First race over...is the new formula a success?

[DChemTech]

Complaining about wheelbase is futile as teams didn't agree to less than 3600mm (FIA wanted 3400mm of course)

Why is it futile to complain then? I can still complain because I don't like the choice by the teams, right?
And in any case, perhaps the teams should have less of an influence at such decisions. So, I'll complain about that, too.
Whoever is to blame for it, I think the cars are too long and with respect to making the cars 'look' fast, the new formula is not a success. All things considered, I think things improved overall (as far as we can say, now), but this is a thing I'd like to have seen different.

[Just_a_fan]

Yes, on balance I would say it is a success and the cars can race more closely without being affected by turbulence. Sure they are a bit clumsy, but it is what it is and there are reasons for that (discussed below).

You have to put the 18" tyres (+17kg, +1kg BBS vs OZ) aside from the other changes, as they (and that part of the extra weight) aren't part of the aerodynamic package to improve following.

But the 18in tyres are part of the overall "clumsy" problem. They don't appear to like being hustled meaning the drivers are doing all of their braking in a straight line and then turning later, so they look less nimble (because they are). That's not the aerodynamics, it's the tyres.

I think making such a big change in both the aero and the tyres in one go was a mistake. But then I think the tyres are a mistake no matter what, so perhaps I'm biased.

[HungarianRacer]

Following seems a fair bit better, the slipstream effect however has also been weakened alot, which, to be fair, has an upside, it means that if someone set his car up for top speed it is now properly rewarded, before, the tow was so powerful even from 2-3 seconds distance that it really didn't matter much if one normally had 3-4 km/h on his chaser in undisturbed air (the same is true from the attacker's perspective, any reasonable trimming of drag didn't weigh in much compared to the immense tow effect)...

... Potential downside is, I could see situations in the future where it's actually MORE DIFFICULT to make an overtake stick in this current formula solely because of this.

[Just_a_fan]

... Potential downside is, I could see situations in the future where it's actually MORE DIFFICULT to make an overtake stick in this current formula solely because of this.

I think the powers that be would be happy with that. An overtake that gets reversed fairly quickly means "more overtaking!" and thus is exciting and desirable (they think).

I think we'll see a lot more drivers playing games where they let someone get ahead before a DRS detection zone and then get the benefit of the following DRS to make an overtake work properly.

[taperoo2k]

I'd say it's so far so good. The signs are the drivers can follow for longer before the tyres are destroyed, which allows for more overtaking opportunities. Once drivers get used to how the new cars behave then we'll probably see more overtaking, faster laptimes and drivers managing the tyres better i.e. extend the stints, then maybe slap on a faster tyre to try and gain places near the end of a race etc. I think the cars look ponderous at the moment as it likely reflects the drivers learning the limits of the new cars. Give it a few races and I think we'll see certain drivers going for more risky overtakes. Leclerc and Verstappen were kind to each other in the overtakes, but I'm not sure that will last once they have a better handle on the cars limits.

[CMSMJ1]

Yes, on balance I would say it is a success and the cars can race more closely without being affected by turbulence. Sure they are a bit clumsy, but it is what it is and there are reasons for that (discussed below).

You have to put the 18" tyres (+17kg, +1kg BBS vs OZ) aside from the other changes, as they (and that part of the extra weight) aren't part of the aerodynamic package to improve following.

- the size and weight do make cars look to sluggish.

The cars are just too heavy and large in my opinion.

The rest of the extra weight is mostly safety improvements (+20kg) and increase of cockpit size to help taller drivers, so that is non-negotiable. [I would welcome a return to V8 or V10 naturally aspirated engines to save over 70 kg (noting that power unit weight is also +1kg for 2022 to 151kg + 20kg battery) but I don't think that is going to happen!]

Without knowing the exact numbers, they have probably gone from a chassis (tub) weighing ~60kg 17-18 years ago, to ~99kg quoted by Caterham 7-8 years ago, to now weighing 120kg + 17kg halo (137kg) so that's a significant increase in safety and explains a lot of the weight increase (and from the car being underweight and running ballast, to now being overweight and not running ballast apart from the driver minimum weight ballast, driver weight itself also +5kg).

Complaining about wheelbase is futile as teams didn't agree to less than 3600mm (FIA wanted 3400mm of course), while 2000mm track width is if anything still too narrow and it should be the proper 2150mm [2150mm example 1 , 2150mm example 2]. Slightly longer control arms would make almost no difference to the weight of the car.

If we consider just the aerodynamic side of the changes, the cars can certainly race more closely, much like F2 cars, so I would say job done. The midpack was 3 to 4 cars wide on the opening lap!

18" tyres is really a different topic and not part of the aerodynamic objectives IMO. Part of the stiffness is trying to control the ride height with less tools (a good thing IMO) and part of it is the 18" tyres. It is what is. F2 cars are also quite stiff and lift wheels around Casino hairpin.

If the cars were able to refuelled then they can be lighter, smaller and run in a more agile way. That isn't going to be reintroduced though.

If there is refuelling it should be gravity-fed like other racing series and not with the, IMO, overly dangerous pressurised system introduced by Gordon Murray. But I quite like that there is no refuelling.

Responding to the weight piece- your points ref the tub weights make sense. However, we look at these cars and they have an enormous footprint and some of that is just the floor.

You could surely mandate a shorter car and that would ensure that the 'gubbins' and all of the tightly packaged mechanicals are spread over the footprint og the floor.

The aero would be impacted but with a shorted, more 'dense' car the agility would increase and due to chopping a metre from the length and perhaps a rough equivalent from the track/bodywork width we would see a lighter car?

5m x 2m today - 900KG
4m x 1.8m tomorrow? - 750KG?

That would give brakes a better time, tyres an easier life and require less fuel for the race distance...

We would lose the no sidepods designs and gain some bulk into the centreline but there is no reason that the safety would be reduced - driving lighter cars into walls or other cars at speed is much less of a risk than these behemoths.

[JordanMugen]

... Potential downside is, I could see situations in the future where it's actually MORE DIFFICULT to make an overtake stick in this current formula solely because of this.

I think the powers that be would be happy with that. An overtake that gets reversed fairly quickly means "more overtaking!" and thus is exciting and desirable (they think).

I think we'll see a lot more drivers playing games where they let someone get ahead before a DRS detection zone and then get the benefit of the following DRS to make an overtake work properly.

Like Formula Ford slipstreaming battles, which many say is the gold standard of good racing (and Formula Vee too).

[Hoffman900]

... Potential downside is, I could see situations in the future where it's actually MORE DIFFICULT to make an overtake stick in this current formula solely because of this.

I think the powers that be would be happy with that. An overtake that gets reversed fairly quickly means "more overtaking!" and thus is exciting and desirable (they think).

I think we'll see a lot more drivers playing games where they let someone get ahead before a DRS detection zone and then get the benefit of the following DRS to make an overtake work properly.

Like Formula Ford slipstreaming battles, which many say is the gold standard of good racing (and Formula Vee too).

Low horsepower and lack of downforce / grip is how you have that.

Also, anyone who races those things and races all race is going to lose (and they do). Best to line up and break away and save it for the end.

No different than any draft dominated class.

[Just_a_fan]

... Potential downside is, I could see situations in the future where it's actually MORE DIFFICULT to make an overtake stick in this current formula solely because of this.

I think the powers that be would be happy with that. An overtake that gets reversed fairly quickly means "more overtaking!" and thus is exciting and desirable (they think).

I think we'll see a lot more drivers playing games where they let someone get ahead before a DRS detection zone and then get the benefit of the following DRS to make an overtake work properly.

Like Formula Ford slipstreaming battles, which many say is the gold standard of good racing (and Formula Vee too).

Who says Formula Ford is the gold standard of good racing?

You're not going to get FF type racing whilst you have downforce, big tyres and lots of power. FF and F1 are nearly as different as road cars and F1.

[digitalrurouni]

It's interesting. I pretty much agree with the comment about I think the 18 inch wheels makes the cars look more sluggish. I wonder if that could be improved if the fronts were a bit smaller than the rear. The new Porsche and Corvette has 19 inch and 20 inch front rear right?

[JordanMugen]

Seems the new rules do really allow better racing. This is so much better than the last few years.

The analytical approach to managing car wakes has really paid off. Great stuff.

As Button says now drivers can attack back, in a way that was not possible before. (As well as being able to stay close behind for many laps without killing the tyres.)