Putting the sexiness back into F1
Discussion
I cannot be @rsed to use the search functionality, nor have I time, so apologies if this is a re-post or has been discussed to exasperation.
The good Doc has thought much about the lack of overtaking in F1 and what can be done to rectify the situation. So here it is, hear me out, then berate me.......
Over the race weekend, award points for BOTH qualifying and the race itself. The quicker you qualify the more points you get....BUT.....you start in reverse order on the grid. So, get a huge wad of points for qualification, have a quick car, start at the back and people at the back will be slicing through the field. It makes for fekin good racing.
What thinks you? God, I am a genius. I should just patent myself.
The mathematically gifted amongst you can provide a points scheme which would make this both workable and exciting. Maybe offer more points for qualifying than the race itself, that could incentivise more being further back in the grid.
So come on you bespectacled midget Bernie (no offence intended to the vertically challenged amongst you, nor the blind), give us a Championship that F1 followers crave.
Signed DrYazz
The good Doc has thought much about the lack of overtaking in F1 and what can be done to rectify the situation. So here it is, hear me out, then berate me.......
Over the race weekend, award points for BOTH qualifying and the race itself. The quicker you qualify the more points you get....BUT.....you start in reverse order on the grid. So, get a huge wad of points for qualification, have a quick car, start at the back and people at the back will be slicing through the field. It makes for fekin good racing.
What thinks you? God, I am a genius. I should just patent myself.
The mathematically gifted amongst you can provide a points scheme which would make this both workable and exciting. Maybe offer more points for qualifying than the race itself, that could incentivise more being further back in the grid.
So come on you bespectacled midget Bernie (no offence intended to the vertically challenged amongst you, nor the blind), give us a Championship that F1 followers crave.
Signed DrYazz
ajprice said:
Simplify the aerodynamics twelvety times over. They tried to get away from the bias on aero performance last year, but double diffusers stuffed that up, this year f-ducts look like a similar thing. The cars are much too reliant on the aerodynamics.
+1You could design a test whereby, if someone were to walk round the car with a hammer, if they could just knock off all of the silly add-on bits of aerodynamics with one wallop then you wouldn't be allowed to race with it !
With a big enough hammer you could probably get rid of all the silly bits on the front wings and side-pods, the barge-boards and maybe even some of the fiddly bits around the diffusers.
Nick M said:
ajprice said:
Simplify the aerodynamics twelvety times over. They tried to get away from the bias on aero performance last year, but double diffusers stuffed that up, this year f-ducts look like a similar thing. The cars are much too reliant on the aerodynamics.
+1You could design a test whereby, if someone were to walk round the car with a hammer, if they could just knock off all of the silly add-on bits of aerodynamics with one wallop then you wouldn't be allowed to race with it !
With a big enough hammer you could probably get rid of all the silly bits on the front wings and side-pods, the barge-boards and maybe even some of the fiddly bits around the diffusers.
Or just stop going to processional tracks. Go to more Brazil and Spa type tracks. Get them on the old Nurburgring as well!
ajprice said:
Simplify the aerodynamics twelvety times over. They tried to get away from the bias on aero performance last year, but double diffusers stuffed that up, this year f-ducts look like a similar thing. The cars are much too reliant on the aerodynamics.
+1how about no front or rear wings,mandatory flat floor & no diffusers,I'd even be tempted to go for mandatory front mounted radiators so we could get back to the 60's cigar shaped cars.
cars need to get back to mechanical grip rather than aerodynamic force
cragswinter said:
cars need to get back to mechanical grip rather than aerodynamic force
This is an oft-quoted, but I fear misconveived, concept.If all cars have more mechanical grip, then braking distances are shorter and when exiting corners the car in front will always be able to accelerate before the car behind, thus potentially opening up a gap which makes it more difficult for the following car to get a tow and then out-brake them at the next corner.
What we've seen is that wet races produce, well, racing, because there is just less grip overall - both mechanical and aero. So, if racing is to encouraged there needs to be a reduction on aero primarily, but also in terms of the tyres too.
I think we need to see increased braking distances and a requirement for a deft right foot to get the power down as early as possible without spinning the rear tyres.
But, and this is the tricky question, is that what we want F1 to be ? Or do we want to see really fast lap times from the most advanced and quickest single-seaters on the planet, and to hell with the racing....
Nick M said:
But, and this is the tricky question, is that what we want F1 to be ? Or do we want to see really fast lap times from the most advanced and quickest single-seaters on the planet, and to hell with the racing....
It's about balance IMO. Yes we want the most advanced cars but ultimately it's still racing not a time trial.I also think the balance between aero and power has swung too far towards aero. For the efficiency of the current Aero package, 750bhp isn't enough. Either reduce the Aero effect or increase the BHP.
If they reduce the Aero then the cars risk falling closer to lower class cars. If they increase the power then the nanny PC brigade get excited.
They've gone a little bit soft.
Fire99 said:
Nick M said:
But, and this is the tricky question, is that what we want F1 to be ? Or do we want to see really fast lap times from the most advanced and quickest single-seaters on the planet, and to hell with the racing....
It's about balance IMO. Yes we want the most advanced cars but ultimately it's still racing not a time trial.I also think the balance between aero and power has swung too far towards aero. For the efficiency of the current Aero package, 750bhp isn't enough. Either reduce the Aero effect or increase the BHP.
If they reduce the Aero then the cars risk falling closer to lower class cars. If they increase the power then the nanny PC brigade get excited.
They've gone a little bit soft.
Assuming the FIA let them...
Munter said:
Shirly thats what the 1500cc turbos are about. Keeps the nannys at bay because it's a small efficient engine just like they want in road cars. But given modern technology should be able to bang out a fairly reliable 1000-1200bhp....
I suspect the efficiency might suffer a bit if you're trying to get 1,000bhp out of them !!You still need to burn a bucket-load of fuel (more than the current in all probability) to produce that sort of power after all....
Nick M said:
Munter said:
Shirly thats what the 1500cc turbos are about. Keeps the nannys at bay because it's a small efficient engine just like they want in road cars. But given modern technology should be able to bang out a fairly reliable 1000-1200bhp....
I suspect the efficiency might suffer a bit if you're trying to get 1,000bhp out of them !!You still need to burn a bucket-load of fuel (more than the current in all probability) to produce that sort of power after all....
Anyway to avoid going off topic to put the sexy back we need more power, less aero, and great tracks which have been proven to give good racing on a local level for a few years before F1 will use them.
Munter said:
Assuming the FIA let them...
And that is the key. They've been reducing power outputs. From 1000+bhp Turbo cars, to 900bhp V10 cars to 750bhp V8's.I have no belief whatsoever that they'll allow power outputs to climb back towards the 1000bhp mark.
My fingers, toes and everything else are firmly crossed that i'm wrong though.
There appears to be some negative responses to my proposal. Which surprises me somewhat.
What I have not heard is any constructive arguments against it.
Just what are the downsides to my Eureka-like suggestion?
You may jest, but in a few years, this idea may be seen as just as revolutionary as Che Guevera or the mobile phone.
What I have not heard is any constructive arguments against it.
Just what are the downsides to my Eureka-like suggestion?
You may jest, but in a few years, this idea may be seen as just as revolutionary as Che Guevera or the mobile phone.
Nick M said:
cragswinter said:
cars need to get back to mechanical grip rather than aerodynamic force
This is an oft-quoted, but I fear misconveived, concept.If all cars have more mechanical grip, then braking distances are shorter and when exiting corners the car in front will always be able to accelerate before the car behind, thus potentially opening up a gap which makes it more difficult for the following car to get a tow and then out-brake them at the next corner.
What we've seen is that wet races produce, well, racing, because there is just less grip overall - both mechanical and aero. So, if racing is to encouraged there needs to be a reduction on aero primarily, but also in terms of the tyres too.
I think we need to see increased braking distances and a requirement for a deft right foot to get the power down as early as possible without spinning the rear tyres.
But, and this is the tricky question, is that what we want F1 to be ? Or do we want to see really fast lap times from the most advanced and quickest single-seaters on the planet, and to hell with the racing....
i would like to see the tyre rules change to give a free choice. keep the same number of tyres/compound allowed, but give the teams a free reign of which tyres they want to use. as it seems some cars work better on one tyre than the other over a race distance.
and it may be that a careful driver can drive one set of hards for a race distance, but another driver could be quicker to have 2 stops, but run on softs through the race.
Q3 i would like to see run like a top 10 run off like a sprint.
reverse the order of the top 10 in Q2, each get a clear track to set a time.
ie driver 1 goes outlap, full lap, cool down. next driver goes out 20 secs later to set a time and so on. tyre is a given set of softs like they currently get in FP1.
If it rains part way through Q3, tough. car breaking down on inlap will mean a re-run for the baulked car on its out lap.
aero wise - i think a look at the GP2 rules - with a certain amount of ground effects allowed, and a removal/reduction of wings - part of the problem seems to be having the car behind being able to stay close to the car in front through the preceeding corners.
look back at the late 70s ground effects cars, or even the early 80s following the banning of ground effects, but the cars still having small wings, but big grippy tyres - the cars could be right up the gearbox through the corners, and get the tow down the straight to try the move.
lord summerisle said:
Nick M said:
cragswinter said:
cars need to get back to mechanical grip rather than aerodynamic force
This is an oft-quoted, but I fear misconveived, concept.If all cars have more mechanical grip, then braking distances are shorter and when exiting corners the car in front will always be able to accelerate before the car behind, thus potentially opening up a gap which makes it more difficult for the following car to get a tow and then out-brake them at the next corner.
What we've seen is that wet races produce, well, racing, because there is just less grip overall - both mechanical and aero. So, if racing is to encouraged there needs to be a reduction on aero primarily, but also in terms of the tyres too.
i would like to see the tyre rules change to give a free choice. keep the same number of tyres/compound allowed, but give the teams a free reign of which tyres they want to use. as it seems some cars work better on one tyre than the other over a race distance.
and it may be that a careful driver can drive one set of hards for a race distance, but another driver could be quicker to have 2 stops, but run on softs through the race.
Nick M said:
cragswinter said:
cars need to get back to mechanical grip rather than aerodynamic force
This is an oft-quoted, but I fear misconveived, concept.If all cars have more mechanical grip, then braking distances are shorter and when exiting corners the car in front will always be able to accelerate before the car behind, thus potentially opening up a gap which makes it more difficult for the following car to get a tow and then out-brake them at the next corner.
With high aero, the cars exit the corner say 50 yards apart needing a longer straight with which to exploit slipstreaming and pass. With low aero, the cars are much closer and thus only a short straight would be needed.
As you say, braking distances would be shorter but surely that would just mean drivers would have to be more accurate, which in turn may lead to more exiting entrances to corners when they get it wrong.
Forums | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff