Zandvoort to replace Barcleona in 2020?

[TheDeuce]

Frimley111R said:

Agree but we're not in charge unfortunately. All this 'relevance to road cars and tech filter down to road cars and relevance to daily motoring/cars, etc' is all BS. We want V12 engines that sound like thunder, big wings, big tyres and no stupid penalties for making any mistake - they're racing FFS, not doing their driving test.'

1.6 hybrid engines FFS...!

Hybrid engines are an interim solution to a far bigger future problem for F1.

I want V12 thunder too. Most fans probably do, today. But liberty can't run the sport for today, they have to also be aligning it for 10-20 years time. If they don't, then the value on their investment is lost.

I (with Mrs Deuce) also want to have a kid in the next couple of years. All being well, let's say Deuce Jnr is born 2021. By the time that they're old enough to watch and appreciate F1, the majority of cars they see in their day to day life will be electric. On that day, I'm going to have my work cut out explaining to them that F1 is the 'pinnacle of motorsport' if the cars are using ICE's. At that point, they will already have been taught about the history of ICE and how the technology was superceded by electric. If F1 still uses ICE's, the future generations would see it as some sort of throwback/classic race series, not a tech fest or the pinnacle of anything at all.

Growing old is a bd as inevitably the world changes in ways we aren't happy about, and we lose things we love. But in business, those changes need to be tracked and the business must evolve along with a changing world.

At some point F1 will have to go electric. That's sad for me, but I can't see any realistic alternative if it is to appeal on a grand scale to future generations. Accepting that future, there isn't any alternative but to steer the sport in that direction today. Hence, hybrid.

[Eric Mc]

Where is the excitement?

Where is the thrill?

Explain to me why I should get "revved up" (obviously soon to be a redundant phrase) about a motor sport world with no risk, no noise, no sensory stimulation?

[Kraken]

Eric Mc said:

Where is the excitement?

Where is the thrill?

Explain to me why I should get "revved up" (obviously soon to be a redundant phrase) about a motor sport world with no risk, no noise, no sensory stimulation?

Where do you get no risk from? Replace the ICE engines with electric engines of the same power and the risk would be the same.

Noise really depends on your order of priorities. My ideal motorsport would be deep, growling V8s, with wheel to wheel racing and the drivers having to work hard. Out of those criteria noise would be bottom of the list for me if I had to choose.

When I'm watching a tense, wheel to wheel battle, the noise doesn't come into for me but we're all different.

[DeltonaS]

chunder27 said:

The only reason it is there is Max, he is also sponsored by Jumbo, funny that.

Question was why the race is held at Zandvoort and not Assen.

Not why the F1 calendar gets a race in the NL.

[entropy]

thegreenhell said:

F1 is popular because it is F1, because of all those things it was, all the mystique, the bravado, the V12 and noise and thunder. That is what made F1 what it is today, and it would still be just as popular, if not more so, if it had all those elements. F1 didn't evolve into its current state because it's what anyone wanted to see. Nobody voted for this. No fans asked to ban V12s, make the cars so aero dependent that the only way they can pass each other is with an artificial aid, or penalise the drivers if their car suffered any engine or gearbox failures beyond an arbitrary limit. In fact, if F1 was still all that, and someone came along and started a brand new series with hybrids, DRS and multiple penalties for all sorts of crap, it would be as popular as.. Formula E.

V12s were never banned. Biggest myth in motoring racing - along with rotary engines being supposedly banned in Le Mans. Ferrari gave up on them in the mid-90s because they were too heavy and thirsty so they followed the herd and went with V10s which offered the better compromise.

When have the fans ever had a say in the sport? 1976 British GP to re-instate James Hunt? Booing Vettel & Rosberg on the podium? Fan survey? It's predominantly down to racing evolution, the rulemakers, the commercial rights holders, the teams and manufacturers who come up with the wrong answers in the eyes of the fans. To them we're just a bonus.

[Teddy Lop]

entropy said:

V12s were never banned. Biggest myth in motoring racing - along with rotary engines being supposedly banned in Le Mans. Ferrari gave up on them in the mid-90s because they were too heavy and thirsty so they followed the herd and went with V10s which offered the better compromise.

When have the fans ever had a say in the sport? 1976 British GP to re-instate James Hunt? Booing Vettel & Rosberg on the podium? Fan survey? It's predominantly down to racing evolution, the rulemakers, the commercial rights holders, the teams and manufacturers who come up with the wrong answers in the eyes of the fans. To them we're just a bonus.

I thought the 3 litre V10 then 2.4 litre V8 was made the standard every team was required to build, banning any other config by default? I think you're correct in that ferrari had shifted to the V10 of their own accord by this point.

[Allyc85]

Well Wtcr was a bit of a procession just now. Doesn’t bode well for F1!

[Deesee]

A little bit more detail out now..

40 million euros is the 1st yr payment.

Min, 25 million from ticket sales.

The rest must come from sponsors (5) but they must be equal, (as well as a payment from the headline sponsor) and the local government has pledged 4 million (which they expect to double back as a return).