F1 Green Hypocrisy

[jmcgreg]

Given the direction F1 has taken in 2014, I feel compelled to comment. Racing is all about fans and the spectacle itself. That F1 should go down the "green" path, is in my opinion completely ridiculous and the mountain top of hypocrisy. First of all, the argument about "technology transfer" is spurious at best. Road cars have been produced in hybrid iterations for years. Antilock brakes, ditto. Active suspension, oops (banned in F1). Carbon brakes? Maybe, but only in the most expensive of road going cars.

In addition, the hideously expensive rules changes have the negative effect of making the lower tier racing teams even more uncompetitive. They'll just start to "get it" in about four years when the rules will probably change once again. Then its back to the rear - all over again.

What really irks me is seeing lap times 6 seconds slower than 10 years ago and calling it a "good thing" is hardly a good thing. Giving teams a certain fuel budget is maybe a valid idea, but then enforcing how fast they can use said fuel on top of the ration is just plain dumb. That's what they have hordes of technical staff to figure out. Will Buxton can just stop gushing about how fast the cars are and how great they sound.... I have fully functional eyes and ears.

Fuel economy? It is the height of hypocrisy for F1 to tout "fuel economy" when they are ferried around the world on a weekly basis via a fleet of jumbo jet freighters EACH of which burns between 20 and 30 THOUSAND pounds of fuel per hour. Do the math. The fossil fuel they burn in a race is a single drop in an entire sea of dead dinosaurs. If they were really interested in reducing their "carbon footprint" they would ferry the cars and teams on sailing ships.

The sound of the cars?...... Don't get me started on this.

I was looking forward to going to Austin this season, but now I'll stay home and save the planet instead.

[slimfitcasual]

Whether we agree or disagree on any of the "green" focused rule changes, all of this reveals just how dependent F1 is on the consumer automobile industry.

[FrukostScones]

before opening another pointless thread (on the day of youre registration!) look for an existing thread where you can load off your frustration about F1.

[Andres125sx]

IMHO it´s amazing how critic are some people with new engines... when nobody said nothing before about F1 using 7 years old frozen engines...

To me that´s the hypocresy, that´s what did not have any sense


Changing to more eficient engines is the natural process, nothing odd there IMO. The only problem is people have bought the "green argument" completely as if that would be the only reason for the change, when that´s just a political argument more than a real one



Now if you want to talk about how far they went with the fuel flow limitation, so far that they don´t even reach the rpm limiter because it´s not worth without more fuel, we can talk. IMO they went too far, I´d have prefered 1.0 L engines without any fuel or turbo restriction

[flyboy2160]

before opening another pointless thread (on the day of youre registration!) look for an existing thread where you can load off your frustration about F1.

Correct. We already had this discussion here and the thread ended up locked. This will probably end up likewise. Shall we start a poll on how long before this one is closed?

[xpensive]

How about a "26 days and posts before you can open a new thread" - rule?

Heck, add 26 votes while you're at it dear moderator! Ooops...

[Vettel Maggot]

I keep forgetting people have to read 24 hours worth of threads and making sure thier opinion hasnt already been voiced. This site has a horrible way of welcoming new members.

Anyway I agree with everything the OP has said.

[flynfrog]

I keep forgetting people have to read 24 hours worth of threads and making sure thier opinion hasnt already been voiced. This site has a horrible way of welcoming new members.

Anyway I agree with everything the OP has said.

Is it so much to ask to use the search button?

[acosmichippo]

I think people need to realize F1 is a marketing platform first and foremost. There's no reason for engine/car manufacturers to dump millions of dollars a year into F1 if they can't use it to show (accurately or not) that they're on the forefront of motorsport and auto tech. You can't do that with decade-old v8's frozen in development. Granted, you can argue the WAY they've implemented the change could have been handled much better, but I don't think the root of the problem is f1 trying to be more "green".

[rich1701]

The idea that faster lap times is somehow better doesn't make any sense. In 2004 the racing wasn't good, let's face it. Driver aids galore, fewer opportunities to overtake, car performance and tyre performance was a much more dominant factor determining outcome than driver skill. That has to be bad.
In 1991 the cars were about 7 seconds slower than 2004. Tell me 1991 wasn't a better season than 2004. And tell me why that is the case.

[mep]

Two points to throw in here:
1.) Taking 2004 as an example for bad racing is a non-valid comparison. Even if racing would have been bad, it picks out a bad year to prove a weak point. The racing in 2003 and especially in 2005 was amazing. Ferrari was very strong in 2004, but mainly because their main competitors McLaren and Williams came up with very radical cars and both failed totally.

The current season is going to be boring as well because it is totally dominated by the strong Mercedes engine. This does not only affect the top of the field where Mercedes GP is going to win every GP but also messes up the middle field. Teams which were rather poor in the past few years are suddenly on top only because they have the right engine (Williams). Teams which were good in the past are at the end of the field (Lotus, Sauber) now.

2.) The road relevance argument is weak because the new engines we see now are already frozen. So there is no further development going on which also means that nothing can be transferred to road cars. It will also be very hard if not impossible for Renault and Ferrari to catch up with Mercedes when the rules forbid development. Dull racing is programmed with such a situation. It generated a main performance component only for certain teams with the other teams having little chances of catching up. Just as the different tire brands in the past gave big advantages to certain teams only.

[autogyro]

Yet more circular argument is it.

The main point again missed totally.

If any of the ideas to open up F1 technically posted by people with little F1 knowledge were taken up, the performance of the cars would be so high that the organisers would have to build tracks five times bigger than they are now to contain the energy.

All F1 is today is a marketing exercise for sponsors, nothing else.

Those with a decent knowledge of power unit development all know deep down that noise means wasted energy.
Eventually that fact alone would kill F1.

[Coulthard's Jaw]

If any of the ideas to open up F1 technically posted by people with little F1 knowledge were taken up, the performance of the cars would be so high that the organisers would have to build tracks five times bigger than they are now to contain the energy.

A bit hysterical, G forces are the limiting factor on the speed of cars, not track design and space.

[autogyro]

G forces are the limiting factor on the speed of cars, not track design and space.

You are mixing the speed of the cars with lap times.
The cars are capable of far higher speeds than they are geared for already.
The G force in corners is a product of down force.
If the cars were given more power at the same weight they would reach top speed quicker and the brakes would have to work harder, there would be a higher chance of something going wrong.
The cars would be at a higher speed for a longer time and track safety would be compromised.
It is all about energy management and containment.
F1 has not been about technical innovation to increase performance since the late 1970s/80s.
The old turbos and the V10s were the last gasp attempts to justify that ideal.
Dodging regulations and adapting model aeroplane technology is the name of the game today.

[Andres125sx]

If any of the ideas to open up F1 technically posted by people with little F1 knowledge were taken up, the performance of the cars would be so high that the organisers would have to build tracks five times bigger than they are now to contain the energy.

A bit hysterical, G forces are the limiting factor on the speed of cars, not track design and space.

False.

When you design the gravel trap of a corner you must know the max cornering speed cars/bikes will go at that point, because that will tell you how much space you need to put between the track and the audience, and avoid any uncontrolled car crashing against the wall/fence and throwing the audience some hundreds of broken parts

If most cars/bikes go at that point at around 160km/h, but then F1 go at that point at 240km/h... then the track safety is compromised, the audience at that corner is not safe, and also drivers will asume more risks than usual. The example is real, those are the numbers for the first corner of Ricardo Tormo track, and IMO are a perfect example to ilustrate how much F1 cars compromise tracks safety


We all know F1 cars are very quick at the corners, but IMHO most people including myself are not really conscious about how fast they are. Saying they can support 4-5Gs when braking or cornering is easy, understanding what does that really mean is a different story.

I´m not sure if it was Autogyro who said one day F1 cars are close to the overturn point, that was a mindblowing idea to me. When you see a car that flat you can´t even think about an overturn, but they have so much grip, they go so fast at the corners, even with that dimensions they could overturn if they continue improving cornering speeds.

IMO that data and the comparison with MotoGP cornering speeds are good examples to make an idea about how fast F1 cars really are, and why FIA never stops limiting the development and perfomance. They are too quick, it is this simple