The current Formula One manufacturers have come to an agreement to reduce the cost of a V6 Hybrid power unit considerably, and ensure that customer teams will not be left without an engine deal.
Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
kooleracer wrote:This is how a modern F1 car should look like, F1 should not clinch to the past but more important F1 cars should always have something from the past. The concept by Ferrari and the Adrian Newey ultimate F1 car. Is not the way F1 should go in my opinion. Those cars have too much bodywork. Formula cars never have much body work, its about a clean car. For me an F1 cars must have 4 wheels that aren't boxed in by bodywork, when the moment comes when that stops then it isn't a formula car anymore. the DW12 indycar has rear protection because of the speeds they are doing on ovals when they are racing closely. But in F1 thats is not necessary. The Audi concept is the best modern interpretation i have seen yet of F1. Its clean, but aggresive and proportions are right and the big wheels just make it look like real monster.
This is an 1984 MP4/2 with some fresh paint... The most successful f1 car in my opinion (3 years in use, 3 Drivers championships) but a design of the past... Nice try though
great news. things can only even get better from that point.
cheaper engines, more powerfull engines, less restrictive rules,
more aero effects to add to the competition, paired with the
already 2016-starting possibility for simply put 'customer parts' [Haas using Ferrari parts]
will bring a lot of breathing space for smaller teams to work with.
"Explain the ending to F1 in football terms"
"Hamilton was beating Verstappen 7-0, then the ref decided F%$& rules, next goal wins
while also sending off 4 Hamilton players to make it more interesting"
I'd like to see tires that last the whole race distance. They could still have a rule that mandates the use of both compounds.
Flat out racing from lap #1 is what I miss...
nokivasara wrote:I'd like to see tires that last the whole race distance. They could still have a rule that mandates the use of both compounds.
Flat out racing from lap #1 is what I miss...
nokivasara wrote:I'd like to see tires that last the whole race distance. They could still have a rule that mandates the use of both compounds.
Flat out racing from lap #1 is what I miss...
We had this already. It wasn't that great.
Your're right, 2005 (?) wasn't that great in that aspect, but now, a decade later I'm sure there would be more grip available even if they were to last the whole race.
Tire management is a big part in racing but it has gone too far IMHO, even if it's better now than a few years ago. Look at Superbike, they go balls to the wall from the green flag and we, the spectators, get to see amazing action on every single lap. That's what I'd like to see in F1.
nokivasara wrote:I'd like to see tires that last the whole race distance. They could still have a rule that mandates the use of both compounds.
Flat out racing from lap #1 is what I miss...
Yeah sure... and than you flat spot a front tyre in lap 3 and you still need 2 do 54more laps on them...
Not a great idea ..
If you want flat out racing, than bring back the refuelling..
nokivasara wrote:I'd like to see tires that last the whole race distance. They could still have a rule that mandates the use of both compounds.
Flat out racing from lap #1 is what I miss...
Yeah sure... and than you flat spot a front tyre in lap 3 and you still need 2 do 54more laps on them...
Not a great idea ..
If you want flat out racing, than bring back the refuelling..
At no point does the quote above say that one set must be used for the whole race, rather the tyres CAN last the whole race but there's still a mandated pitstop, though this happened in 2010 and it was pretty dull anyways.
I have been floating around a idea on tyres in my head, and would like to see who would support it. It goes like this:
* Every race will be governed by the same Hard/Medium/Soft compounds - Ditch the chewing gum super soft.
* The target for each compound is to do a maximum of 50Km for the soft, 120Km for the Medium and 200Km for the Hard compound. ** Based on an average degradation track surface** - Each compound would have a 0.7 to 1.2 of a second between them depending on the track surface.
* Each driver has a single hard compound, two mediums and three softs for Quali & the race
* Drivers in Q3 must start on the set they set their fastest time on - Also must use all 3 compounds in the race
* Drivers in Q2 must start on the set they set their fastest time on - However can use any two compounds in the race
* Drivers in Q3 have free reign over the tyre they start on and full strategy call.
The reason i am doing this is to allow the guys from the back to come through on a single stop race or two at tops if the track is really abrasive, but also to allow the rest of the grid to be able to compete on a two or three stopper. Its also to allow the drivers to push and give their maximum performance for some races and for others it will be on tyre management and who can make a 1 or 2 stopper work from the back and up front who can make a 2 or 3 stopper work. This way, the driver who wins the championship will not only have to drive in a Prost manner but also a Senna manner to win the title. It is also designed to get drivers out in Q1, the top guys will try to get through on a set of Mediums, the guys in the middle and back will try to get through using all of their softs as they won't need them in the race. Im not giving pit stop windows, as I'm giving more than enough strategy lea-way for the teams to make the best of what they have.
Races will be closer from front to back, but also i think will make Quali an even bigger must see event in the context of the race.
I would not have points in Quali, but if there was a 10 point prize for those who were fastest in Q1 the most through the season, it may just be a good thing to get the guys out to treat quail as a race in effect. I would also do one last thing, drivers would have to get their ass out of the garage as id also start Q1 for all cars with 60Kg of fuel on each car, so to go fast in Q3, the top guys must get out and fuel burn, of which they may just use that extra set of Mediums I'm giving them to run and run.
Each car would have 125Kg of fuel for the race, but no fuel flow meter, just 125Kg to last up to 310Km of racing. 125Kg is still up to 50Kg less than what was needed at some tracks for the V8s, however 125Kg would do a almost full power 54 laps at Monza, but at Singapore it would only last 70% of the race at full power due to the stop/start nature of the track.
I want drivers to be able to push when they want to as some races will be fuel limited, others tyre limited, some neither, some both. So in essence, the best driver will win the title in the best all round car.
The circuits vary too much for one compound to achieve 50km at each track. That is why there are supersofts -> hard, the idea is supposed to be that 1 of the 4 compounds will be right for a 2/3 stop race. At some of the street circuits the supersofts last 20 laps but at other tracks they wont make 5.
Increasing the fuel amount wont encoruage teams to go flat out, they rarely take the full 100kg as it is and they didnt brim the tank for the v8s either, its faster to do some fuel saving than carry the extra weight for the whole race.
Seems like they've opted for the sensible route, which is upping the fuel flow on existing PUs.
I think they should just ditch the fuel flow limit and just have a tank volume limit. Who cares when they use the fuel.
Love to see wider tires being researched. I hope they go back to wide rears. Not that I am that sentimental. but when every RW performance car has wider rears than fronts it seems very artificial for F1 to not have that.
BTW. I think they already made a big improvement by bringing back the sparks. Maybe stupid, but these wide tracks kill all perception of speed. Often when they switch cameras I have to look whether the car is actually at speed or having a failure. With the sparks there is no question that they are going fast.
Edax wrote:
Love to see wider tires being researched. I hope they go back to wide rears. Not that I am that sentimental. but when every RW performance car has wider rears than fronts it seems very artificial for F1 to not have that. http://cdn.images.autosport.com/f1great ... 082900.jpg
I'm not sure how changing the rule is going to help costs, particularly changing the engine rules. It certainly won't get more teams into the sport. Bernie and his pals need to realize that their running short of teams and nobody's going to make the commitment to get in (probably a 3 year process) if they change the rules every three years. F1 was really successful in the 70s and perhaps 90s-2000s due to rule stability
The only rule proposals I've heard in the last few years that I think make sense are:
- Change to more "normal" racing wheel diameters (17 or 18 inchers) and allow more different tyre manufacturers. My guess is the effect on costs will be neutral as the manufacturers would pay teams to run their tyres rather than the other way now where Pirelli probably get paid for tyres. i've heard in the past that Michellin for example would only get into F1 tyres if they were the same as what they run in prototypes as the F1 14 inchers are too weird a size. Teams would have to develop all new suspensions and that have knock on chassis design impact.
- Apportion more of the down force to ground effect: Martin Brundle mentioned this in the last F1 race as a way to allow cars to run closer. I think this makes sense as today's cars are very wing dependent and obviously a wing doesn't run well in another car's upwash. Personally I like the total amount of down force they're running today as the cars aren't so totally glued down as they were in days gone by.
I don't understand the idea of louder cars. I went to the Montreal GP last year and it was nice not to have to wear ears plugs/not have a splitting headache at the end of the race. And I was sitting on the straight! I had been to a GP (also in Montreal) before back in 1996 when they ran anything from V8 to V12s and the noise was great but you could only take it for so long. For TV they can simply turn the volume up. Plus now you can hear the other car noises like the tyres and the brakes both live and on TV. Trust me the brake/tyre noises at the hairpin are just as exciting as the engine noises.
My personal rule changes would be a return to refueling: same total fuel limitation and same fuel flow limits. The fuel flow limits I think are invisible to the audience and total fuel is an issue at only a few tracks based on last year's experience plus teams will save fuel to save weigh anyway. today's cars look big and humpbacked partially because they have to carry so much fuel plus I *think* (maybe I'm wrong) the drivers have to baby the cars early in the race because they're so heavy. Refueling would bring some more tactics back in as the longer refueling stop might pay off in running lighter overall.
As for the looks of the cars, who cares? The best looking cars are ones that win. I never liked the looks of the old Williams that Mansell and co drove to championships because I thought they were bulky looking but nobody get points for looks
This was mooted and then dropped for 2013 but wonder why this isn't being thrown into the mix with current discussions? Seems to me that, with more powerful engines too, this would achieve the goals the fia are after - and would likely leave a less turbulent wake/aid overtaking.
This was mooted and then dropped for 2013 but wonder why this isn't being thrown into the mix with current discussions? Seems to me that, with more powerful engines too, this would achieve the goals the fia are after - and would likely leave a less turbulent wake/aid overtaking.
F1 should only make the necessary changes to the PU to make them louder, on the chassis side i totally agree with your article. I also think ground effect is the cheapest way to add downforce without creating a lot of drag. Also with ground effect it would guarantee that even the slowest cars would be a lot quicker then GP2 cars or other race series. Also i think the turbulent air is less with ground effect then with all the little vortex generators teams use nowadays.
Irvine:"If you don't have a good car you can't win it, unless you are Michael or Senna. Lots of guys won in Adrian Newey's cars, big deal. Adrian is the real genius out there, there is Senna, there is Michael and there is Newey.They were the three great talents."
