Are 2017 cars the fastest in F1 yet?
Discussion
I think the big killer is weight - the Hybrid PUs weigh a bit and so the designers have less flexibility to play with ballast.
Albert Park is unchanged since then so should give us a great early indication. They have been 4 odd seco0nds quicker at pre-season.
There's actually 10 circuits which are broadly unchanged from then, so we should get a really good idea of how close they've gotten.
They'll be knocking on the doors certainly.
Albert Park is unchanged since then so should give us a great early indication. They have been 4 odd seco0nds quicker at pre-season.
There's actually 10 circuits which are broadly unchanged from then, so we should get a really good idea of how close they've gotten.
They'll be knocking on the doors certainly.
Not before time - I read that Hamilton's quickest lap at Monza last year would have put him at 2004 Minardi pace . Trouble is , these insanely complex cars are also absurdly heavy. Why the f***k a 2017 carbon and unobtanium F1 car costing the GDP of a small country has to weigh 50% more than its mid 80s counterpart (whilst producing significantly less power from a bigger engine) escapes me . Batteries , yes I know . Insane .
Pure speed shouldn't be the sole metric of F1 but add in too much grip from too much aero and it's set to disappear up its own fundament.
Pure speed shouldn't be the sole metric of F1 but add in too much grip from too much aero and it's set to disappear up its own fundament.
coppice said:
Not before time - I read that Hamilton's quickest lap at Monza last year would have put him at 2004 Minardi pace . Trouble is , these insanely complex cars are also absurdly heavy. Why the f***k a 2017 carbon and unobtanium F1 car costing the GDP of a small country has to weigh 50% more than its mid 80s counterpart (whilst producing significantly less power from a bigger engine) escapes me . Batteries , yes I know . Insane .
Stronger cars, more drivers with complete heads and attached feet.Feel free to continue with the rant.....
The Vambo said:
Stronger cars, more drivers with complete heads and attached feet.
Feel free to continue with the rant.....
The 2004 cars weren't exactly death traps. If you had said 1964 or 1974, you might have a point.Feel free to continue with the rant.....
The increased weight of modern F1 cars is very little to do with added safety features and very much to do with the weight of added electrical components.
The Vambo said:
Stronger cars, more drivers with complete heads and attached feet.
Feel free to continue with the rant.....
200kg of safety features? You know as well as I do that this isn't anything even remotely the case. Cars are safer now , of course , but as Eric pointed out, the safety record in the 80s was a quantum leap over earlier decades . And until we had batteries and the rest of the irrelevancies many cars were ballasted to bring them up to the 600kg minimum which applied from 97 until recently. The other issue is that heavier cars have potentially worse accidents - watch a flyweight FF1600 spin off and it stops very quickly and undramatically. Then watch a porky BTCC car do the same thing. Feel free to continue with the rant.....
Just to add that I think the hybrid technology is amazing and absolutely has a place in motor racing - and that place is called endurance racing. F1 should be light and uncompromised by gratuitously complex gimmickry
coppice said:
Just to add that I think the hybrid technology is amazing and absolutely has a place in motor racing - and that place is called endurance racing. F1 should be light and uncompromised by gratuitously complex gimmickry
I half agree with you on this. But I also think that we need to let the tech evolve in F1. It's the first time in it's history where there is a relevant and tangible linkage to road car development and not just the pseudo, marketing driven tripe of the past.At the moment, F1 tech can be likened to the original bulky mobile phones but sooner or later; it will reach the 'smart phone' analogy.
).I watch Grand Prix racing primarily as a battle between drivers; it matters only that the cars are very , very fast , spectacular aurally and visually and difficult enough to drive so that only the truly gifted can extract the last tenth . That's all. I am not interested in on track competition being dominated by pit stop strategy algorithms, nor gratuitously complex (and usually utterly irrelevant) aerodynamics. Road car linkage ? Leave it for touring cars, spec formulae and sport prototype powertrains.
The real irony is that the two biggest influences on road cars are high nose styling cues (pioneered by Harvey Postlethwaite on the 89 Tyrrell ) and the faux diffusers you see on everything from a Fiesta to an AMG Merc . I can only think of one lasting influence - the paddle shift pioneered by John Barnard on the 89 Ferrari . And F1 would be a better place without them as the removal of normal gear changing put the ham fisted(and footed) at no disadvantage .
The real irony is that the two biggest influences on road cars are high nose styling cues (pioneered by Harvey Postlethwaite on the 89 Tyrrell ) and the faux diffusers you see on everything from a Fiesta to an AMG Merc . I can only think of one lasting influence - the paddle shift pioneered by John Barnard on the 89 Ferrari . And F1 would be a better place without them as the removal of normal gear changing put the ham fisted(and footed) at no disadvantage .
coppice said:
I watch Grand Prix racing primarily as a battle between drivers; it matters only that the cars are very , very fast , spectacular aurally and visually and difficult enough to drive so that only the truly gifted can extract the last tenth . That's all. I am not interested in on track competition being dominated by pit stop strategy algorithms, nor gratuitously complex (and usually utterly irrelevant) aerodynamics. Road car linkage ? Leave it for touring cars, spec formulae and sport prototype powertrains.
+1F1 is either the pinnacle of motorsport, or a science lab for road cars. It struggles to satisfy both.
sparta6 said:
+1
F1 is either the pinnacle of motorsport, or a science lab for road cars. It struggles to satisfy both.
Presumably manufacturers at least partly justify their entry to the board/shareholders by pushing the road car link. Although Formula E seems to be hoovering up the big manufacturers in this respect.F1 is either the pinnacle of motorsport, or a science lab for road cars. It struggles to satisfy both.
eps said:
not forgetting that a lot of the circuits have been slowed down as well...
I thought of that.I reckon the following are the same as 2004 (off the top of my head)
Albert Park
Shanghai
Bahrain
Sepang
...maybe Monaco?
Monza
Spa
Montreal
Barcelona
Red Bull Ring/Speilberg
Hungaroring
Suzuka
Interlagos
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff