1 Not necessarily. 2. That’s part of the problem...insane aero 3. It’s a legal product. Cars have killed millions of people, too. 4. Part of the problem. 5. Really? Where is that written? If tech is so important why don’t they use airbags and ABS? Heck, practically every new road car has these life saving devices, why not cutting edge F1? 6 So why #2? 7 All those are “legacy tracks”....you know, like in the “good old days.” 8 So are modern F1 cars compared to previous 9 Something on which we can agree..but who cares about cost effective? 10. Yes, but that doesn’t make it a good idea And I’ll add #11.....Reliance on tail-chasing gimmicks like artificial tire regulations and tricks like DRS to generate “excitement”......essentially an admission that otherwise it would be even more boring.
1. Exactly the problem. The whole thing is more like show, and not a sport anymore. Where's the element of surprise? Every other sport has this, besides F1 these days, unfortunately. 2. How is penis noses aerodynamically efficient? What is the definitely of aero efficiency when one car can't even follow the other closely? 3. So why is alcohol advertising allowed in F1? If you drink a bottle of Jack Daniels by yourself, vs smoking a whole box of ciggies, which one has a high chance of hurting yourself or someone else? I worked in Marlboro before, i grew up in tobacco dominated sponsors. Never smoked in my life, and have no interest whatsoever. 4. It wasn't. It's the whole new business model which Bernie created. 5. And how is technology improving the sport? Ask any real fan, and everyone points back to the 90s, 80s, etc. No one cares about 2018 tech. 6. Agreed 7. Look at the run off areas they have. Practically, you make a 10 mistakes, and you still get away. The track is not allowed to bite you back. 8. Now you sound silly, unfortunately 9 .I do not want a tyre war. One tyre supplier is perfect. Just not damn Pirellis. Those things can't be driven in the wet, and can't be driven more than 10 laps while hard charging 10. The bigger question is why? There's so much more could be done here, rather than a knee jerk reaction of Toyota's pullout
1. Orchestraded close "racing" is the show. The element of surprise is still where it's always been....somebody doing better when they can. So go watch them..... 2. I'm not an aerodynamicist, but I guarantee they are what they are for a reason. I don't know what the "definitely" of anything is, but the efficiency isn't about making the air behind the car clean....it's about making the car quicker around the circuits. 3. Let's ban racing....it's dangerous. 4. Whatever. 5. Maybe your watching the wrong series/sport. 6. Again, your entitled to your opinion. Also again, maybe F1 is not for you. 7. I thought we didn't want people to hurt themselves (3.)....I'm confused. 8. Thus the . Very observant of you. 9. F1/FIA dictates the tires, Pirelli just constructs them. 10. Third time, maybe it's not for you. Or, when are you positioning yourself high enough in FIA or F1, or forming/buying a team so you can have a say?
1.a. Orchestraded close "racing" is the show. b.The element of surprise is still where it's always been.....designing, developing, setting up, driving and strategising better than the rest. c. If they're your preference, do enjoy them. 2. I'm not an aerodynamicist, but I guarantee they are what they are for a reason. I don't know what the "definitely" of anything is, but the efficiency isn't about making the air behind the car clean....it's about making the car quicker around the circuits. 3. Wouldn't it be more "efficient' to ban all auto racing racing period? There's also a high chance of hurting someone. 4. Yup. 5. Technology is F1's niche in the sport of auto racing. Maybe your watching the wrong series. 6. The only way to limit that is to mandate a body design like the spec/kit-cars of IndyCar. That's not F1. Hey! There you go! IndyCar's a great "sport". 7. I thought we didn't want people to hurt themselves (3.)....I'm confused. 8. Mssr. wm.'s a real kidder.... . But, in every joke, there's some truth..... (and come on now Remy and Bill.....they sound more like leaf blowers...and that's not a joke, just the truth) 9. F1/FIA dictates the tires, Pirelli just constructs them. 10. Third time, maybe it's not for you. Or, when are you positioning yourself high enough in FIA or F1, or forming/buying a team, so you can have a say in the decisions? The only racing I follow somewhat closely now (I used to love them all; 'drove in IMSA) is F1, as it's closest to it's roots of all series. The others are all already down the road of BoP'd, "level the playing field", "show". They're no longer part of the sport (auto racing in general) I grew up with a passion for....... At least in F1 you still have to excel to conquer (as has Mercedes and Hamilton lately), not just have your turn at the front for said show.......
It seems that for some people F1 should deliver different winners and different champions regardless of merit. They simply don't like one team dominating for a period. Also, I do not subscribe to the idea that F1 is "falling apart"; it just moves with the time and adapts to a new environment.
1. When one teams cars are 1 full second ahead in qualifying; you really do expect that team to dominate the race. 2. as I have been saying for a long time, ban aero:: longer braking distances, slower cornering speeds, longer acceleration distances, and since we saw the picture a couple weeks ago of how small the cars of the 1980s were compared to the monstrosities today: ban any protrusions from the cars that are not the single element front and single element rear wings, or rear view mirrors. This gets rid of barge boards, T-trays, most of the floor, and gets rid of maybe 60% of the downforce and 70% of the drag. 3. I don't see why you can't unban tobacco advertising and alcohol advertising at the same time. 4. Manufactures have power because they spend money (see 3 above for solution) 5. Completely agree, remove all computers--including engine control unit, and go back to points and distributor. This also reverts to manual transmissions. 6. see 2 above for solution. 7. Because F1 charges $25M per race (in a normal season) from the track hoisting the show. Also because not many tracks qualify as being F1-able. 10. This is caused by the money=power situation. Given unlimited testing, the smaller teams will drop even further back unless 3 above. But, realistically, you are going to need access to a good portion of $1B in order to design a new engine capable of propelling F1 cars and developing that engine so it has the reliability to finish race weekends. Oh, and BTW, engines costs per year were lower when they replaced the engine 5 times a race weekend than now that they have to last 5+ race weekends. 11. get rid of the grid penalties due to mechanical catastrophes. 12. use the safety car WAY LESS OFTEN.
1970! I love it!!! Will ya' also toss the Can Am in your bucket list for me too please. Thank you in advance. See my sign. Aaaaahhh, if only it could be so......
Regardless of our opinion about its devastating effects, tobacco advertising was stopped in F1 to keep it being broadcasted. Many countries legislated against any form of tobacco advertising, so F1 had to abide by those laws. The issue is a blind alley now; you don't see tobacco advertising anywhere.
Here’s a what if. What if, F1 went to unlimited, “run what you brung?” Want V12? Fine. Want full electric? Fine. Andy Granatelli where are you? Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat
Hummm, unlimited power, unlimited aero, unlimited testing, unlimited development and with unlimited budget, I presume. That could prove a very shortlived experiment, with one team bringing a car that no one can match. But it would be interesting to know the views of the engineers on the subject.
With unlimited development and testing, I guess there wouldn't be much point in cloning anything because you would never catch up! Imagine a series where one team would turn up with a 1500hp ICE car that needs refuelling and tyre change every 15 laps, whilst another team would gamble on an ultralight car of just 500hp running at constant revs with hydraulic transmission to do the whole race without stopping. In the middle of that electric racers with inbuilt turbine generator, or cars running on hydrogen. You could imagine anything if it was really "unlimited". 4-wheel drive, 6 wheelers, of course all forms of ABS, traction controls, any fuel, fan cars, active suspension, etc ... That would be an engineer's delight !!!
CanAm showed that one can go from tolerably fast race cars (500 HP, 1600 pounds) to unbelievably fast race cars (900 HP, 1200 pounds) in 5 years with the budget of privateers!
Call me old school, but I thought that was the purpose of F1. No spec cars. Just bring it on. Tires are the limiting factor anyway. I'm guessing traction control would produce the fastest lap times.
Oh, please, stop with that unlimited cars utopia. With the complexity of modern technology, that would bankrupt all teams in a few seasons. Also look how unbalanced the teams are right now, even with a very tight regulations. It´s called Formula for something: because there is a formula, a set of rules. If you want to free up something, I think that it would be easier to allow more testing and scrap the tokens. Same **** but at least there would be more possibilities of catching up.
The current formula doesn’t appear to be working does it. From what I can tell, it leads to finger pointing and cheating accusations, in a sport where everyone cheats. In fact, it creates an incentive to cheat on the front end by influencing how the rules are written. Besides, I don’t think horsepower is the problem. Getting it to the ground for an entire race is the key. Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat
I agree with that. I think a formula should have a limited timescale (like it happened with the 1.5L from 61 to 65) Let's say 5 years, after which the parameters could be changed (engine size and induction, downforce, aero, fuel capacity, dimensions, etc ). So every so often, the teams would be confronted with different variables, and the engineers would have a new set of rules to play with. That would hopefully stop any team dominating for too long.
Agree. And we'll definitely arrive at 1 conclusion: 1 Team will get it completely right and will wipe the floor with EVERYONE. The 2022 rules are a reasonable start, engines need to be simplified and cars need to be lighter. Keep current V6, conventional turbo(s), get rid of the MGU-h, replace with simple KERS, this should make the engines miles cheaper and allow 8 engines per season so not so much of this car saving is going on. 2025 we can talk some properly exciting engines.
I am looking. 'Have been for the past 60 years.. And, I see that the discrepancy from front to rear of the grids is smaller than ever before. Likewise from front to rear of race finishers. So yes, you're correct. How "unbalanced the teams" are, is less than ever before. Good point. On a serious note, however, the situation is the same in any racing venue. There are winners and there are losers. As always, there's a series called IndyCar for those "fans" that want that "equal" and "fair", spec/kit, every car exactly the same, open wheel show. But surprise, surprise.....the cream still rises to the top, even there. People are not all "the same". And yes, "some" are "better" than others and sometimes dominate. That struggle for supremacy is what competing is all about. 'All facets of life.....fantastically challenging. That. hopefully, will never, ever, change. 'Would be an awful boring life otherwise, no?
All the BS from Liberty about diversity encouraging more women into the sport blah blah...this is after they canned all the damn Grid Girls! GGM!
OK, old fart, there was more distance, but look at this: 2010s - 2 different winners (Red Bull, Mercedes) 1960s - 6 different winners (Cooper, Ferrari, BRM, Lotus, Brabham, Matra) P.S: I´m already a bit tired of the "I´ve been watching F1 since the XIX century" thing. There are books, films and lots of things to know well how things were before, specially if you think that back in the day F1 had not so much coverage like today so most old farts only know what they´ve read in the papers and watching one or two races per year... hey, exactly like we do today.
