F1 2021 Regulation changes

F1 2021 Regulation changes

Author
Discussion

HardtopManual

1,233 posts

111 months

Friday 19th July
quotequote all
TheDeuce said:
I'm aware it maybe reads that way to a one line response detractor. What part(s) did you feel were contradictory?
All of it.
TheDeuce said:
As an aside, do you have anything to add to the debate other than criticism of my contribution?
No.

HardtopManual

1,233 posts

111 months

Friday 19th July
quotequote all
OK, I'll reply properly.

You state that a 100+ page tech reg doc is simpler than having no rules. It clearly isn't.

The fact that you lack the ability to explain technical (and they can't be that technical, coming from people who are completely new to the sport) features of F1, such that a lay person can understand them, isn't a failing of the sport, but then you don't seem to do introspection.

You say that some people "can't be bothered to get their head around the rules". Have you got your head around them? Do you know what a monocyclic mono-olefin with a paraffinic side chain is, without Googling? Because if you don't, you clearly haven't bothered to get your head around the rules.

Get over yourself.

HardtopManual

1,233 posts

111 months

Friday 19th July
quotequote all
Re 2021 reg changes - the richest teams will still be at the front and the poorest will still be at the back. They're not doing reverse grids, so the fastest cars will start at the front the slowest cars at the back. I can't see it bringing any more overtaking. If you want unpredictability, you need to ban driver-in-loop sims, ban algorithmic race simulations and cut practise down to the bare minimum.

FWIW, the current formula is already capable of delivering great racing. Maturity brings convergence of performance, but Merc's lead is just so big. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see the 2021 reg shake-up take us straight back to 2014.

Big Nanas

246 posts

29 months

Friday 19th July
quotequote all
RobGT81 said:
The recent LMP1 engine regulations seemed to work very well.
Did they? Technically varied for sure, but wasn’t the dreaded BOP required to make everything even?
Can you imagine BOP being suggested for F1?

HustleRussell

16,791 posts

105 months

Friday 19th July
quotequote all
HardtopManual said:
OK, I'll reply properly.

You state that a 100+ page tech reg doc is simpler than having no rules. It clearly isn't.

The fact that you lack the ability to explain technical (and they can't be that technical, coming from people who are completely new to the sport) features of F1, such that a lay person can understand them, isn't a failing of the sport, but then you don't seem to do introspection.

You say that some people "can't be bothered to get their head around the rules". Have you got your head around them? Do you know what a monocyclic mono-olefin with a paraffinic side chain is, without Googling? Because if you don't, you clearly haven't bothered to get your head around the rules.

Get over yourself.
yes

TheDeuce said:
HustleRussell said:
Why are you always trying to high road everyone?

I have seen this across multiple threads. Whenever somebody disagrees with you, you always post something exactly like what you have just done there. You seem to take people disagreeing with you very personally. Your default move is to act offended as though the other poster has attacked you.

If people disagree with your opinion, they may say so in short words. Nobody is obligated to provide a full analysis. If you find this so bruising, perhaps online fora aren’t for you?
I find a single dismissive comment a rude and odd way to enter any conversation. Imagine if you were chatting F1 in the street and someone stopped, and congratulated you for saying your thoughts were the most ridiculous thing they ever heard. I think it would be normal to enquire as to why they had entered the conversation so rudely, and invite them to explain why they felt such a way. That is all I have done.

It's really nothing to do taking anything personally or feeling attacked. It has everything to do with not understanding such behaviour, so I ask for an explanation. I'm well aware that some people have a tendency to speak more abruptly or provocatively on forums - but I think that is more something those people could improve, rather than I could improve by not questioning the rudeness when such comments are directed at me.

To be perfectly honest, I just want to debate F1 - oddly enough, given this is an F1 forum..
TheDeuce, I said 'That's bull'. If you find that so objectionable and 'rude', then I think I must expand my comment that online fora may not be for you to include the outside world as a whole.

//j17

3,282 posts

168 months

Friday 19th July
quotequote all
thegreenhell said:
//j17 said:
TheDeuce said:
If Pirelli are asked to produce a new tyre that will last an entire race and switch on with a little wheelspin and a couple of med-fast turns then they can.
And I can't help thinking Pirelli would love to do that, not be forced by the FIA to make tyres with the current degredation and behaviour...then get the blaim that the tyres degrade so drivers can't push!
Ask and ye shall receive: https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/pirelli-high-de...
Just call me Eddie Jordan!

Actually, that doesn't work does it. My prediction was correct. smile

HardtopManual

1,233 posts

111 months

Friday 19th July
quotequote all
Great news. The sport only went to hi-deg tyres based on a single race. What F1 failed to grasp when specifying the wear rate of the Pirellis is that Canada 2010 unfolded as it did because high tyre wear was not anticipated, not high tyre wear by itself.

thegreenhell

6,108 posts

164 months

Friday 19th July
quotequote all
HardtopManual said:
Great news. The sport only went to hi-deg tyres based on a single race. What F1 failed to grasp when specifying the wear rate of the Pirellis is that Canada 2010 unfolded as it did because high tyre wear was not anticipated, not high tyre wear by itself.
If only they'd looked at Canada 2011 instead and put sprinklers on every track...

geeks

4,536 posts

84 months

Friday 19th July
quotequote all
HardtopManual said:
Great news. The sport only went to hi-deg tyres based on a single race. What F1 failed to grasp when specifying the wear rate of the Pirellis is that Canada 2010 unfolded as it did because high tyre wear was not anticipated, not high tyre wear by itself.
Not wishing to be a dick, wasn't it Canada 2009?

kambites

57,334 posts

166 months

Friday 19th July
quotequote all
One thing they do not appear to be doing, which I'd rather hoped they would, is making the cars smaller.

HardtopManual

1,233 posts

111 months

Friday 19th July
quotequote all
geeks said:
Not wishing to be a dick, wasn't it Canada 2009?
Also not wishing to be a dick, there was no Canadian GP in 2009.

sparta6

1,330 posts

45 months

Friday 19th July
quotequote all
TheDeuce said:
sparta6 said:
I agree, and if you throw all the past changes together there is a clue.

Why not have it completely open ?

Run any N/A engine you like. Let's see what laps the fastest.

It has worked well before
I would love that! It'll never happen because in the mass media the viewers need a simple enough formula to understand. But in the spirit of what F1 began as, it's how it should be.

Opens rule book:

"There's the tracks - go build whatever you think will go round most of them the quickest"

Closes rule book.

smile
I hear what you say.

I would also add that the average layman would not recognise or care whether a V12 or 4pot 1.6 was whizzing around on their TV screen.

The audience do however recognise and appreciate good close racing.

Something for Ross Brawn to consider....

sparta6

1,330 posts

45 months

Friday 19th July
quotequote all
HardtopManual said:
I wouldn't be at all surprised to see the 2021 reg shake-up take us straight back to 2014.
Unfortunately this is highly possible

entropy

3,778 posts

148 months

Friday 19th July
quotequote all
RobGT81 said:
T

The biggest cheque book will always win. Especially as parc ferme gets longer and off track testing becomes even more important. Merc already have the best testing rigs at Brackley. Red Bull, Sauber, Ferrari and Racing India are investing in these areas but still years behind.
Eventually the biggest chequebook wins...

I'd still like to think that rule changes allow a different competitive order as it historically has done. After all all dominations eventually come to an end.

entropy

3,778 posts

148 months

Friday 19th July
quotequote all
HardtopManual said:
Great news. The sport only went to hi-deg tyres based on a single race. What F1 failed to grasp when specifying the wear rate of the Pirellis is that Canada 2010 unfolded as it did because high tyre wear was not anticipated, not high tyre wear by itself.
True but bare in mind that that year's Canadian GP was an anomaly as the Bridgestone tyres then were too good, so good in fact they could make a mockery of the rules. You could do a race distance on a set of tyres. As exciting the season was at times it did have boring races made worse without a strategic variable that could influence a race without pitwall having to play chess on a race track - bring back refuelling? No thanks.

Dermot O'Logical

668 posts

74 months

Friday 19th July
quotequote all
entropy said:
HardtopManual said:
Great news. The sport only went to hi-deg tyres based on a single race. What F1 failed to grasp when specifying the wear rate of the Pirellis is that Canada 2010 unfolded as it did because high tyre wear was not anticipated, not high tyre wear by itself.
True but bare in mind that that year's Canadian GP was an anomaly as the Bridgestone tyres then were too good, so good in fact they could make a mockery of the rules. You could do a race distance on a set of tyres. As exciting the season was at times it did have boring races made worse without a strategic variable that could influence a race without pitwall having to play chess on a race track - bring back refuelling? No thanks.
The most intelligent engineers on the planet work in Formula 1, and it didn't take long for them to work out how to manage the degredation of the Pirelli tyres. Whatever the FIA and Liberty try to come up with to make F1 cars slower, easier to race, or follow each other and overtake, the engineers and designers will find a way around it. Witness the practice of running the rear tyres the wrong way round which caused multiple tyre failures before the FIA stepped in and outlawed the practice, which the teams had discovered caused the sidewalls to bulge differently and run closer to the rear floor, thereby creating a seal which made the diffuser more effective.

Ground effect? The front runners have a form of ground effect already, with slots along the edges of the floor creating an air curtain to provide a seal between the floor and the track surface.

There were enough cars following each other closely at Silverstone to indicate that the front wing changes for this season have had an effect, although the resurfaced track and lack of racing prior to the Grand Prix changed the grip characteristics. Otherwise, the drivers claim that following another car is as difficult as ever.

Liberty may have employed the ultimate "poacher-turned-gamekeeper" in Ross Brawn to spice up the show by changing the technical regulations, but give an F1 team a set of regulations and they will immediately get their designers and lawyers (to dissect and disassemble the wording of the regulations) together to find a way around them.

entropy

3,778 posts

148 months

Friday 19th July
quotequote all
Dermot O'Logical said:
Ground effect? The front runners have a form of ground effect already, with slots along the edges of the floor creating an air curtain to provide a seal between the floor and the track surface.
Apologies for being pedantic but more virtual/aero skirts than ground. In my eyes to be ground effect would be at least have tunnels running at the bottom of the car.

Dermot O'Logical said:
There were enough cars following each other closely at Silverstone to indicate that the front wing changes for this season have had an effect, although the resurfaced track and lack of racing prior to the Grand Prix changed the grip characteristics. Otherwise, the drivers claim that following another car is as difficult as ever.
Yet Lewis recently complained of finding it difficult of following a car behind and how the powers that be need to find better solutions. F1 is such a complex and dynamic sport, we all have our ideas of how F1 should be or what the silver bullet should be or perhaps expect one.

HardtopManual

1,233 posts

111 months

Friday 19th July
quotequote all
entropy said:
True but bare in mind that that year's Canadian GP was an anomaly
Yes, this was exactly my point. It doesn't matter what the tyres are engineered to do - the teams will learn their behaviour. It's only when the tyres behave in an unexpected way that they are really a factor in the racing (hence the Canada 2010 example). So, we may as well have tyres that allow a driver to sustain pressure on another driver.

rdjohn

Original Poster:

3,637 posts

140 months

Saturday 20th July
quotequote all
Seb hitting Max last Sunday demonstrated perfectly that when you get with a couple of metres of the car in front, you have zero downforce on the front wing.

For a point of reference every race car since the mid-60s has made use of ground effects. Prior to that the theory was always streamline based. GE is l literally, the study of the aerodynamic effects when a body is travelling at the air / ground interface. First noticed when aircraft take off.

What has been missing from F1 has been sidepods with Venturis. These were made hugely effective with skirts. Banning skirts was correct as downforce was lost when running kerbs at the apex, but Venturi sidepods should have remained rather than teams only being allowed to exploit diffusers.

However whenever two cars are in close proximity the following car will lose front end grip. That can be reduced, but ultimately is unavoidable.

Kraken

1,109 posts

145 months

Saturday 20th July
quotequote all
The biggest chequebook (ability to attract talent, fine details etc) will always win out but there's a massive difference to how close everyone is and how many people can afford to play depending on the rules.

Zero rules and the sky is the limit as far as expenditure goes. Closely worded rules with many spec parts, limited testing etc (for example) and the spending becomes about hiring the best people and making the best of marginal gains.