The Future Of F1 As The Pinnacle Of Technology Is Endangered?

A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter does not belong here.
mclaren111
63
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:49 am
Location: JHB Hell Hole - South Africa

Re: The Future Of F1 As The Pinnacle Of Technology Is Endangered?

Post by mclaren111 » Mon Jun 19, 2017 12:21 pm

Stormy wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 10:55 pm
mclaren111 wrote:
Wed Jun 14, 2017 2:13 pm
Totally agree.

F1 must move away from this "green" sport nonsense.

There is a hundred other ways where they can help "save" the planet.

Just by banning in season testing they have saved enough to give them a "free ride" for the next 30 years !!!!!!!!!!
It's not just about saving the world. It's about the big manufacturers showcasing their technology which is the future of the automotive industry. They don't care about IC engines anymore, that's the past and it will be reserved only for enthusiasts in the future.
F1 is more than that and has always been. If the big manufacturers don't want in they can leave. F1 should move away from the "reliance" of the big manufacturers. At the moment they have far to much influence.

F1 = IC and loud IC.

Otherwise go to Formula E, LMP1 etc

Stormy
1
User avatar
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2017 9:34 pm

Re: The Future Of F1 As The Pinnacle Of Technology Is Endangered?

Post by Stormy » Mon Jun 19, 2017 12:32 pm

mclaren111 wrote:
Mon Jun 19, 2017 12:21 pm
Stormy wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 10:55 pm
mclaren111 wrote:
Wed Jun 14, 2017 2:13 pm
Totally agree.

F1 must move away from this "green" sport nonsense.

There is a hundred other ways where they can help "save" the planet.

Just by banning in season testing they have saved enough to give them a "free ride" for the next 30 years !!!!!!!!!!
It's not just about saving the world. It's about the big manufacturers showcasing their technology which is the future of the automotive industry. They don't care about IC engines anymore, that's the past and it will be reserved only for enthusiasts in the future.
F1 is more than that and has always been. If the big manufacturers don't want in they can leave. F1 should move away from the "reliance" of the big manufacturers. At the moment they have far to much influence.

F1 = IC and loud IC.

Otherwise go to Formula E, LMP1 etc
Yeah but without the manufacturers F1 will become a low budget spec series like IndyCar.

mclaren111
63
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:49 am
Location: JHB Hell Hole - South Africa

Re: The Future Of F1 As The Pinnacle Of Technology Is Endangered?

Post by mclaren111 » Mon Jun 19, 2017 12:46 pm

Stormy wrote:
Mon Jun 19, 2017 12:32 pm
mclaren111 wrote:
Mon Jun 19, 2017 12:21 pm
Stormy wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 10:55 pm


It's not just about saving the world. It's about the big manufacturers showcasing their technology which is the future of the automotive industry. They don't care about IC engines anymore, that's the past and it will be reserved only for enthusiasts in the future.
F1 is more than that and has always been. If the big manufacturers don't want in they can leave. F1 should move away from the "reliance" of the big manufacturers. At the moment they have far to much influence.

F1 = IC and loud IC.

Otherwise go to Formula E, LMP1 etc
Yeah but without the manufacturers F1 will become a low budget spec series like IndyCar.
I disagree. I think if they do their marketing right F1 will stay at the top with the difference being F1 make the rules and the big manufacturers decide whether they are in or out as it has always been before.

I have been following F1 since the 70's and 2014 to 2016 has been the worst years ever :(

roon
101
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2016 6:04 pm

Re: The Future Of F1 As The Pinnacle Of Technology Is Endangered?

Post by roon » Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:49 pm

In terms of what F1 "is" and "has always been," you could say that it was always a prestigious/expensive form of racing, competition and gambling. That it became i.c.e. motor racing specifically, was a reflection of technology available at the time—something which is always changing. Just as an understanding of engine position & suspension types changed over the decades of F1's existence.

The abscense or presence of unmuffled internal combustion engines is not an integral nor absolutely necessary feature of the sport. Were front engines? Because mid engines replaced them. Were skinny tires? Because wide ones replaced them. Were wingless cars? Because winged ones replaced them. Were unmuffled internal combustion engines? Because...

F1 was not solely created because people wanted to hear specific types of exhaust notes (of which people have various opinions of what sounds good). This was a single feature among many, a byproduct. Technologically F1 could become anything. The current engine formula is a preview of that.

3jawchuck
24
User avatar
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 7:57 am

Re: The Future Of F1 As The Pinnacle Of Technology Is Endangered?

Post by 3jawchuck » Mon Jun 19, 2017 8:00 pm

roon wrote:
Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:49 pm
In terms of what F1 "is" and "has always been," you could say that it was always a prestigious/expensive form of racing, competition and gambling. That it became i.c.e. motor racing specifically, was a reflection of technology available at the time—something which is always changing. Just as an understanding of engine position & suspension types changed over the decades of F1's existence.

The abscense or presence of unmuffled internal combustion engines is not an integral nor absolutely necessary feature of the sport. Were front engines? Because mid engines replaced them. Were skinny tires? Because wide ones replaced them. Were wingless cars? Because winged ones replaced them. Were unmuffled internal combustion engines? Because...

F1 was not solely created because people wanted to hear specific types of exhaust notes (of which people have various opinions of what sounds good). This was a single feature among many, a byproduct. Technologically F1 could become anything. The current engine formula is a preview of that.
I am in agreement with you on this. Can I ask you something totally subjective and OT? What do you think is the pinnacle of F1 and what do you think was the era of the best races in F1?

For me, the pinnacle was just prior to 1994, technology was really booming and the cars were simple yet complex. The best racing for me comes from the 1970s, although I was not alive then, I have seen some nice racing.

roon
101
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2016 6:04 pm

Re: The Future Of F1 As The Pinnacle Of Technology Is Endangered?

Post by roon » Mon Jun 19, 2017 11:27 pm

3jawchuck wrote:
Mon Jun 19, 2017 8:00 pm
roon wrote:
Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:49 pm
In terms of what F1 "is" and "has always been," you could say that it was always a prestigious/expensive form of racing, competition and gambling. That it became i.c.e. motor racing specifically, was a reflection of technology available at the time—something which is always changing. Just as an understanding of engine position & suspension types changed over the decades of F1's existence.

The abscense or presence of unmuffled internal combustion engines is not an integral nor absolutely necessary feature of the sport. Were front engines? Because mid engines replaced them. Were skinny tires? Because wide ones replaced them. Were wingless cars? Because winged ones replaced them. Were unmuffled internal combustion engines? Because...

F1 was not solely created because people wanted to hear specific types of exhaust notes (of which people have various opinions of what sounds good). This was a single feature among many, a byproduct. Technologically F1 could become anything. The current engine formula is a preview of that.
I am in agreement with you on this. Can I ask you something totally subjective and OT? What do you think is the pinnacle of F1 and what do you think was the era of the best races in F1?

For me, the pinnacle was just prior to 1994, technology was really booming and the cars were simple yet complex. The best racing for me comes from the 1970s, although I was not alive then, I have seen some nice racing.
I'm no expert on the history, but the older eras of privateers & garages appeals to me. Little advertising, smaller teams, racers who had other tasks to perform--some even designed or helped build their own cars. Now everything is so specialized & perfected, although that too warrants appreciation. The sport's evolved into a state of perfection and mastery. So in that sense the pinnacle of the sport is now.

Aesthetically I think the peaks for the cars were the 1960s (wide tires, cigar chassis, exposed engines & no wings) and the year 2008 (peak aero complexity).

Race-wise, I'm more into lap times & results. Passing/overtaking doesn't so much concern me. So its hard to say which era had the best races. Maybe this is akin to a "reading the stats" type of baseball fan. Every era has something to appreciate.

I'm content to read about races, watch a little of them now and then, but I find most forms of motorsport boring to watch for extended periods of time. Ultimately driving consistency is needed whatever the series is, so you're gonna have long periods of no crashing and no passing. The only form with constant action like that is demolition derby. This is part of the problem I have with people wanting to "improve the racing." You can only have so many crashes & passes in a race. Good racing is often boring. It doesn't require watching every second of every lap.

Like, the original intent was that you'd be there in-person, in the grass, with a picnic, talking to people, having a drink. Not watching camera shots of cars repeating the same perfect lap seventy times. No wonder people get bored.

Because-I-Can
1
Joined: Fri May 20, 2016 5:17 am

Re: The Future Of F1 As The Pinnacle Of Technology Is Endangered?

Post by Because-I-Can » Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:57 pm

Greg Locock wrote:
Tue Jun 06, 2017 10:06 am
Well, you must be thinking of something, I can't read your mind.

Here's what I asked

Please nominate three technologies that were developed specifically for F1 and then were used successfully in production cars. Or two. Or one.

Here's the previous list


Diacil cylinder? Developed for and used in motorbikes in 2002

CF body? Mclaren MP4 in 1981 . I suppose that might qualify, back then I don't think the aircraft industry was building entire assemblies out of it. Although in 1968 it was used in the VC10s.

Ceramic brake? developed for railway trains in 1988

Nitrogen tyres? Not worth doing

EBD? Developed at Teves in 1992, used in 2004 Dodge Durango if not before

Inconnel in road (not rocket)? Developed for Whittle in 1950s. Used in RX7


So, maybe 1, maybe.
It's a rare event that something is developed that isn't based on some previous development. Inconnel wasn't developed because a R&D office manager went to Bob and said I need Inconnel and it needs to have these properties. Bob then grabbed a pad of paper and wrote a formula out for the manager that became inconnel. Inconnel wouldn't have been something to think possible if it wasn't for stainless steel and SS was discovered in a pile of failures. It stuck out because it wasn't tarnishing. Steel had to come before SS. Vulcanized rubber was another accident. Bakelite was a accident that led to nylon, polyester, vinyl, etc. Ceramic brakes wouldn't exist if the Chinese teapot hadn't existed. IC chips and computers wouldn't exist without the transistor which wouldn't exist without P and N material. Failure is what moves science forward. That's not an opinion from me but an accepted rule in science.

Your position appears to be when it comes to F1 there's a reset. It's no longer about developing new uses or improving what already exists but an expectation of original ideas. That's an impossible expectation to meet. I once heard a lecture on the thesis that everything invented or developed since WW2 can be traced back to Einstein and E=MC^2. If not directly a result of the formula then for the necessary support of something this is directly related.

Apply your expectations of F1 to everything and there's not much to consider if anything at all. What's in a production vehicle that can't be traced to something else? It all goes back to the wheel and converting rotary force into linear motion.

I will suggest this one though. The super square, 20k+ RPM engine which also required a replacement for the valve spring. Pneumatic springs wasn't an F1 idea and they weren't the only ones working on them but they were never considered practical until F1 racing proved otherwise. The only thing that prevents them from being used in production vehicles is the cost benefit ratio.

That's what F1 does. It's a proving ground at extremes. It's not about reinventing the wheel.

Because-I-Can
1
Joined: Fri May 20, 2016 5:17 am

Re: The Future Of F1 As The Pinnacle Of Technology Is Endangered?

Post by Because-I-Can » Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:25 pm

notsofast wrote:
Mon Jun 05, 2017 4:20 pm
No other motorsport series ever was more technologically developed and complex than F1.
No Trophy or Score vehicle would win an F1 race but the have a chance of finishing. No F1 car would complete a Trophy or Score race. Feel free to alter the suspension anyway you want. The drivetrain won't last. I'm not a fan of Trophy or Score racing but that doesn't prevent me from appreciating the extensive technology involved. It's apples and oranges but it is a motorsport. Trophy and score are equally as technologically developed and complex. Just with different concentrations. Actually suspension technology probably far exceeds that of F1. 40" of travel and much less reliance on tire changes to determine vehicle limits. F1 is all about tires.

Jersey Tom
250
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 7:49 pm
Location: Huntersville, NC

Re: The Future Of F1 As The Pinnacle Of Technology Is Endangered?

Post by Jersey Tom » Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:26 pm

A proving ground for what, though?

The "extremes" of auto racing just aren't all that relevant for anything consumer related. And I'd say that endurance testing and requirements in consumer markets far exceeds what's done in racing.

Not to be overly cynical about it, but my experience has been that the majority or entirety of people I know who have worked in consumer transportation, pro auto racing, or both (myself included) - just don't see any real overlap between the two worlds. Totally separate entities. And if anything, I tend to have seen more cutting edge or fundamentally interesting R&D done in the consumer world than in racing. I've heard similar comments from my contemporaries who have worked in a variety of sectors.

The notion that F1 is the pinnacle of everything is just pretentious at best, and laughable at worst. I remember when McLaren electronics first came to NASCAR and the expectation was their stuff would be top notch - because it's what F1 uses after all. And instead we find it's crap that's 10-20 years out of date.

Just let things be what they are. Perfectly fine for some things to be purely about sport competition and entertainment.
Grip is a four letter word. All opinions are my own and not those of current or previous employers.

Because-I-Can
1
Joined: Fri May 20, 2016 5:17 am

Re: The Future Of F1 As The Pinnacle Of Technology Is Endangered?

Post by Because-I-Can » Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:53 pm

I'm not saying F1 is the pinnacle. I don't believe it is. First and foremost it's entertainment. About the racing it's a proving ground for tires more than anything else, IMO. AWD, traction control and ABS were all developed for F1 and then banned. Everyday production vehicle stuff. But if your expectation is F1 can't own it because development wasn't limited or isolated to F1 their part is invalid then true invention is limited to the guy sitting in the garage perfecting the mouse trap or apple peeler.

My point was more that F1 is not the place to search for original ideas and view it with the same expectations you would have for anything else.

Jersey Tom
250
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 7:49 pm
Location: Huntersville, NC

Re: The Future Of F1 As The Pinnacle Of Technology Is Endangered?

Post by Jersey Tom » Tue Jul 18, 2017 4:05 pm

Eh, I don't even think I can agree with that though.

I used to work at the technical center and world headquarters of a tire company with probably more history across motorsport than any other. Race tire development and consumer tire development - totally separate entities with totally separate needs. Practically zero cross over. The size and scope of consumer development would just dwarf anything motorsport related. Not even close to similar magnitude.

Coworkers of mine there and where I'm currently at had lots of F1 experience through the 80s, 90's, 2000's. Early traction control development in F1 - teams made big gains by bringing in controls expertise and engineers from the consumer realm, not the other way around. Just like EFI development in F1 made big advances by leaning on experience from consumer development.

Within the F1 bubble, there's a lot of very sharp engineering and technical staff. For their very specific requirements and little world they live in, I have no doubt that a lot of things are developed to a sharp edge with a high degree of proficiency. I would be comfortable saying that within the larger pro motorsport bubble, some cross pollination can be a great thing in bringing experience from one team or series to another.

But racing is just a bubble. It is its own little world. No more, no less. Trying to stretch it into something to benefit consumer markets is just that - a stretch.
Grip is a four letter word. All opinions are my own and not those of current or previous employers.

Because-I-Can
1
Joined: Fri May 20, 2016 5:17 am

Re: The Future Of F1 As The Pinnacle Of Technology Is Endangered?

Post by Because-I-Can » Tue Jul 18, 2017 4:27 pm

FWIW my problem with F1 is the season is over after the first race. Teams have to get their limited number of cars and engines and god knows what else inspected at the beginning of the season and that's their bag of tricks. I miss the days of Wide World of Sports and the 10 minute bio on Gurney and Westlake discussing what they had done that week to improve the cars performance. You would get an education on what to look for and how to recognize what they were attempting to do. I became invested in the race. What you get now from the talking heads is a lecture, They bore me. Todays drivers are celebrities and they bore me. I appreciated the driver that was in the garage between races and could tell you everything about the car and his driving. Gurney and Westlake are just examples for a different time.

Because-I-Can
1
Joined: Fri May 20, 2016 5:17 am

Re: The Future Of F1 As The Pinnacle Of Technology Is Endangered?

Post by Because-I-Can » Tue Jul 18, 2017 4:47 pm

Tom,

I guess just different experiences. I had a post withheld for validation or something that you might have agreed with. Someone had written F1 was the ultimate motorsport for technology and I disagreed. A Trophy or Score vehicle wouldn't win an F1 race but it would finish. An F1 car wouldn't finish a Trophy or Score race. I said go ahead and alter the cars suspension anyway you want, the drivetrain won't last. A suspension with 40" travel going full speed over uneven and changing terrain and holding up requires extensive technology. It just has a different focus. And for you, it's a motorsport that is full of suppliers that "race on Sunday and sell on Monday," to steal an old phrase. The problem with this sport is it's not an event. The vehicles go by once at full speed and they don't stop for possibly 1,000 miles. It's all over quick.

Greg Locock
137
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2012 11:48 pm

Re: The Future Of F1 As The Pinnacle Of Technology Is Endangered?

Post by Greg Locock » Tue Jul 18, 2017 11:06 pm

F1 is the pinnacle of F1 technology. Within a specific resource space and capability space it is optimised, presumably around winning a year's races. For any other racing series both n dimensional spaces are different, and indeed the goal is different. Again it is different for production cars, or aircraft, or confectionery.

But, the title of the thread is silly. It is only the pinnacle within its own goals and constraints.

Because-I-Can
1
Joined: Fri May 20, 2016 5:17 am

Re: The Future Of F1 As The Pinnacle Of Technology Is Endangered?

Post by Because-I-Can » Wed Jul 19, 2017 5:43 am

Greg Locock wrote:
Tue Jul 18, 2017 11:06 pm
F1 is the pinnacle of F1 technology. Within a specific resource space and capability space it is optimised, presumably around winning a year's races. For any other racing series both n dimensional spaces are different, and indeed the goal is different. Again it is different for production cars, or aircraft, or confectionery.

But, the title of the thread is silly. It is only the pinnacle within its own goals and constraints.
Excellent and well said.

I once read an article by a Chrysler enthusiast trashing Henry Ford for his published opinions about 6 cylinder engines. I think his comments came from sometime in the 20's. In the article he said something to the effect of 6 cylinder engines require the crankshaft to extend from the block something like 2 feet. That didn't make any sense and by that time Ford had a history with 6 cylinder engines that didn't match what he was saying. After digging up the comments by Ford that were being referenced it turns out Henry was talking about Ford Aviation. Turns out he was comparing the radial engines Ford was making to inline 6's and wing loading but also it was with respect to the aircraft Ford was making. Furthermore the Chrysler guy was using Ford's comments to bolster Chrysler's superior innovations in the 50's and 60's. Using that criteria what car made today isn't superior to one made 30 years ago? It's just a generic and rhetorical question and not specific with the point being; Anytime the thesis is contoured to fit the point you want to make you can't be wrong. Problem is though, it's about as intellectually dishonest as a thesis can be made to be.