Last year Hungary, in the beginning of the race Schumi on Bridges is 5 or 6 spots ahead of the next person on Bridges and is still challenging for the lead. He ends up almost finishing third, and still gets a point after breaking down.
I think the most impressive performance by Michael and the major reason he won the race, was Qualifying in China 2006. With those awful Bridgestones, he got himself up to what 6th in qualifying? He showed the rest of the field what he was made of during that race. It was incredible to watch him qualify with those tires. I thought he was going to go off any time, look at his times compared to the rest of the Bridgestone runners. What was funny was Lauda, telling Speed Channel that Alonso was going to cruise easily to a win in that race.
Disc brakes were not developed in F1, they were developed by the aircraft industry and first seriously adopted for racing by Jaguar on the C-Type in 1952. F1 has never been anthing approaching an open type formula. It has always had rather restrictive rules that grew ever more restrictive as technology advanced. A true open formula libre type series for F1? Very bad idea. If that was done the drivers would not be IN the cars they would "drive" by remote control with heavy input from GPS, they would be powered by gas turbines (2500hp+ from a 400lb unit...), the aero would include sliding skirts and ground effects tunnels and moving wings... computers would control all aspects of power delivery, suspension travel, braking and even steering inputs. I doubt they would look much like what we even consider a car. With an open formula, why have 4 wheels? The "cars" would probably pull 10G of lateral acceleration around fast corners and the problem would be preventing them from ripping up the pavement. It would be a spectacle for sure, but there wouldn't be any racing. Machines are not heroes. Machines do not have courage nor skill nor integrity. They do not bleed blood and risk all in the pursuit of becoming the best in the world. Men do this. They do this by RACING. So lets have cars that are CRAZY fast and demand the absolute most from the absolute best and lets make them RACE for it. THAT is what its supposed to be all about. Terry
Back in the fifties and earlier, there were actaully quite a few "run what you brung" circuit races. What I was think was elminate ALL computer controls including engine, traction, and shifting management, but beyond that, an open formula for cars that can fit inside a specific size box..
I'm not too upset that they are going to ban traction control, but I still believe that the 2race engine rule and the 4race gearbox rule are retarded. The teams should be able to use as many engines and gearboxes as they want. I don't really think that it's saving any money, the teams are still bringing tons of engines, and spending the same amount of money trying to make everything reliable. If the teams want to change engines a million times a weekend, heck if they want to change engines during the race I say let them. http://www.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/070330165207.shtml
Ditto. The 2 race rule hasn't saved any money, just moved it from machining to engineering and quality control. Equally bad is the current freeze on engine development. It helps the smaller teams to save cost, but it really hurts the factory teams to show their stuff and it makes the aeros an even more important part.
Hmm I just realize that the traction control ban for next year means, Massa is screwed. He was slow in the rain last year, now he has no TC? Oh boy.
That's a very good point as well. I know people have said that a free for all on technological improvement would be bad and I agree, but engine development should not be something that should be limited. There's already regulations on what the engine has to meet, the teams should be allowed to get every ounce of power they can within those guidelines.
Im not in disagreement with the spirit of what your talking about... but back in those days there was no aero beyond efforts to reduce drag. Having an "open" formula with zero computer controls, steel brake rotors, manual shifting AND a spec aero package plus a simple engine displacement limit (plus limit it to traditional piston engine powerplants, otherwise you will see all gas turbines) could work. If you had aero free as well.... the cars would rapidly perform beyond the physical limits of the drivers. The human body can only sustain so many G's. With no aero limits you would have sliding skirts, full venturi tunnels coupled with suction fans and moveable wings... the cars would be more than capable of running upside down! Not only would this be downright dangerous but it would make the current aero related inability to pass even worse. The emphasis on super high tech aero development is one of the worst things that has ever happened to F1. Its technology that has little to no value on street cars and it wrecks the racing. What is needed is MORE horsepower coupled with LOTS more mechanical grip. Toss in brakes that require skill and must be managed plus the need to actually shift gears (and suffer the consequences of missed shifts) and then you have a formula that separates the men from the boys. AS to efforts to keep engine costs reasonable, i think this is critical to building a series where more than 1 or 2 teams has a realistic chance at winning. The absolute best time period from a competition standpoint was the reign of the DFV. During 1970 - 1980 in any given year there were as many as 5-6 teams with cars capable of winning. The deciding factor really was the DRIVER. In not one of Schumachers championship years was there more than 1 other team that offered a serious threat for the WDC. To me, when the top dog is really only having to beat 2-3 other cars in any given race its far from as great an accomplishment as it would be if there were 8-10 other cars capable of winning. So I would prefer that costs be kept under control so that smaller teams really can have the chance to fight for wins. Of course coming up with a really effective means of doing this is very difficult. CART had success with this with the spec pop-off valves on the turbo motors. Terry
Okay, so far, the comment of developing production technology on the track has been interpreted as both "stock slug racing" and "totally open formula". I'm talking about technology that can be applied to production vehicles, not zillion horsepower aerospike engines, and not running what comes off the assembly line. By that measure, I'd oust the carbon fiber brakes. You won't see pure CF brakes on street cars. Carbon-ceramic, maybe. Monster aerodynamics? On street cars? But traction control? Absolutely. On TC, the reason it was reinstated was that there were too many ways to implement it -- the only way to get rid of it would be a completely "spec" car. Now many would like to see these drivers competing in the identical cars. But that's not F1. Of course, in the past, F1 drivers did drive in other events, and I'd like to see that happen again. But for some reason, "spec" events are a recent concept. F1 is a makes championship. Without technology development, you might as well let them just go *buy* a car ..... oh, wait. What's the point of a manufacturer's championship in a spec series? And if all racing is spec, then who develops what goes into your street car? The bean counters? That doesn't make good cars, that makes cheap ones. Some of the finest road machines are the result of homologation requirements: the F40, the F50, the Stratos, the Celica GT-four, the EVO, ... Racing improves the breed when the manufacturers can innovate within limits. Those limits should relate to what technology will go onto the showroom floor. And if the manufacturers are required to put some of that technology on a limited production street machine, then we get some darn fine autos to buy for ourselves. That sounds a lot better to me than having Kimi and Sato in identical racing cars, and the showrooms filled with identical hybrid slug buckets.
I think thats a good move for F1. It gets some heat for being controlled too much by computers and electronics; this will add some purity. A sideways F1 car was always a beautiful thing...ahh...Gilles Villeneuve R.I.P.
I think thats just a little bit harsh. He's improving at a rapid rate and he still has this whole year to get better. Senna was a Brazilian and he was a master in the wet (Donnington 1993 comes to mind). You may say thats irrelevant, and to some extent it is, but maybe Brazilian drivers have something special. Massa is in an excellent position with an excellent team and machine to maybe become the next Senna and carry all of Brazil on his shoulders...hopefully he won't suddenly be ripped out from under us but you get the point. Have some faith in him.
+1 with the engine freeze thing, i'm not surprised how teams are pushing the aero development to gain maximum advantage...no wonder so many parts of the car are flexing...
Please don't compare Massa to Senna. That's so far off base it is not even funny. And I'm not a Senna fan btw. I read an article where the author was trying to make a similar case: "What is it in the water of Brazil that has brought out so many great champions like Emerson, Piquet, Senna and such talented drivers like Barrichello and Massa?" Well first off I'd strike the two last names from that list. At least until they have won a championship, which is quite unlikely unless Kimi will have some serious injury this year. So why does Brazil have such great drivers? Other countries have 3 and more champions, so what? Kart racing is popular in Brazil, that helps. Also the society is split into poor and rich, not much of a broad middle class as for instance in the States. So the rich kids get all the help they need to grow in motorsports. Money is important in this sport and Senna as well as Piquet came from rich families (dunno about Emerson). So no, I don't think it is the water. Just the natural selection process as everywhere else. Maxorido: I think you brought up an excellent point. Massa is screwed without TC. As are probably a bunch of other midfielders. Which is kinda the whole point on banning electronic driver aids.
our faith, opinions, inferences, are based on watching him drive for more than enough years. and this one makes me think you just drank the bong water...'the next Senna' ???
Hahaa, Bong Water, Massa = Senna? What a joke. What International Championships did Massa win on his way to F1? Massa=Barichello that is about as good as it gets, oh and btw, Barichello would blow Massa off in the wet at the same age.
Andreas, did you read about when DC grabbed Massa by the collar in Massa's rental car and almost yanked him out for giving him the bird during a GP? DC said the only reason he let him go was the little turd's parents were in the car. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/4494231.stm
Sure remember that one. I was thinking about maxorido's argument regarding the TC: Who of the current field has ever driven a F1 without TC? I would think only DC, but am not sure since TC was temporarily banned and then reintroduced. Regardless, rainmasters like Alonso and Kimi won't have an issue without TC.
DC, Rubens, Trulli and Wurz are the only ones to have driven without tc, I think. Also, Rubens would school Massa in the wet even now. I think it was shanghai or somthing last year (where the Honda team wears blue) that Rubens qualified P3 in the pouring rain while Jenson and Massa were further back. I never heard of that incident with DC and Massa lol but go DC!
I have no doubt in my mind that Kimi can handle the car without TC, but I am worried about Massa. He is great when it's dry, but horrible in the wet, so driving without TC is probably pretty close to it in an F1 car. He needs to get practicing! -John
2000 was the last year without TC although some were thought to be using a mild form. The 1st practice in 2000 at Indy F1 was wet. On the mounds at turn 6 you could look down into the cockpit and see hands working, rears stepping out and being collected up or not, and engines spinning with the tires. Friday 2001 was dry. As the first few cars came out I thought they were broke. At exit of each turn they just stood on the gas and engines cut out with a horrible sound. 5 years later the intrusion of TC is more seamless, bit it still sucks. So whoever drove in 2000 drove without TC.
Yep, The last series to have a no rules approach to thing's where what? Group B and the Killer Bs and CanAm? Other than that all racing series have had some rules of some such on engine size, type, fuel type, number of drive wheels, and size of tryes etc. Has the future rules it's GREAT. F1 (tho some F1 fans won't like it one bit) is slowly becoming Champ Car in it's rules philology in putting the racing in th driver's hands and feet, The only thing I see that the FIA won't get rid of is the semi-auto gear boxes. Purely for avoiding of blowing up motor's on missed shifts by the driver's.
