Rule changes for 2019
Discussion
So the fuel limit is up to 110kg, will this allow for flat out races like they say or will teams still underfill and fuel manage, me thinks the latter
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/headlines/2018/...
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/headlines/2018/...
Doink said:
So the fuel limit is up to 110kg, will this allow for flat out races like they say or will teams still underfill and fuel manage, me thinks the latter
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/headlines/2018/...
I agreehttps://www.formula1.com/en/latest/headlines/2018/...
Unless they make this a mandatory minimum limit nothing will change
Won't make any difference to the front running teams. Some midfield teams might try running "flat out" not caring that they'll get a penalty at some point with an engine replacement.
They need to up the fuel limit, up the number of engines and remove all limits on harvesting/deployment. Seems daft to me that they are so keen to showcase hybrid technology and then put artificial limits on it.
They need to up the fuel limit, up the number of engines and remove all limits on harvesting/deployment. Seems daft to me that they are so keen to showcase hybrid technology and then put artificial limits on it.
The fuel flow limit is essentially a power limit, removing it would mean as much power as you can possibly get on a Saturday and not much change on Sundays except that the "more power/more fuel consumption" dial on the steering wheel would go to 11 instead of 9ish.
Where they actually set it for the race would still be in the setting that gets them to the end of the race the fastest rather than to the end of the lap.
The thing it'd have the biggest effect on is probably Horner moaning about engine modes.
Where they actually set it for the race would still be in the setting that gets them to the end of the race the fastest rather than to the end of the lap.
The thing it'd have the biggest effect on is probably Horner moaning about engine modes.
1 engine per weekend would be a much better solution, it would probably end up cheaper for the teams anyway in the long run. And less winged aero so they can run closer to each other. The aero gap they need today is just ridiculous.
The driver weight rule should have been in place years ago. If I remember correctly Marcus overweight over Wehrlein corresponded to something like 0,3s per lap last year. Far more fair to level that out.
Hope they dont mess it up to much though, it just started to get interesting this year at the top end of the grid!
The driver weight rule should have been in place years ago. If I remember correctly Marcus overweight over Wehrlein corresponded to something like 0,3s per lap last year. Far more fair to level that out.
Hope they dont mess it up to much though, it just started to get interesting this year at the top end of the grid!
Jabbah said:
Scarbs did a graphic for this:
So whilst not considered separately, the seat becomes the ballast instead of letting the teams put it anywhere. Should definitely help the taller heavier drivers.
Seems a sensible solution to be honest.So whilst not considered separately, the seat becomes the ballast instead of letting the teams put it anywhere. Should definitely help the taller heavier drivers.
I`m not convinced allowing more fuel to be carried will make any difference. They often choose to run with less than the allowed fuel anyway so increasing the limit won`t make much difference unless as has been said, they increase the max fuel flow limit too.
Wh00sher said:
I`m not convinced allowing more fuel to be carried will make any difference. They often choose to run with less than the allowed fuel anyway so increasing the limit won`t make much difference unless as has been said, they increase the max fuel flow limit too.
I'm not even sure that would be enough to get them to push harder. Running more fuel to get more power would put more stress on the engines. Now they have to get them to last seven races, they're pretty tight on reliability as it is. All this fuel saving and turning the engines down that goes on isn't just about starting as light as possible to get to the end of the race and quickly as possible, it's about doing it while taking as little life out of the engines as possible so they can use them again in the next race, and the one after that...Oldwolf said:
Does anyone know what the gloves actually do?
"while the use of biometric gloves will become mandatory for drivers in order to improve safety."
https://www.fia.com/news/biometric-gloves-set-f1-d..."while the use of biometric gloves will become mandatory for drivers in order to improve safety."
Turbojuice said:
Can't see it making any difference considering they will still have to make do with 3 engines for 21 race weekends. Teams will still have to manage the engines much the same to get them to last, surely?
Agreed. It will make no difference in a race because they'll be conserving engines. Longer term they need to make the engines much simpler and cheaper so they can throw away the stupid 3 engine rule. That might actually make the drivers race instead of wave at each other as they go past on a different strategy.It's the fuel flow limit that's holding it all back along with the 3 engine rule, more fuel = more revs, more revs = more power and they'll need to find more power once the scrap the MGU-H, along with more revs you'll get more noise so it's win win win. Get rid of DRS, simplify front wings, reduce top surface aero, allow ground effects, fit a canopy and there you have it.....perfect!
Give them all the fuel they need and tyres that last the whole race and it will be as boring as hell. Back to the original Bridgestone days when the race order was set at the end of lap 2.
Pretty much all circuit racing features fuel, tyre and engine saving. It's just in F1 they talk about it non-stop and it's gone to extremes with the engines.
Pretty much all circuit racing features fuel, tyre and engine saving. It's just in F1 they talk about it non-stop and it's gone to extremes with the engines.
Gaz. said:
NotStig said:
Agreed. It will make no difference in a race because they'll be conserving engines. Longer term they need to make the engines much simpler and cheaper so they can throw away the stupid 3 engine rule. That might actually make the drivers race instead of wave at each other as they go past on a different strategy.
The fuel flow limit is being scrapped for the 2021 season, the longevity rules are likely to go the same way, the FIA & FOM will confirm at the end of the month. Wasn't it Colin Chapman who said the car should fall to bits just after crossing the finish line? We seem to be a long way from that 'flat out until it breaks' mentality. Now, I'm not suggesting all the cars should grenade themselves as they cross the line, but giving the drivers the ability to push from start to finish, without having to worry about what might happen in 4 races time has to be a positive step from a racing point of view. I'd love to see these guys just go head down and flat out instead of managing tyres, engines, etc.
NotStig said:
I fear that the engine/gearbox limits will remain as F1 tries to make itself 'eco-friendly'.
If they wanted to appear to be eco-friendly they should have tyres that don't need to be thrown away after 20 miles of use. They get through something like a thousand tyres every race meeting.NotStig said:
Now, I'm not suggesting all the cars should grenade themselves as they cross the line...
Why not? It would add to the entertainment. Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff