trinidefender wrote: ↑
Fri Aug 23, 2019 2:11 am
strad wrote: ↑
Fri Aug 23, 2019 12:37 am
Hopefully they stay under 2017 lap times at least...
I've never understood this obsession with lap times and or top speeds instead of fantastic close racing.
I'd prefer close racing and real passes over a few MPH or ticks on the clock.
While I don't think lap times are the end all and be all of what makes F1....F1, it does play a part. If lap time doesn't matter then why not watch any other series? NASCAR, Indy, DTM, Aussie supercars, BTCC, GT3 classes etc etc etc.
The fact is F1 is F1 because it has always had a few defining characteristics. These are;
1. Open design rules which encourage manufacturers to come in and prove they are the best
2. The fastest cars around a track which again, encourages manufacturers to compete to say, look we are the best.
3. Fastest cars around the track (part 2) which is a marketing point in itself which attracts fans for it being "the pinnacle of motorsports"
There are others but these are, whether one wants to admit it, very large reasons why it has the fan base it does. It is seen as the pinnacle of Motorsport and that's why drivers aim for it.
This brings me neatly back on topic. I believe too much standardisation will do harm to F1 in the long run. It pushes it away from its unique position into being similar to almost every other racing series. Have a budget cap and leave it at that. If the FIA still finds that there is too much difference between teams then simply reduce the budget cap season on season. There will be parity after a while.
I agree. The budget cap is important, because it prevents 'buying' the championship by just having the biggest wallet instead of the best, most creative engineers and top drivers. An interesting part of the competition is who can perform best with limited resources.
Perhaps, in that light, rules are set in the wrong way. Regulations are based on how a car can look, how big an engine can be, etcetera, which limits the creativity teams can exercise - and indeed paves a way to standardization. Maybe instead limits on specs should be set. E.g. max peak engine output, maximum lift/drag coefficients, and so on - but leave open how
teams achieve this. This shifts the competition from one of performing the maximum within certain geometrical constraints, to one of being the most efficient within certain performance constraints (the best engine would not be the one operating at the highest HP, but the one operating most efficiently so they can run at the maximum allowed HP for the longest time, or with the most lightweight, etc... ). I think it would also increase the relevance of F1 innovation for real world application.
Edit: and, since the topic is on aero, same there - don't limit the shapes that can be used, but limit the budget teams can spend on it, and perhaps set some performance targets, e.g. limits to wake behavior, or something like "a maximum loss of X% in downforce for a standardized car geometry following at a distance of Y meters" (or some other standardized test cases)