F1 on a road to nowhere...?

[FrukostScones]

I blame your perceived demise on the rise of the microcomputers!
No soul, just zeroes and ones. Pure efficiency, keeps the air thin at the top!

I follow F1 since 1989. Old cars were ugly in my opinion, the races were not always exciting.
I think 2007,2008,2009,2010 were awesome seasons, no processional races as far as I remember, 2000-2004 were very dull. 2011 was ruined by DRS.

You can keep apart the F1 cars without livery! By the way those old cars look pretty much the same.

F1 is still the pinnacle of motorsports engineering. Maybe more than ever.

Rule changes are fine, only Newey and the mass spending of Red Bull sucks, Ferrari always spent the most but they were kind of inefficient sometimes.

Tryin to understand the myth of aero is difficult but fun (i can't really understand how it works). At least I can see the things I speculate about, engine and Kers are inside, suspension (interesting parts also)also.

No aero and big open engines? there are open touring cars series that fullfill those needs.

So lets wait for the Turbo cars, maybe they will ruin F1 ???

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Which automotive series is predominately aero based?

Non other than f1.

It's a situation borne out of an escalated arms race, now most teams have their own wind tunnels and Cfd computers etc. The day aero is nullified as a performance differentiator, is the day the sport can move forward from it's "best car wins it" tag.

[neilbah]

i have watched F1 solidly since the 80s, F1 has never been perfect in my opinion, its controlled by a crafty tycoon, who is motivated by dirty money and glam, rather than dirty oil rags and burning rubber, a villain everyone loves to hate and hates to love perhapse but he does have some rather stupid suggestions at times.

Do we want F1 to be green? it seems to be confused about which direction to go in, can motorsport still be exciting without screaming high revs? whats this carbon neutral rubbish like macca claim? i suspect turbo engines will mute the high rev noise? but hopefully nothing like the lemans TDi cars, ever.

one of my fav memories of f1 was standing by the silverstone hangar straight in 1994, and the variety and ferocity of the different engine sounds. Currently theyre still very loud butits a shame they all sound very samey now, the ebd made a nice change with some audible differences but again this innovation is being muted.

personally i liked differing amounts of cylinders and the 80s/90s engine blow ups, it helps in creating the image of a sport that pushes components to the maximum, but i also accept that there needs to be a cap on the spending.. so were always with a catch 22.

More recently, and despite the tight ruling there is still some innovation, F ducts, exhausts, flexing parts and cars that change height/pitch, within the spirit of the rules? probably not but these loopholes have been allowed thru and led to 3 seasons of copycat development races where the poorer teams are left blue flagging. Enough ranting for now.

[hardingfv32]

What we're saying is that F1 has become hamstrung by poor decision making that inhibits creativity allowing costs to spiral.

When the rules were more lose it was exciting to see what would be created by the engineers.

I assume you are talking about poor decisions made by the F1 series management. This is completely wrong. Their decisions have been just fine. For them there is more than better racing to manage. So to say that they have made poor decisions fails to recognizes the complexity of this business or sport.

Excess speed relative to the racing venues would be one of the main drivers of the restrictions we have. It is generally not physically or financially possible to modify tracks to handle the speed that comes from uncontrolled creativity.

My family raced karts for a number of years and I found the races just as processional as those found in F1 from a spectator point of view.

Brian

[NonNewtonic]

What we're saying is that F1 has become hamstrung by poor decision making that inhibits creativity allowing costs to spiral.

When the rules were more lose it was exciting to see what would be created by the engineers.

I assume you are talking about poor decisions made by the F1 series management. This is completely wrong. Their decisions have been just fine. For them there is more than better racing to manage. So to say that they have made poor decisions fails to recognizes the complexity of this business or sport.

Excess speed relative to the racing venues would be one of the main drivers of the restrictions we have. It is generally not physically or financially possible to modify tracks to handle the speed that comes from uncontrolled creativity.

My family raced karts for a number of years and I found the races just as processional as those found in F1 from a spectator point of view.

Brian

I agree with Brian the main purpose the FIA implement all these rules is to prevent cars from gaining too much DF and hence cornering at a higher speed which increase the risk of a deadly accident and it will cost much more cheaper to implement those rules rather than modifying the track as what I can recall is the organisers of Imola actually spent 5 million dollars to modify the corner which the great Aryton Senna crashed and died. And Senna is the last driver who died in a race because since then the FIA has implement bunch of rules in order to prevent cars from going faster.

[strad]

Does anyone watch the videos I post in the vintage video thread, or is it a waste of time?...Stroll thru history..Right now we are looking at the 70s