.
How about make both series use the same base engine, perhaps with slightly different setups or optimisations but in essense the same, then anyone commited to wec could easily supply an f1team with a PU and vice versa.NRS said:
rdjohn said:
It is a tad early to right-off these tyres after one race.
However, I do believe that most races this year will be one-stop and in an era when it is nearly impossible to overtake, it is imperative that 2-stops are regulated to neutralise the advantage of a single under-cut.
As the qually tyres will only last, comparatively, fewer laps, it means the latter 2/3rds of the race will inevitably be processional. Using 3-sets of tyres means that drivers will be pushing harder fore more of the race, making it more of a spectacle.
Ross Brawn keeps talking about unintended consequences of regulation changes killing " the show". The switch to Hybrids and aero regs seem to be very good examples of the regs being changed without thinking about the expectations of the consumers (fans). Doing this at a time when switching from free-to-air to pay-per-view is tending towards suicidal.
I have to say I personally preferred the midfield "fake" racing we have had recently where it lead to a balance of racing and strategy, and often cars were out of sync with each other for pit stops etc leading to questions if they could stay ahead until the end or not.However, I do believe that most races this year will be one-stop and in an era when it is nearly impossible to overtake, it is imperative that 2-stops are regulated to neutralise the advantage of a single under-cut.
As the qually tyres will only last, comparatively, fewer laps, it means the latter 2/3rds of the race will inevitably be processional. Using 3-sets of tyres means that drivers will be pushing harder fore more of the race, making it more of a spectacle.
Ross Brawn keeps talking about unintended consequences of regulation changes killing " the show". The switch to Hybrids and aero regs seem to be very good examples of the regs being changed without thinking about the expectations of the consumers (fans). Doing this at a time when switching from free-to-air to pay-per-view is tending towards suicidal.
Saying that i'm not desperate for thermal degradation either but know which of the two evils I'd prefer.
hairyben said:
DanielSan said:
Tiff Needell has some good ideas in the Motorsport Magazine podcast this week, simplify the engines by going back to just petrol turbo engines and let WEC and FE donthr electric/hybrid thing. Make it more about the driver than trying to be at the forefront of technology.
How about make both series use the same base engine, perhaps with slightly different setups or optimisations but in essense the same, then anyone commited to wec could easily supply an f1team with a PU and vice versa.Ultimately cars with far more power than grip are going to provide the best differentiation between drivers. Add in a low level of aero downforce and clean air coming off the back of cars to give them a chance of passing.
However, F1 has never been much about passing, which is why Arnoux/Villeneuve is still cited all these years later.
Lead cars running around a few seconds apart. Having watched lead cars lap everyone else for a number of years in the 1980s, we don't know how good it is now to have competitive teams.
However, F1 has never been much about passing, which is why Arnoux/Villeneuve is still cited all these years later.
Lead cars running around a few seconds apart. Having watched lead cars lap everyone else for a number of years in the 1980s, we don't know how good it is now to have competitive teams.
Z3MCJez said:
Ultimately cars with far more power than grip are going to provide the best differentiation between drivers. Add in a low level of aero downforce and clean air coming off the back of cars to give them a chance of passing.
However, F1 has never been much about passing, which is why Arnoux/Villeneuve is still cited all these years later.
Lead cars running around a few seconds apart. Having watched lead cars lap everyone else for a number of years in the 1980s, we don't know how good it is now to have competitive teams.
However, F1 has never been much about passing, which is why Arnoux/Villeneuve is still cited all these years later.
Lead cars running around a few seconds apart. Having watched lead cars lap everyone else for a number of years in the 1980s, we don't know how good it is now to have competitive teams.
Reading about some of Jim Clarks most famous victories, it's clear that blasting off into the sunset isn't a new thing or even an Aero thing. Z3MCJez said:
Ultimately cars with far more power than grip are going to provide the best differentiation between drivers. Add in a low level of aero downforce and clean air coming off the back of cars to give them a chance of passing.
However, F1 has never been much about passing, which is why Arnoux/Villeneuve is still cited all these years later.
Lead cars running around a few seconds apart. Having watched lead cars lap everyone else for a number of years in the 1980s, we don't know how good it is now to have competitive teams.
Ah, but the problem (last year at least) was that everyone knew that Mercedes were driving at a canter for 90% of the race. I have a feeling that if Hamilton had got any closer in Australia Vettel would have driven a bit faster, and the lap time differentials compared to the test in Barcelona seem to suggest that's the case.However, F1 has never been much about passing, which is why Arnoux/Villeneuve is still cited all these years later.
Lead cars running around a few seconds apart. Having watched lead cars lap everyone else for a number of years in the 1980s, we don't know how good it is now to have competitive teams.
If they were going flat out it'd be a different matter IMO.
Z3MCJez said:
Ultimately cars with far more power than grip are going to provide the best differentiation between drivers. Add in a low level of aero downforce and clean air coming off the back of cars to give them a chance of passing.
However, F1 has never been much about passing, which is why Arnoux/Villeneuve is still cited all these years later.
Lead cars running around a few seconds apart. Having watched lead cars lap everyone else for a number of years in the 1980s, we don't know how good it is now to have competitive teams.
I was watching a documentary on Tony Brooks last night. In one race, in 1956 I think, he pitted early on and lost 5 or 6 laps while a problem was fixed. In the next clip he was in 4th place!However, F1 has never been much about passing, which is why Arnoux/Villeneuve is still cited all these years later.
Lead cars running around a few seconds apart. Having watched lead cars lap everyone else for a number of years in the 1980s, we don't know how good it is now to have competitive teams.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff