Concept 50 / 50 split between technology and driver skill

Here are our CFD links and discussions about aerodynamics, suspension, driver safety and tyres. Please stick to F1 on this forum.
User avatar
Figlio_del_Diavolo
0
Joined: 20 Mar 2006, 22:07
Location: NY, USA

Post

flynfrog wrote:yes i know nobody will pay for it but its a differnt take on how to change the rules who says we have to change the cars
Such a rule change would change the cars drastically anyhow, so I don't see the benefit of destroying multi-million dollar tracks.
"Some people will tell you that slow is good - and it may be, on some days - but I am here to tell you that fast is better." - Hunter S. Thompson

User avatar
flynfrog
Moderator
Joined: 23 Mar 2006, 22:31

Post

my point being to avoid going to a spec nascar with wings series you could use the track to define the cars and open up the rules

Reca
Reca
93
Joined: 21 Dec 2003, 18:22
Location: Monza, Italy

Post

zac510 wrote: I visit a few different F1 forums and see this kinda stuff every couple of days. Some person who thinks they have the 'miracle' solution for F1. Usually it is just a bit of uneducated oversimplified drivel pushing the agenda that the poster wants to make.
Bingo.

We have been on this argument many times before here too.

Usually the most frequent requests are : reduce (if not eliminate) downforce, increase tyre grip, manual gearbox, steel brakes, increase power because what is needed is excess of power over grip etc etc.

Well, take GP2 in 2005. Downforce level similar, if not superior, to F1 (thanks to lack of restrictions a non particularly evolved design is enough), same grooved tyres as f1 (2-3 years old F1 tyres), paddle shifter, carbon brakes and 300 hp less than f1 meaning excess of grip over power. Theoretically, according to usual requests for the perfect series, it should be a nightmare with cars hundreds of m apart unable to race each other. Did you see the races last year ? Just spectacular...

Besides, lot of series with characteristics close to what F1 romantic is asking for already exist, low tech, single spec, no wind tunnel research etc etc. there’s no need to transform F1 in another one of them.

DaveKillens
DaveKillens
34
Joined: 20 Jan 2005, 04:02

Post

I agree Reca, we all have our personal opinions on what we would like to see, and how to fix F1. I'm quite sure someone, somewhere has read some of my posts, shaken their heads and rolled their eyes and muttered something about the elevator not going to the top floor. :wink:
And I'm cool with that, but I'd rather throw out a weird concept for discussion and thought, than sit back and not say anything at all.
But F1 is a weird evolution of rules that try to please a lot of different interests. And the perfect solution will probably never arrive, and even then, it would be incredibly complex.
Sometimes the problems jump right out and bite us in the butt, like the sad instance of two drivers passing away on the same race weekend. Sometimes the problems lay dormant or unnoticed for years. But the rulemakes do try to find a sensible solution between many conflicting requirements.
And the weird thing is, despite what appears to be problems, we as fans still tune in, and enjoy something truly wonderful, exciting, and entertaining.
Formula One, I love it.