Would a London Grand Prix kill off the Silverstone race?
Discussion
RoverP6B said:
The day F1 goes BEV is the day it dies. End of.
F1 should stop pretending to be the be-all and end-all of future road car technology and embrace an openly and unapologetically Luddite attitude to electrification. Historic racing is now a big thing, ITV broadcasts the Goodwood Revival, and as Formula E increasingly becomes more relevant to the road cars of the future, F1 can only survive at all by appealing to the enthusiasts who couldn't give a toss about the sport's carbon footprint and just want to see loud, screaming petrol (or maybe bioethanol?) powered racing cars being driven flat out all the time - none of this nonsense over managing tyre degradation or fuel consumption that has made F1 such a dull spectacle in recent years. Make them 48v mild hybrids if you must, but for goodness sake let's return to proper racing cars that are the ultimate challenge to drive - as Alonso says, today's cars are simply not as difficult to control as those of 15 years ago were.
But F1 doesn't want to be a historic race series, it wants to be current. It always has been.F1 should stop pretending to be the be-all and end-all of future road car technology and embrace an openly and unapologetically Luddite attitude to electrification. Historic racing is now a big thing, ITV broadcasts the Goodwood Revival, and as Formula E increasingly becomes more relevant to the road cars of the future, F1 can only survive at all by appealing to the enthusiasts who couldn't give a toss about the sport's carbon footprint and just want to see loud, screaming petrol (or maybe bioethanol?) powered racing cars being driven flat out all the time - none of this nonsense over managing tyre degradation or fuel consumption that has made F1 such a dull spectacle in recent years. Make them 48v mild hybrids if you must, but for goodness sake let's return to proper racing cars that are the ultimate challenge to drive - as Alonso says, today's cars are simply not as difficult to control as those of 15 years ago were.
Formula e is a stop gap solution and provides an opportunity for testing the water.. there is no possibility in 20 years time, when petrol cars are all bun gone on the roads, that F1 cars will still be using it. It would be plain weird for an F1 car to be using a PU and fuel that the whole world knows (at that point) offers less than half the power to weight ration of electric drive and modern batteries.
Hate the idea all you want - but that's where it's headed.
RoverP6B said:
The day F1 goes BEV is the day it dies. End of.
F1 should stop pretending to be the be-all and end-all of future road car technology and embrace an openly and unapologetically Luddite attitude to electrification. Historic racing is now a big thing, ITV broadcasts the Goodwood Revival, and as Formula E increasingly becomes more relevant to the road cars of the future, F1 can only survive at all by appealing to the enthusiasts who couldn't give a toss about the sport's carbon footprint and just want to see loud, screaming petrol (or maybe bioethanol?) powered racing cars being driven flat out all the time - none of this nonsense over managing tyre degradation or fuel consumption that has made F1 such a dull spectacle in recent years. Make them 48v mild hybrids if you must, but for goodness sake let's return to proper racing cars that are the ultimate challenge to drive - as Alonso says, today's cars are simply not as difficult to control as those of 15 years ago were.
I have a certain sympathy with this point of view but the argument needs some refinement.F1 should stop pretending to be the be-all and end-all of future road car technology and embrace an openly and unapologetically Luddite attitude to electrification. Historic racing is now a big thing, ITV broadcasts the Goodwood Revival, and as Formula E increasingly becomes more relevant to the road cars of the future, F1 can only survive at all by appealing to the enthusiasts who couldn't give a toss about the sport's carbon footprint and just want to see loud, screaming petrol (or maybe bioethanol?) powered racing cars being driven flat out all the time - none of this nonsense over managing tyre degradation or fuel consumption that has made F1 such a dull spectacle in recent years. Make them 48v mild hybrids if you must, but for goodness sake let's return to proper racing cars that are the ultimate challenge to drive - as Alonso says, today's cars are simply not as difficult to control as those of 15 years ago were.
The future of road cars is by no means 'confirmed' as electric. Much is being invested in EVs but there remain what at the moment are insurmountable challenges in terms of infrastructure and energy supply that is highly likely to cause the UK government (and other governments) to refine their targets on transition. Hydrogen is a better solution but the same challenges on infrastructure and energy supply exist. For the short and medium term future, the focus will be increasingly towards energy efficiency and that means hybrid. I work in the environmental sector and the general unofficial consensus is that over the next 50 years at least, we'll see an increase of EVs on the road mixed with Hybrid with pure ICE vehicles the preserve of the enthusiast.
Given the Formula E is evolving (slowly, on all counts) into a credible series, motor sport has the EV side of things covered so F1 makes logical sense to focus upon Hybrid. There may come a point in the future when the two merge - perhaps initially with Hybrid and FE mixed on the grid in the same way Turbo and non-Turbo cars existed in the late 70s and 80s.
The idea of F1 needing to be a balls-out petrol-burning-fest runs the risk of turning it into Classic Rock. Ageing bands like Whitesnake, Kiss, Def Lepard and the like, band members all well into their 60s with a few new younger members thrown in to keep the wheel turning, playing to an audience of the recently retired. Sooner or later, the recently retired will become the recently deceased whilst the younger fans will have discovered a plethora of other rock genres and bands making equally good but different music.
Historic Racing isn't big. It's popular but the two most recent historic meets at Brands Hatch didn't exactly have the crowds flocking in their 10s of thousands. The Goodwood events are just that; 'events'. They and a few others like them, are unique.
F1 has always evolved. Sometimes for the good. Sometimes for the bad. But evolve it always has and always will. If you are only interested in F1 then I can understand the concern if its current incarnation doesn't light your fire. If your'e a motor racing fan, there are something like 300 formulae, championships and series to chose from. But the fact that Silverstone sold every ticket they had for the GP last weekend, as will many other GPs throughout the year and that for almost any other meet at any other circuit you can chivvy up to the gate on race day and buy a ticket, suggests that there's little wrong in the model as it is.
Maybe the cars are too 'easy' to drive. Maybe some of the challenge has been lost. There's many things that's wrong with F1 but there's also many things that are very right with it. See the British GP for further information.
StevieBee said:
I have a certain sympathy with this point of view but the argument needs some refinement.
The future of road cars is by no means 'confirmed' as electric. Much is being invested in EVs but there remain what at the moment are insurmountable challenges in terms of infrastructure and energy supply that is highly likely to cause the UK government (and other governments) to refine their targets on transition. Hydrogen is a better solution but the same challenges on infrastructure and energy supply exist. For the short and medium term future, the focus will be increasingly towards energy efficiency and that means hybrid. I work in the environmental sector and the general unofficial consensus is that over the next 50 years at least, we'll see an increase of EVs on the road mixed with Hybrid with pure ICE vehicles the preserve of the enthusiast.
Given the Formula E is evolving (slowly, on all counts) into a credible series, motor sport has the EV side of things covered so F1 makes logical sense to focus upon Hybrid. There may come a point in the future when the two merge - perhaps initially with Hybrid and FE mixed on the grid in the same way Turbo and non-Turbo cars existed in the late 70s and 80s.
The idea of F1 needing to be a balls-out petrol-burning-fest runs the risk of turning it into Classic Rock. Ageing bands like Whitesnake, Kiss, Def Lepard and the like, band members all well into their 60s with a few new younger members thrown in to keep the wheel turning, playing to an audience of the recently retired. Sooner or later, the recently retired will become the recently deceased whilst the younger fans will have discovered a plethora of other rock genres and bands making equally good but different music.
Historic Racing isn't big. It's popular but the two most recent historic meets at Brands Hatch didn't exactly have the crowds flocking in their 10s of thousands. The Goodwood events are just that; 'events'. They and a few others like them, are unique.
F1 has always evolved. Sometimes for the good. Sometimes for the bad. But evolve it always has and always will. If you are only interested in F1 then I can understand the concern if its current incarnation doesn't light your fire. If your'e a motor racing fan, there are something like 300 formulae, championships and series to chose from. But the fact that Silverstone sold every ticket they had for the GP last weekend, as will many other GPs throughout the year and that for almost any other meet at any other circuit you can chivvy up to the gate on race day and buy a ticket, suggests that there's little wrong in the model as it is.
Maybe the cars are too 'easy' to drive. Maybe some of the challenge has been lost. There's many things that's wrong with F1 but there's also many things that are very right with it. See the British GP for further information.
Most of the problems with EV's on the road or racing essentially come down to range, which comes down to the limitation of current batteries. There are however billions upon billions being invested in solid state batteries, of which functional batteries already show charge rates 6 x faster than present, and double the density. The most recent designs should achieve almost 4 x the density. This will make EV's far lighter and give a range easily sufficient for most people's requirements between night-time charges. It would also allow an overall lighter package to power an F1 car.The future of road cars is by no means 'confirmed' as electric. Much is being invested in EVs but there remain what at the moment are insurmountable challenges in terms of infrastructure and energy supply that is highly likely to cause the UK government (and other governments) to refine their targets on transition. Hydrogen is a better solution but the same challenges on infrastructure and energy supply exist. For the short and medium term future, the focus will be increasingly towards energy efficiency and that means hybrid. I work in the environmental sector and the general unofficial consensus is that over the next 50 years at least, we'll see an increase of EVs on the road mixed with Hybrid with pure ICE vehicles the preserve of the enthusiast.
Given the Formula E is evolving (slowly, on all counts) into a credible series, motor sport has the EV side of things covered so F1 makes logical sense to focus upon Hybrid. There may come a point in the future when the two merge - perhaps initially with Hybrid and FE mixed on the grid in the same way Turbo and non-Turbo cars existed in the late 70s and 80s.
The idea of F1 needing to be a balls-out petrol-burning-fest runs the risk of turning it into Classic Rock. Ageing bands like Whitesnake, Kiss, Def Lepard and the like, band members all well into their 60s with a few new younger members thrown in to keep the wheel turning, playing to an audience of the recently retired. Sooner or later, the recently retired will become the recently deceased whilst the younger fans will have discovered a plethora of other rock genres and bands making equally good but different music.
Historic Racing isn't big. It's popular but the two most recent historic meets at Brands Hatch didn't exactly have the crowds flocking in their 10s of thousands. The Goodwood events are just that; 'events'. They and a few others like them, are unique.
F1 has always evolved. Sometimes for the good. Sometimes for the bad. But evolve it always has and always will. If you are only interested in F1 then I can understand the concern if its current incarnation doesn't light your fire. If your'e a motor racing fan, there are something like 300 formulae, championships and series to chose from. But the fact that Silverstone sold every ticket they had for the GP last weekend, as will many other GPs throughout the year and that for almost any other meet at any other circuit you can chivvy up to the gate on race day and buy a ticket, suggests that there's little wrong in the model as it is.
Maybe the cars are too 'easy' to drive. Maybe some of the challenge has been lost. There's many things that's wrong with F1 but there's also many things that are very right with it. See the British GP for further information.
The question of where the extra electricity will come from is also down to batteries - there is no real shortage of solar power potential, but it's the storage of that energy that is the restriction.
The breakthrough moment for most EV concerns will be achieving mass production of solid state batteries. To be fair, when I say "within the next 20 years we'll be mostly EV etc" that is based upon my own expectation/prediction that in around the next 5 years solid state batteries will start to come on line. The money being piled in to making it happen is now insane, normally a very good indicator that a workable solution is in sight and everyone is rushing to get their first and slap a load of patents over the end result. I doubt very much it will take 50 years to get to a point at which ICE is viewed as dinosaur tech. I'm sure it will take far less - I accept that plotting that future based on today's technology might give that sort of time-frame, but over a period of just 10 years new technologies emerge and converge, often at a faster rate than predicted, and I'm sure if plotted the same forecast in 10 years time, the time-line would be revised heavily downwards for a variety of reasons.
The problem with hydrogen is that the car has to carry it's own fuel power plant, just like an ICE, to convert fuel to usable energy per car. That is a disadvantage compared to an EV where the conversion to electrical power occurs on mass in a power station, and each car just needs the batteries to store it and motor(s) to use it.
Hybrid is indeed a stop-gap solution which makes sense at this point in time. It's got the public used to the idea of electric power and has bought increases in efficiency in an affordable manner. And of course F1 copied that trend, not so much as an efficiency saving but as a way to keep the sport moving in the general direction that the auto industry is moving, and to ease the viewers into the benefits of electric power in motor sport.
TheDeuce said:
The money being piled in to making it happen is now insane, normally a very good indicator that a workable solution is in sight and everyone is rushing to get their first and slap a load of patents over the end result.
My sister company - a marcomms agency - has a client that makes batteries. It's an American company selling globally with their marketing division in the UK. To date, their principal business has been batteries for lawn-mowers, motorbikes, jet-skis, caravans....good products but hardly high-end tech. Yet they've been given bucket loads of cash by the US government as well as securing private investment to develop...well....anything battery related. This is all because western governments have determined the future to be EV, its in policies and dates have been set. This may all well work in these western countries. The fun starts when you look at places like India, parts of Africa, Central and Southern America where car usage is vast yet they hardly have he ability to service that usage level with current infrastructure.If one were to draw a ven diagram representing global car usage; showing one circle ICE and one EV with the overlap being Hybrid, I think the size of the overlap is significantly bigger than many currently believe and will remain in place for a much longer period of time. And I think it is this that is directing the thinking of F1.
StevieBee said:
My sister company - a marcomms agency - has a client that makes batteries. It's an American company selling globally with their marketing division in the UK. To date, their principal business has been batteries for lawn-mowers, motorbikes, jet-skis, caravans....good products but hardly high-end tech. Yet they've been given bucket loads of cash by the US government as well as securing private investment to develop...well....anything battery related. This is all because western governments have determined the future to be EV, its in policies and dates have been set. This may all well work in these western countries. The fun starts when you look at places like India, parts of Africa, Central and Southern America where car usage is vast yet they hardly have he ability to service that usage level with current infrastructure.
If one were to draw a ven diagram representing global car usage; showing one circle ICE and one EV with the overlap being Hybrid, I think the size of the overlap is significantly bigger than many currently believe and will remain in place for a much longer period of time. And I think it is this that is directing the thinking of F1.
I'm speaking of the west - some parts of the world are clearly decades behind. At the turn of this century the motorcar was over 100 years old yet many developing countries still largely used oxon.. It doesn't mean that new cars and new tech weren't a global sales hit elsewhere.If one were to draw a ven diagram representing global car usage; showing one circle ICE and one EV with the overlap being Hybrid, I think the size of the overlap is significantly bigger than many currently believe and will remain in place for a much longer period of time. And I think it is this that is directing the thinking of F1.
The level of infrastructure required to charge EV's is only required because of battery tech limitations today. If you could charge your EV in a few hours at home each night and wake up to an 800 mile range then how many years would pass, even as a daily driver, before you really needed to charge it up anywhere else? That is the reality that solid state cells will bring. There is a huge amount of money being spent on that specific target - the first one who nails the technology will be credited with changing the world quite significantly - and make crazy levels of return on their investment.
The fact that every other company under the sun is finding new things to add batteries too (I have seen the battery mowers..), has more to do with being on trend, and yes - if a government offers a grant companies will pop up or change tactic in order to qualify for it. Electric cars are seen as green, people want to be seen as green. By association anything electric with batteries seems to be pretty hot right now, despite the fact current li-ion batteries are pretty un-economical in many applications.
I do agree that F1 is mirroring whatever the general auto industry does, to a degree. So long as hybrid is the main market as opposed to EV's, then no need for F1 to go fully electric either. But I do think that switch will happen far sooner than in 50 years time. The moment solid state cells are viable then the reasons to buy, or even keep running an ICE car for many people will evaporate almost overnight. If you don't have to worry about re-charging/range, battery lifespan or the associated depreciation then it's a bit of a no brainer. Take the car which costs half what the ICE version costs to run, be on trend and have around double the power and a near silent drive..
I'm aware my entire argument hinges on how quickly they can get solid state cells to mass market by the way. I accept that I can't know how soon that will really be, I just sense there must be a tangible target within view given the billions being spent in that area right now. The Japanese government along with a consortium of Japanese auto and tech companies have as one committed over $90bn usd. That kind of money doesn't appear unless they have spied the light at the end of the tunnel. It's enough money to make things happen pretty quickly.
TobyTR said:
During Qualifying, back in the 2004-2005 they had one-lap qualifying only with their race-fuel levels on board, where as today they're allowed multiple laps over three sessions running minimal fuel levels. Race is the better indicator
Unchanged tracks from 2004 to present, the 2004-2005 V10s are still the fastest in history - still hold majority of official lap records from unchanged tracks (8:3) and the total race times are significantly quicker, even with the V10s pitting 3-4 times per race. The regs, engines and tyres allowed them to race flat-out essentially three-four sprint sessions.
950bhp/605kg kerb weight vs 800bhp+160bhp temporary-KERS/740kg kerb weight... but then you can't have the hybrid tech complexity without the added weight...
even when the 2018-2019 cars pit for fresh super-soft slicks towards the end of the race with just handful laps fuel remaining, their fastest laps are still a bit slower than the 2004 V10s on majority of circuits.
2004-2005 cars still hold:
Melbourne, Bahrain, Nurburg, Hockenheimring, Hungaroring, Monza, Shanghai, Suzuka
track layouts changed since 2005: Catalunya, Monaco, Silverstone, Spa
How has Monaco changed since 2005?Unchanged tracks from 2004 to present, the 2004-2005 V10s are still the fastest in history - still hold majority of official lap records from unchanged tracks (8:3) and the total race times are significantly quicker, even with the V10s pitting 3-4 times per race. The regs, engines and tyres allowed them to race flat-out essentially three-four sprint sessions.
950bhp/605kg kerb weight vs 800bhp+160bhp temporary-KERS/740kg kerb weight... but then you can't have the hybrid tech complexity without the added weight...
even when the 2018-2019 cars pit for fresh super-soft slicks towards the end of the race with just handful laps fuel remaining, their fastest laps are still a bit slower than the 2004 V10s on majority of circuits.
2004-2005 cars still hold:
Melbourne, Bahrain, Nurburg, Hockenheimring, Hungaroring, Monza, Shanghai, Suzuka
track layouts changed since 2005: Catalunya, Monaco, Silverstone, Spa
Edited by TobyTR on Wednesday 17th July 03:56
TheDeuce said:
I'm speaking of the west - some parts of the world are clearly decades behind. At the turn of this century the motorcar was over 100 years old yet many developing countries still largely used oxon.. It doesn't mean that new cars and new tech weren't a global sales hit elsewhere.
The level of infrastructure required to charge EV's is only required because of battery tech limitations today. If you could charge your EV in a few hours at home each night and wake up to an 800 mile range then how many years would pass, even as a daily driver, before you really needed to charge it up anywhere else? That is the reality that solid state cells will bring. There is a huge amount of money being spent on that specific target - the first one who nails the technology will be credited with changing the world quite significantly - and make crazy levels of return on their investment.
The fact that every other company under the sun is finding new things to add batteries too (I have seen the battery mowers..), has more to do with being on trend, and yes - if a government offers a grant companies will pop up or change tactic in order to qualify for it. Electric cars are seen as green, people want to be seen as green. By association anything electric with batteries seems to be pretty hot right now, despite the fact current li-ion batteries are pretty un-economical in many applications.
I do agree that F1 is mirroring whatever the general auto industry does, to a degree. So long as hybrid is the main market as opposed to EV's, then no need for F1 to go fully electric either. But I do think that switch will happen far sooner than in 50 years time. The moment solid state cells are viable then the reasons to buy, or even keep running an ICE car for many people will evaporate almost overnight. If you don't have to worry about re-charging/range, battery lifespan or the associated depreciation then it's a bit of a no brainer. Take the car which costs half what the ICE version costs to run, be on trend and have around double the power and a near silent drive..
I'm aware my entire argument hinges on how quickly they can get solid state cells to mass market by the way. I accept that I can't know how soon that will really be, I just sense there must be a tangible target within view given the billions being spent in that area right now. The Japanese government along with a consortium of Japanese auto and tech companies have as one committed over $90bn usd. That kind of money doesn't appear unless they have spied the light at the end of the tunnel. It's enough money to make things happen pretty quickly.
Home charging is no issue for houses with off-road parking but flats or terraced housing getting a solution for that is the big oneThe level of infrastructure required to charge EV's is only required because of battery tech limitations today. If you could charge your EV in a few hours at home each night and wake up to an 800 mile range then how many years would pass, even as a daily driver, before you really needed to charge it up anywhere else? That is the reality that solid state cells will bring. There is a huge amount of money being spent on that specific target - the first one who nails the technology will be credited with changing the world quite significantly - and make crazy levels of return on their investment.
The fact that every other company under the sun is finding new things to add batteries too (I have seen the battery mowers..), has more to do with being on trend, and yes - if a government offers a grant companies will pop up or change tactic in order to qualify for it. Electric cars are seen as green, people want to be seen as green. By association anything electric with batteries seems to be pretty hot right now, despite the fact current li-ion batteries are pretty un-economical in many applications.
I do agree that F1 is mirroring whatever the general auto industry does, to a degree. So long as hybrid is the main market as opposed to EV's, then no need for F1 to go fully electric either. But I do think that switch will happen far sooner than in 50 years time. The moment solid state cells are viable then the reasons to buy, or even keep running an ICE car for many people will evaporate almost overnight. If you don't have to worry about re-charging/range, battery lifespan or the associated depreciation then it's a bit of a no brainer. Take the car which costs half what the ICE version costs to run, be on trend and have around double the power and a near silent drive..
I'm aware my entire argument hinges on how quickly they can get solid state cells to mass market by the way. I accept that I can't know how soon that will really be, I just sense there must be a tangible target within view given the billions being spent in that area right now. The Japanese government along with a consortium of Japanese auto and tech companies have as one committed over $90bn usd. That kind of money doesn't appear unless they have spied the light at the end of the tunnel. It's enough money to make things happen pretty quickly.
TheDeuce said:
StevieBee said:
My sister company - a marcomms agency - has a client that makes batteries. It's an American company selling globally with their marketing division in the UK. To date, their principal business has been batteries for lawn-mowers, motorbikes, jet-skis, caravans....good products but hardly high-end tech. Yet they've been given bucket loads of cash by the US government as well as securing private investment to develop...well....anything battery related. This is all because western governments have determined the future to be EV, its in policies and dates have been set. This may all well work in these western countries. The fun starts when you look at places like India, parts of Africa, Central and Southern America where car usage is vast yet they hardly have he ability to service that usage level with current infrastructure.
If one were to draw a ven diagram representing global car usage; showing one circle ICE and one EV with the overlap being Hybrid, I think the size of the overlap is significantly bigger than many currently believe and will remain in place for a much longer period of time. And I think it is this that is directing the thinking of F1.
I'm speaking of the west - some parts of the world are clearly decades behind. At the turn of this century the motorcar was over 100 years old yet many developing countries still largely used oxon.. It doesn't mean that new cars and new tech weren't a global sales hit elsewhere.If one were to draw a ven diagram representing global car usage; showing one circle ICE and one EV with the overlap being Hybrid, I think the size of the overlap is significantly bigger than many currently believe and will remain in place for a much longer period of time. And I think it is this that is directing the thinking of F1.
The level of infrastructure required to charge EV's is only required because of battery tech limitations today. If you could charge your EV in a few hours at home each night and wake up to an 800 mile range then how many years would pass, even as a daily driver, before you really needed to charge it up anywhere else? That is the reality that solid state cells will bring. There is a huge amount of money being spent on that specific target - the first one who nails the technology will be credited with changing the world quite significantly - and make crazy levels of return on their investment.
The fact that every other company under the sun is finding new things to add batteries too (I have seen the battery mowers..), has more to do with being on trend, and yes - if a government offers a grant companies will pop up or change tactic in order to qualify for it. Electric cars are seen as green, people want to be seen as green. By association anything electric with batteries seems to be pretty hot right now, despite the fact current li-ion batteries are pretty un-economical in many applications.
I do agree that F1 is mirroring whatever the general auto industry does, to a degree. So long as hybrid is the main market as opposed to EV's, then no need for F1 to go fully electric either. But I do think that switch will happen far sooner than in 50 years time. The moment solid state cells are viable then the reasons to buy, or even keep running an ICE car for many people will evaporate almost overnight. If you don't have to worry about re-charging/range, battery lifespan or the associated depreciation then it's a bit of a no brainer. Take the car which costs half what the ICE version costs to run, be on trend and have around double the power and a near silent drive..
I'm aware my entire argument hinges on how quickly they can get solid state cells to mass market by the way. I accept that I can't know how soon that will really be, I just sense there must be a tangible target within view given the billions being spent in that area right now. The Japanese government along with a consortium of Japanese auto and tech companies have as one committed over $90bn usd. That kind of money doesn't appear unless they have spied the light at the end of the tunnel. It's enough money to make things happen pretty quickly.
I agree that EVs are overhyped, and I cannot see them taking a majority global market share any time soon for the reasons outlined above by others far more knowledgeable about such matters than I. However, if EV racing is the future, FE has stolen a years-long march over F1 and I can't see F1 playing catch-up working. Hybrid technology is all very well if it can be packaged efficiently, but when today's cars are no faster than those of 15 years ago, weigh 50% more and are demonstrably worse from a racing point of view, it's hard to see that as progress. A battery-less 48v mild hybrid system could work, and I'd like to see Mazda's SkyActiv naturally-aspirated engine technology, perhaps combined with a 48v system, going racing as a giant middle finger to both the EV lobby and the idea we have to use small turbocharged engines.
I also wonder about the idea of bringing back F5000 (albeit without the displacement limit) as a feeder series, using basic aero, crate V8s and perhaps even manual gearboxes, keeping entry costs as low as possible, and hopefully producing full grids of thirty-odd cars and close, lively racing...
I also wonder about the idea of bringing back F5000 (albeit without the displacement limit) as a feeder series, using basic aero, crate V8s and perhaps even manual gearboxes, keeping entry costs as low as possible, and hopefully producing full grids of thirty-odd cars and close, lively racing...
nickfrog said:
It can't be a feeder series if it's radically different, by definition. Motorsport is not exactly your forte either...
Well it sure isn't yours sunshine - what definition are you referring to ? In the past 'feeder series ', which isn't a term of art , has included everything from FF1600 and 2000 and FJ at lower end , F Renault , via F3 , latterly F4 , F2 , F 3000 , F Atlantic and F5000. coppice said:
Well it sure isn't yours sunshine - what definition are you referring to ? In the past 'feeder series ', which isn't a term of art , has included everything from FF1600 and 2000 and FJ at lower end , F Renault , via F3 , latterly F4 , F2 , F 3000 , F Atlantic and F5000.
True, I have only worked in the industry for about 10 years. There is a bit of clue in the name though. A feeder series like the ones you quote is supposed to emulate the top flight series, albeit at a lower level of performance and cost, in order to get aspiring drivers progressively dialled in in areas like aero, tyre degrad, gearbox, chassis set up etc. If you make it drastically different as suggested, it's not a feeder series but a mere support race like the Porsche Supercup, not a feeder series to F1. Slight confusion here perhaps between support and feeder series.
There are already several historic SS and F1 championships if that's what floats someone's boat. BOSS GP is pretty good.
And I've been watching so called feeder series for nearly 50 ..
But the point is that it is all one massive exercise in self delusion isn't it ? There's only 20 drivers in F1 , and a few dozen others on test and sim duty . There's no turnover, now that cars are so safe , meaning that Kimi has been in F1 since about 1964- or that's what it feels like .
Single seater series need to wash their own hands - and be excellent racing in their own right, as opposed to peddling myths about being a route to F1 , as if it is the only show in town . It really isn't , and that is what made stuff like F5000 at its best so bloody good . Not to mention 'original' F2 - not the modern support band nobody much watches but a great series in its own right, with F1 drivers , yes, but plenty of others too.
But the point is that it is all one massive exercise in self delusion isn't it ? There's only 20 drivers in F1 , and a few dozen others on test and sim duty . There's no turnover, now that cars are so safe , meaning that Kimi has been in F1 since about 1964- or that's what it feels like .
Single seater series need to wash their own hands - and be excellent racing in their own right, as opposed to peddling myths about being a route to F1 , as if it is the only show in town . It really isn't , and that is what made stuff like F5000 at its best so bloody good . Not to mention 'original' F2 - not the modern support band nobody much watches but a great series in its own right, with F1 drivers , yes, but plenty of others too.
My opinion?
for the money they charge? The British Gp should be a massive festival of British motorsport, kind of like a Good wood.
All the best circuit series should be on, there should be historic stuff, rally stuff, rallycross, even some bike stuff, or perhaps save that for the British bike GP.
No effort is made to make it special, it is all closet series that no-one is really interested in, the cars all look the same, sound the same and the racing while good is better to see on tv.
I know this is all done with deals etc, but for me that is one reason why the cost does not equate to good value. If you had several big series there, rather than just de rigeur stuff that only teams and drivers care about might it be better>
it doesn't matter as it sells out every year for some reason, so why change, but this would for me make it a better event.
for the money they charge? The British Gp should be a massive festival of British motorsport, kind of like a Good wood.
All the best circuit series should be on, there should be historic stuff, rally stuff, rallycross, even some bike stuff, or perhaps save that for the British bike GP.
No effort is made to make it special, it is all closet series that no-one is really interested in, the cars all look the same, sound the same and the racing while good is better to see on tv.
I know this is all done with deals etc, but for me that is one reason why the cost does not equate to good value. If you had several big series there, rather than just de rigeur stuff that only teams and drivers care about might it be better>
it doesn't matter as it sells out every year for some reason, so why change, but this would for me make it a better event.
chunder27 said:
My opinion?
for the money they charge? The British Gp should be a massive festival of British motorsport, kind of like a Good wood.
All the best circuit series should be on, there should be historic stuff, rally stuff, rallycross, even some bike stuff, or perhaps save that for the British bike GP.
No effort is made to make it special, it is all closet series that no-one is really interested in, the cars all look the same, sound the same and the racing while good is better to see on tv.
I know this is all done with deals etc, but for me that is one reason why the cost does not equate to good value. If you had several big series there, rather than just de rigeur stuff that only teams and drivers care about might it be better>
it doesn't matter as it sells out every year for some reason, so why change, but this would for me make it a better event.
F1, F2, MotoGP and a historic race plus a paddock like Goodwood...?for the money they charge? The British Gp should be a massive festival of British motorsport, kind of like a Good wood.
All the best circuit series should be on, there should be historic stuff, rally stuff, rallycross, even some bike stuff, or perhaps save that for the British bike GP.
No effort is made to make it special, it is all closet series that no-one is really interested in, the cars all look the same, sound the same and the racing while good is better to see on tv.
I know this is all done with deals etc, but for me that is one reason why the cost does not equate to good value. If you had several big series there, rather than just de rigeur stuff that only teams and drivers care about might it be better>
it doesn't matter as it sells out every year for some reason, so why change, but this would for me make it a better event.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff