Motorsport On Monday: 24/3/14
PH decides to re-write the F1 rulebook; Bernie, you can thank us later
This in 2014 isn't looking likely
The series needed it, as a fifth year of unimpeachable reliability and Herr Vettel romping away into the distance from Friday morning to Sunday evening doesn't bare thinking about. And although the new rules seem to have stopped that, the question is, have they worked for you?
That's why at PH we're pondering if Jean Todt gave us a call and a green light for some no doubt rather lucrative consultancy work hacking a new set of rules together, what would PHers like to see in there? Soapboxes at the ready...
The progress of turbos in F1...
We'll start with what's been probably the most controversial point of the season so far: the motors. Are they noisy enough for you? Do you think extra hybrid energy recovery is the way forward? Or would you prefer an open engine formula with close balance of performance regulations and power equalised by fuel flow rate?
For me at least, it'd be a return to the 3.5-litre V10 era on sound alone, or the period of 1.5-litre turbos, with massive levels of power really testing the drivers. I suppose, then, my like for small capacity turbos in F1 proves that the new rules really could work if reliabilityimproves just a touch and, more importantly, if the teams manage to liberate a few more decibels from the new V6s. Certainly by the way the cars were moving around in the wet in Australia, they're proving to be a suitably largehandful.
Bring this back, says Sean
For me, the engine changes would only play a small part and would be made with a number of other tweaks to the design of the cars, the tyres they use and even whether or not refuelling would be allowed.
One thing's for sure, my ideal F1 car wouldn't have any frontal appendage that could be likened to the snout of an anteater's nose, a platypus's beak, an elephant tusk or, ah, any other anatomical part. In fact, it'd pretty much look like a McLaren MP4/5.
But there's some (albeit shaky) science behind that.
Although the FIA has tried this year, a serious reduction in downforce would improve the racing. Forget drivers whinging about a lack of grip or balance - I'm sure their millions of euros will keep them warm at night, plus it's their job to drive what they're given - the sport is about entertainment. Even more so today with fans and sponsors picking up the tab.
Are all these really necessary?
Tyres
Much has been made of tyres in recent F1 seasons. Too much maybe, as an excuse for under-performing, overpaid superstars? That's another story entirely...
But, next to tyre regs from 30 years ago, current rules do seem just a bit over complicated. Rather than forcing teams to use two different compounds during the race, how about a soft and a hard with a set performance difference? Let's say the soft was two seconds a lap quicker (roughly) but you could go longer on the hards without pitting - similar to recent years maybe, but you wouldn't have to use both compounds and the softs wouldn't fall apart after a handful of laps.
Also, bring back qualifying tyres. Formula 1 is about pushing the envelope of what's possible in terms of engineering, as well as a drivers' mental and physical ability. Chucking four one-lap super sticky specials at the car means we'd certainly get a show.
Sean wants a return for refuelling too
I say allow it. It brings back another strategic element and would mean the soft/hard tyre debate would have greater importance, as tyres are inextricably linked with fuel loads.
Example: you're on a three-stop strategy and use soft tyres every stint, refuelling in small amounts at each pit stop. With a rival on a two stopper using the hard tyre first and a high fuel load, pitting for a splash and dash and some soft rubber with 10 laps to go, if the balance between the two tyres was right, it could set the race up for an almighty final battle.
Structure
On the subject of qualifying, I think it should be an open one-hour long session with no parc ferme rules imposing fuel loads to start the race on.
Turbos in F1 have some heritage!
I'd also ban double points and simplify the system to keep the championship closer for longer. 10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1 with one for fastest lap would do it.
We've not even talked about DRS yet, but with so much murmuring around the new rules, now's the time to speak up. What would you like to see - or not see - in F1?
[McLaren MP4/5 pic: LAT]
Tyres, no restriction. Soft, hard, whatever. Let the teams and car/manufacturers live or die by their decisions.
Engines, something like 3 litre n/a. With an inlet restrictor if the poor drivers can't handle the power or to try and equal it all. No KERRS or similar. Compulsory fuel stops.
That's a start....
From what I now recall it was Bernie who was getting frustrated with people settling for 2nd or 3rd and not going for the win because they would only drop two/four points to the winner. This, he argued (partly) led to processional races where no-one took risks or made last ditch lunges up the inside.
So, what did he do? He changed the points system to the current one. The idea was that having a large gap between 1st and 2nd would encourage people to really go for the win. Unfortunately, a negative effect of this, and one that we saw last year, is that it can allow one driver to run away by 2/3 of the season. So, Bernie then decides to have a new rule to counter that (double points).
If the double points rule results in a deserved champion-elect to lose the title because a Marussia pulls out on him and wipes him out, will that be fair? Will Bernie then think up another rule to fix that problem? I think inventing new rules to counter the unintended consequences of previous ones is dangerous. Better to chop the tree down and grow a new one then let it grow out of control.
Bernie - maybe have a mini-league for the last 4 races, like in rubgy. The top 5/6 drivers after the first 14/15 races go into a mini championship between them, they start from 0 points and the person who has the most points by the final race is the champion.
I mean, if everyone has 100kg for the race, let them use it however they want. If someone goes nuts, they run out before the end.
And, the sound of the current cars is just wrong. Far too quiet.
Fix the sound, allow refuelling, and get rid of the fuel flow limitation and I reckon we'd be half way there.
DRS can be ditched all together. It's rubbish.
Ditch double points. It's worse than DRS.
Return to early 2000's wing rules. They were better proportioned. Maybe reduce the box for front and rear wing to reduce overall downforce, and make sure the silly wings everywhere can't be employed. Removing downforce all together would remove a part of F1 for me. Aero is always going to be included, accept it.
Open Wheel, Open Cotpit must be maintained. Safety is paramount yes, but they get paid millions to put their lives at risk, give them a little risk.
Tyre Rules as stated in the article. 25-18-15... points can stay. And I like the current quali set up so I want to keep that.
F1 has a major problem; ‘The Show’…. Its become about entertainment as much as an engineering test. In other sports, if someone/ team dominates, they just get on with it. In Motorsport, they have to ‘handicap’ them so there is no domination – and take the series down to the wire.
There should be 2 sets of tyres; hard and soft – and you can use whatever you want. No mandatory choice. Also, a 1.6T engine, but with as many/ few cylinders as you want.
F1 has become far too regimented – with far too little individualism.
By contrast, the WEC, while not perfect is doing most things right. (apart from maybe the BoP)
The only change I would make right now would be to scrap the double points thing. That's a complete farce and I still can't believe it's actually going to happen.
A question for the engineers out there. Would getting rid of the fuel flow rate restriction result in louder cars (as a result of increased revs)?
I'm a bit disappointed that the thing people complain about most is the 'lack of noise' tho - they moan about lack of overtaking and lack of excitement which is fair enough - but lack of noise is hardly the biggest problem in motor racing is it?
If nothing else, these e-turbos are an interesting thing which needs some engineer effort expending to get them ready for road use - that alone is a good reason to watch and wait I think. They have the potential for turbo power levels with supercharger-like delivery and much lower maintenance/wear-and-year issues BUT there are packaging issues AND someone has to prod manufacturers to look at them more closely.
Appreciate this is riddled with flaws, but at least it would be exciting...!
Then it'll be a two horse race and more to complain about.
The fuel flow limit is to stop banzi qualifying tune, and therefore having the expense of making engines to withstand 1500 bhp and then only run 700 bhp during the race.
Really, I'm liking the new setup for engines, they just need to get rid of the ugly front ends and reduce the aero a bit further still and job's a carrot.
I do agree with the old style points system and ditch the double points.
Everything else, team can do as they please
RWD, AWD, 4 wheel steer, 6 wheels, pram tires up front, crazy wings, Mid-engine, rear-engine - you name it
Let Newey et al go absolutely bonkers to get the best out of the V8 up to the 700bhp limit
It should be about envelope pushing design, strategy and driver skill... no more radio messages telling drivers not to push it
Then it'll be a two horse race and more to complain about.
The stricter the tech rules, the more the top teams will spend on eking out teeny tiny advantages - because there is simply no scope for something more radical...
When off the leash, sheer brilliance wins from loadsamoney every single time...
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff