[Somewhat OT] Why I don't much follow sports car racing - Even Le Mans!...

I didn't say faster

but a modern P1 (Audi, Toyota, the old Peugot) is far more technically innovative than any modern F1 car. sorry.

and for comparison, the Toyota P1 car won the pole at Silverstone this spring at 1:43. last year the fastest race lap in F1 at Silverstone was a 1:25, so assume a pole time of 1:22-ish? (Qualy at Silverstone last year was wet).

another data point, qualifying at Interlagos in 2012: F1 car 1:12, P1 car 1:22

 

That's not because F1 teams aren't innovative but because the rules prohibit a lot of new high tech.

Why?

Because the idea is to have an emphasis on the driver and his skills.

When Mansell won the title people said a monkey could have won with that car and to some degree that might be true. FIA has often technologically simplified F1 to bring back more of the driver input and I think that is a good thing.

 

and while I'm on a Sports Car roll, here's a list of manufacturers actively involved in WEC or ALMS:

Audi
BMW
Porsche
Toyota
GM (Corvette)
Chrysler (Viper)
Ferrari
Aston Martin
Nissan
Honda/HPD
Mazda


Here's a list of manufacturers actively involved in F1:
Mercedes
Ferrari
Renault

hmmm....

 

British F3 at Silverstone, pole was a 1:53, dry track, last weekend (5/26/13)

I think current P1 cars are roughly equivalent to the old Lola/Reynard champ cars at a lot of tracks. I assume a lot of the gap between P1 and F1 is down to weight and tire compound.

 

Plus:

McLaren
Marussia

And lets not forget that EVERY team in F1 builds their own car, chassis included.

That to me is another major difference to endurance racing where often the paintjob is the only differentiating factor between the teams.

 

Marussia builds road cars?

I should have put McLaren and Lotus on that list too, I was looking only at F1 engine suppliers as they are historically the road car manufacturers involved in F1 (Ferrari being the perennial exception). of course by that standard Lotus also builds P1 cars although I think they're just rebadged Lolas. same for Morgan, which is just a rebadged Oreca.

 

As Peloton pointed out to me not so long ago.

Yup, they build the Russian equivalent of an Enzo.

 

Porsche won two WCC and three WDC with McLaren/TAG, hardly a fail and yes they do know how to "interpret" a rulebook

Honda won a few championships with McLaren too...

 

ha! learned something today.

 

Mansour Ojeh IIRC

Porsche did get a lot of credit at the time and to this day they proudly present Lauda's TAG McLaren in their museum

 

The B1 which looks Zonda-ish and the B2 which looks a bit like a bulked up Enzo from the side and like nothing else from other angles.

The earlier referred to photos: http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/142310334-post84.html

>8^)
ER

 

I remember that being mentioned in the press at the time. Kinda like if it doesn't work, it was just a consulting job for TAG and if it does, Porsche is back in F1.

Be that as it may, to me it is more important that any car manufacturer has the gutts/$ to participate in F1. I applaud them all, whether they fail or not. Lambo was the laughing stock at the time, but I'm happy they even tried. Same goes for Alfa in the eighties, Jaguar and even Toyota.

F1 is hard, that's why it is F1. Otherwise it would be Endurance racing

 

I actually think endurance racing is a harder technical challenge. F1 is hard because of the sheer money drain and all the politics and BS.

and when was the last time Ferrari had an overall LeMans win? Oh right, during the Johnson administration. with a North American privateer team, and some dude from Kansas City driving

 

IMHO F1 is harder because of the tougher competition. That goes for the engineering of the cars as well as for the talent of the drivers.

Even the last car of the F1 grid is in reality a marvel of technology and capable of blowing endurance cars away.

As for the drivers, just look at the winners of Le Mans: Mostly F1 have-beens or never-weres.

Ferrari made a conscious decision to do one or the other. We'd love to see them at both places (mind you, I do like endurance racing, just not as much as F1) but that's not financially viable.
They made that choice simply based on exposure: Le Mans is a one time event (and nobody follows the rest of the season anyway) whereas F1 is the most watched sport around the globe (except for the World Cup and the Olympics when they're on).

It is all about win Sunday-sell Monday. And with Le Mans that'd be only one Monday a year.

 

it is a silly discussion. I am an endurance-guy all the way. I watch F1 too, but enduranceracing takes the cake. Everytime.

 

I think vettel and Alonso are just guys who can't hack triple stints at 2am

I do hate the "f1 has beens or never weres" argument, again the politics of F1 is the limiting factor in most drivers success, not their talent.

I'm not an F1 hater, I love the sport, but I think to say it's the only form of racing that matters is ridiculously myopic.

 

Totally disagree on that one. Politics is a big part of F1 but in the end $ rules and $ always finds the best talent. Can somebody buy their way into F1? Yes, but not for long. The top guys in F1 are there because of their talent, not their $.

A guy like Wurz didn't make it in F1. Not because of lack of sponsorship but because he wasn't fast enough. Yet he dominates in Endurance racing. I like the guy and was happy for him, but it showed me the talent difference.

I wish all retiring F1 drivers would go to Le Mans. I think that would be great for the fans and much more dignified as some stupid stint in DTM or on a gokart track.

I would never say that. Probably from a development for the roadcars perspective, endurance racing contributes more than F1.

Most racing form matter as they are the building blocks for drivers and teams to the next level. I see endurance racing as the retirement home for aging F1 drivers. Seriously.

 

why would that be great for the fans? Any driver who takes up endurance racing and proves to be an asset, will be a hero. No matter where he comes from.

 

The problem with endurance racing, GTs, Touring cars or any kind of motoracing with multiple co-existing "formulas" is that sooner or later it has to be "BOPed" to survive. In the past the balance of power was more subtle, and now is made in a more evident way, but this brings me that uncomfortable WWEish feeling.

It´s also quite irrelevant for development of technology for road cars, as manufacturers choose the technology they want to sell, not necessarily the best for racing, and then hope that the rules suit them. I can´t think of any recent new technolgy that was first developed for racing; now it´s quite the opposite, the new stuff appears first in road cars, and then gets to motorsports to make them more marketeable (i.e: hybrid cars).

Of course, despite all this crap, I´m still watching and loving it!!