10 grand? Seriously???!!!

[Jag_Warrior]

All I can say is: :rolleyes:


Renault's head of track operations, Remi Taffin, told AUTOSPORT (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/113238) that F1 would be stuck with the sound it has unless the regulations changed.


"There's two big items that drive this," he said.


"Firstly revs: we went from 18,000 to something like 12,000 this year.


"It's important to say it's based on the regulations, because they set 15,000 as a maximum, but the fuel-flow limitation means the maximum we're running, whether it's a Ferrari, a Mercedes, or a Renault, is 12,000 and at the end of the straight it could be 10 or 11,000.


"This makes a very big difference, because last year it was 18,000. Now where you've got grandstands it's something like 10."

[Alfa Fan]

I don't think you understand the article.

[truefan72]

I don't think you understand the article.
yup

[Zico]

I don't think you understand the article.


???

Unless I am missing something, Jag is criticizing the current fuel optimised typical 10-11k rpm revs used by the new power units.

[Zico]

I don't think you understand the article.


???

Unless I am missing something, Jag is criticizing the current fuel consumption optimised typical 10-11k rpm revs used by the new power units.

[driveace]

The engines are more powerful now with turbo,s and don't have to rev to 18000 revs any more .As has been said by the commentators they have to be careful out of corners,putting the power on ,or they get wheelspin in 5th gear
And lap times are as fast as last year with the normally aspirated V8s

[Storm]

BBC had a Hamilton article (ghosted) yesterday where he said it - more torque at lower rpm is making them change to a higher gear at much lower rpm than with V8/10s hence the sound is compromised. Also to save fuel they are "coasting" by lifting off the throttle for 100+m of the straight and then braking.

[Koz]

"It's important to say it's based on the regulations, because they set 15,000 as a maximum, but the fuel-flow limitation means the maximum we're running, whether it's a Ferrari, a Mercedes, or a Renault, is 12,000 and at the end of the straight it could be 10 or 11,000.

Don't forget that the gear ratios are fixed for the year, too.

[Whyzars]

10K is pretty domestic eh.

Everyone, and I mean everyone who I have spoken to about the "new" F1 makes comments that are negative to some degree. Such a shame.

Aside from the easy solution of removing some/all fuel restrictions, I wonder if allowing traction control might improve the situation. Traction control could aid immensely the final RPM/speed at the end of the straights.

The current cars are pretty much point and squirt and I think this is a big part of the problem. No doubt the V6's are grunty motors but they may need traction control to allow drivers to push the fronts harder coming out of the corners to achieve higher speeds down straights.

As to TC's effect on fuel consumption, fuel weight is its own penalty so with a fuel flow limit there is no need for a maximum fuel load. That would have to go.

[steveaki13]

10K is pretty domestic eh.

Everyone, and I mean everyone who I have spoken to about the "new" F1 makes comments that are negative to some degree. Such a shame.

Aside from the easy solution of removing some/all fuel restrictions, I wonder if allowing traction control might improve the situation. Traction control could aid immensely the final RPM/speed at the end of the straights.

The current cars are pretty much point and squirt and I think this is a big part of the problem. No doubt the V6's are grunty motors but they may need traction control to allow drivers to push the fronts harder coming out of the corners to achieve higher speeds down straights.

As to TC's effect on fuel consumption, fuel weight is its own penalty so with a fuel flow limit there is no need for a maximum fuel load. That would have to go.

Interesting, but I personally would hate to see TC back. I like the cars being difficult to drive.

What I would do, is get rid of the limited fuel. I would either give them as much fuel as they need or maybe even bring back refuelling.

To be honest. I am enjoying F1 so far this season, but I cant see F1 improving in the longer term for me, because the sport IMO is getting to bogged down.

Its hard to decide. Technology is important but that leads to less driver input and a lesser sporting challenge.

I guess the answer is that everyone wants and likes different things.

What does seem certain is the number of people losing interest in F1 is increasing.

[Bagwan]

"Big wide slicks , and enough power to break them loose ."
Can't remember who said that , but wouldn't a little more mechanical grip solve the issue , to some degree ?

TC feels like cheating to me , and thus , too drastic a response .

[Whyzars]

"Big wide slicks , and enough power to break them loose ."
Can't remember who said that , but wouldn't a little more mechanical grip solve the issue , to some degree ?

TC feels like cheating to me , and thus , too drastic a response .

I've not heard the quote before but imagine it is from the long past when we had big wide slicks and cigarette billboards for rear wings. :D

The last time I was this upset with F1 was when they bought in grooved tyres. I had to endure that horror for 10 years or so.


When you watch the 2014 cars in a train through slow corners, the point and squirt characteristic is quite noticeable. I agree that TC is a driver aid but F1 may need to do something predictable and quick.

They probably should've gone the "regulated" TC route rather than DRS but thats history now. TC would be something that the teams may be able to implement fairly quickly and maybe provide a means to get a scream going in the straights.

[Bagwan]

Take away the wings as well , as they are largely irrelevant to road cars .
They can still keep the end plate billboards , as they offer little downforce .

Wider slicks , and less wing .

Make no limit on fuel , but have a different trophy for those who save most , so they can still use the silly fuel meter graphics and sensors .

Then , restrict the turbo , and you'll have both more traction from the tire , and a little less power , so they might be tempted to up the revs to the limit to get it back , given the tires could use it up .

[Doc Austin]

I like the new cars, but the regulations are so ridiculously complicated that I have given up trying to understand them.

[steveaki13]

I agree. I think its the constant tweaking of rules and fiddling of penalties and regs, that make a lot of people just tired and fed up of F1.

I am sure 20 years ago it was far more simple to follow.

[TheFamousEccles]

I don't think you understand the article.

Enigmatic... Please illuminate us all, Oh Oracle?

[philipbain]

Having read this thread I don't really understand most of the arguments being made except one, that people seem disappointed that a large % of the fuel burnt by an F1 engine is now no longer lost down the exhaust pipe! In order to make such an ungodly racket the old engines were going into very high rpms where efficiency was lost and lots of noise was produced, so much so that at close quarters in a confined space it was necessary to wear ear defenders to drown out the noise... Now it seems that ear defenders are not necessary, you can actually hear yourself think and the noise the engines make is different with lots more going on other than energy being wasted and converted into a noise so loud that you need to take measures to protect yourself from it! I have to say that it appears i'm in the minority currently in that I like the sound of the new cars, you can hear much more going on, you can hear the turbo whine, you can actually hear the tyres working too when the drivers are pushing them to the limits of adhesion. Also I cannot figure out the logic in thinking that traction control would improve the situation, surely if the cars are more torquey and the fuel supply is limited this encourages the teams and drivers to upshift early in the more efficient lower rev band to prevent wheelspin and save fuel, I don't think TC would help as they would still do this and it would do nothing but diminish the skill required to extract the maximum performance from the car whilst making the cars sound worse with the mis-firing sound you gets from the cylinders cutting in and out.

The fact of the matter is that the original proposal for the revolution in F1's rule book was only semi-implemented, if it had been fully implemented it would have seen the cars freed up for more design freedom, particularly in respect to utilising the underfloor for aerodynamic effect. This wasn't implemented due to the F1 teams being callow when it comes to anything that might differ from the approach to aerodynamics that has essentially been in place in F1 since 1983 when the flat bottom rules were introduced. Had the rule changes been fully implemented there would be a greater onus on efficiency as there would be an even smaller fuel ration (probably a 50% cut on V8 levels) as the cars would be massively more aero-efficient. Its a fact that because of the framing of the rules over the years the current crop of F1 cars have a much lower level of aero efficiency than that which is possible, ie. they could make the same amount of downforce for a much lower level of drag if the rules allowed them to. Also creating more downforce from the underfloor would make the cars less sensitive to running in turbulent air and improve the racing as wings lose much more than the underfloor does in such a situation. This would probably eliminate the need for DRS as well as the wings would be much smaller (wings create a massive amount of drag as well as downforce and with a much tighter fuel limit the cars would need to reduce drag) and woiuld have a much smaller influence on the overall performance of the car, indeed, it has even been suggested that wings would be used more as an aid to balancing the car than overall downforce creation as it was in the early 80s.

And finally, I really dont understand why a street race like Singapore would complain about a lack of noise, surely when your running in a urban setting not everyone in the area will want to be inflicted with a massive amount of noise, indeed, in the past noise levels have been a barrier for street races and the fact that they ran turbo engines in Champ Car in the past (and indeed since 2012 in Indycar) has opened up such championshipa to running more street races as people not involved with the races were much less likely to complain about noise levels.

The only constant in change and F1's new regs have been a step in the right direction, encouraging the development of high performance hybrid drive train technology which should trickle down to the products driven on the road by you and I meaning we can all drive further on less fuel and limit the environmental impact of motoring whilst reducing the rate of depletion of a finite source of energy. Thats right, this is about a much bigger picture, in this context moaning about a reduced level of noise is pretty pathetic!

[Whyzars]

snip...

The only constant in change and F1's new regs have been a step in the right direction, encouraging the development of high performance hybrid drive train technology which should trickle down to the products driven on the road by you and I meaning we can all drive further on less fuel and limit the environmental impact of motoring whilst reducing the rate of depletion of a finite source of energy. Thats right, this is about a much bigger picture, in this context moaning about a reduced level of noise is pretty pathetic!

Pathetic, really?

I well remember the heated discussions around ground effects in the early 80's. In fact I think Alan Jones left the sport for a year or two because of his concerns for safety with the direction that F1 was going at the time. There are always arguments. Some based on logic, some based on strategy. Whereas in the past changes seemed to be about competition and safety now they seem to be about ecology which seems strange.


If F1 takes an audience or financial hit will the venture down the V6 turbo, high ER hybrid path be considered a success? Will Petronas for example still be a sponsor if F1 reduces their fuel use even further?

If F1 was serious about energy conservation then wouldn't CVT have been standard 10 years ago?

Does CVT remaining a banned technology tell us anything about F1?

Wouldn't developing high stress CVT systems do more for the environment via their use in haulage than developing new batteries for a Prius?

F1 can call itself whatever it likes but if it is dependent on fans and sponsors then things like sound are an important part of the overall package. Grab a bag of popcorn, I think the sound issue has a long way to run and I expect that sponsor dollars will win - and CVT will remain banned because it sounds like crap. :)

[philipbain]

I well remember the heated discussions around ground effects in the early 80's. In fact I think Alan Jones left the sport for a year or two because of his concerns for safety with the direction that F1 was going at the time.

I concede that there were safety issues regarding ground effect in the early 80s, that was entirely down to the way the rules were framed and what the FIA allowed the teams to get away with, such as sliding skirts and adjustable ride heights, there are plenty of examples of modern racing cars which use a profiled underfloor without any major safety concerns.

CVTs don't conserve energy, they merely optimise the drive of the engine to deliver maximum power all the time, this isnt efficient, infact it can be argued that its massively inefficient to run an engine at maximum power on a constant basis! CVTs are very suitable for engines which only make good power in a very narrow power band, hence why they are deployed in snowmobiles with 2 stroke engines which have a tiny power band. Although one reason that CVTs were banned in F1 was to prevent a technological arms race based around transmissions, it could be argued that another reason why CVTs were banned and remain banned is road-car relevance, very few road cars have CVTs which is mainly down to issues of fuel efficiency and the fact that normal 4 stroke engines have good drivability and are merely unsuited to a CVT. Throw in the fact that people don't like driving a car where the engine note is constantly flat with little variation and you have a few good reasons why they have yet to catch on and hence are irrelevant in a consumer context.

[AndyL]

CVTs don't conserve energy, they merely optimise the drive of the engine to deliver maximum power all the time, this isnt efficient, infact it can be argued that its massively inefficient to run an engine at maximum power on a constant basis! CVTs are very suitable for engines which only make good power in a very narrow power band, hence why they are deployed in snowmobiles with 2 stroke engines which have a tiny power band. Although one reason that CVTs were banned in F1 was to prevent a technological arms race based around transmissions, it could be argued that another reason why CVTs were banned and remain banned is road-car relevance, very few road cars have CVTs which is mainly down to issues of fuel efficiency and the fact that normal 4 stroke engines have good drivability and are merely unsuited to a CVT. Throw in the fact that people don't like driving a car where the engine note is constantly flat with little variation and you have a few good reasons why they have yet to catch on and hence are irrelevant in a consumer context.

All good points but it prompted me to imagine for a moment the sound and smell of a 2-stroke Formula 1 :smokin:

[Zico]

Interesting, but I personally would hate to see TC back. I like the cars being difficult to drive.

What I would do, is get rid of the limited fuel. I would either give them as much fuel as they need or maybe even bring back refuelling.

To be honest. I am enjoying F1 so far this season, but I cant see F1 improving in the longer term for me, because the sport IMO is getting to bogged down.

Its hard to decide. Technology is important but that leads to less driver input and a lesser sporting challenge.

I guess the answer is that everyone wants and likes different things.

What does seem certain is the number of people losing interest in F1 is increasing.


^ +1.

I like to see the cars being more difficult to drive which puts more emphasis on driver skill. If anything, I'd actually like to see the aero reduced even further.




(Snip) ........The only constant in change and F1's new regs have been a step in the right direction, encouraging the development of high performance hybrid drive train technology which should trickle down to the products driven on the road by you and I meaning we can all drive further on less fuel and limit the environmental impact of motoring whilst reducing the rate of depletion of a finite source of energy. Thats right, this is about a much bigger picture, in this context moaning about a reduced level of noise is pretty pathetic!


Pathetic? I don't think so. You have raised some valid points and yes you are certainly right about there being the all important much bigger picture.... but doesn't that bigger picture also have to include and maintain a certain appeal to a large part of the demographic of F1 fans who seek high entertainment value and consider the sound to be an important part of the spectacle? There has to be a balance... if that part is ignored and viewing figures fall through the floor then surely advertising in F1 becomes devalued by team sponsors which in turn impacts the teams budgets and the value of participating in the sport and so on.....

Also, combined with the above.
Despite what the general public may think, the current hybrid drive/energy harvesting systems used in F1 are actually nothing new. It is also nigh on impossible that the manufacturers could find a loophole which would allow a new innovative, ground breaking, green technology to be found and developed within the extremely tight, current F1 technical regulations.
For the first time I find myself actually agreeing with BE that other racing formats perhaps such as the Endurance Sports Car Racing class LMP1, which is just as technologically advanced as F1 if not more so, is just much better suited to finding breakthroughs in the design and development of Hybrid Drive/Energy Harvesting Technology which will still percolate down to road car level and also fits in to the 'endurance' aspect of that sport format much more naturally.

[steveaki13]

^ +1.

I like to see the cars being more difficult to drive which puts more emphasis on driver skill. If anything, I'd actually like to see the aero reduced even further..

Me too, aero plays to huge a part in not allowing cars to follow. I would rather have less aero and cars able to battle closely. Then we can get rid of DRS too, which even after all these years I still believe to be unfair.







Also, combined with the above.
Despite what the general public may think, the current hybrid drive/energy harvesting systems used in F1 are actually nothing new. It is also nigh on impossible that the manufacturers could find a loophole which would allow a new innovative, ground breaking, green technology to be found and developed within the extremely tight, current F1 technical regulations.
For the first time I find myself actually agreeing with BE that other racing formats perhaps such as the Endurance Sports Car Racing class LMP1, which is just as technologically advanced as F1 if not more so, is just much better suited to finding breakthroughs in the design and development of Hybrid Drive/Energy Harvesting Technology which will still percolate down to road car level and also fits in to the 'endurance' aspect of that sport format much more naturally.

Yes

[journeyman racer]

Pathetic? I don't think so. You have raised some valid points and yes you are certainly right about there being the all important much bigger picture.... but doesn't that bigger picture also have to include and maintain a certain appeal to a large part of the demographic of F1 fans who seek high entertainment value and consider the sound to be an important part of the spectacle?No


There has to be a balance... if that part is ignored and viewing figures fall through the floor then surely advertising in F1 becomes devalued by team sponsors which in turn impacts the teams budgets and the value of participating in the sport and so on.....Where it loses in one area, it gains in another. If F1 keeps the same rules, I will attend the GP in Melbourne, whereas I otherwise don't. No balance is necessary. Fans are not really that important. Hence, we have race like Bahrain, that have smaller crowds. To add further, the fairweather fans who don't like these new rules, will find something else they won't like about F1 down the track.


Also, combined with the above.
Despite what the general public may think, the current hybrid drive/energy harvesting systems used in F1 are actually nothing new. It is also nigh on impossible that the manufacturers could find a loophole which would allow a new innovative, ground breaking, green technology to be found and developed within the extremely tight, current F1 technical regulations.
For the first time I find myself actually agreeing with BE that other racing formats perhaps such as the Endurance Sports Car Racing class LMP1, which is just as technologically advanced as F1 if not more so, is just much better suited to finding breakthroughs in the design and development of Hybrid Drive/Energy Harvesting Technology which will still percolate down to road car level and also fits in to the 'endurance' aspect of that sport format much more naturally.Fundamentally, what you and Bernie don't get, is that F1 concedes it status as the highest level of motorsport, if it doesn't apply these technologies. It might not be that obvious to you, but it does.

[Zico]

No

No balance is necessary. Fans are not really that important..


I'm almost speechless! Seriously?

[steveaki13]

I'm almost speechless! Seriously?

Yer of course. Even if not one person turned up to the races and the TV viewership was 0, they of course would just carry on racing and companys would play millions for advertising to no one.

[Storm]

philipbain, all the arguments you made are perfectly valid and satisfy my scientific mind (especially about the exhaust gases being used rather than wasted and hence getting max efficiency of any machine)
but what it does not satisfy (and no logic ever will) is the longing for a very loud and crazy sounding race car.
Many if not most (?) racing fans have grown up with a racing car making a racket (as you put it) and that racket has always been an intrinsic part of the race fans' enjoyment of the racing.

[philipbain]

philipbain, all the arguments you made are perfectly valid and satisfy my scientific mind (especially about the exhaust gases being used rather than wasted and hence getting max efficiency of any machine)
but what it does not satisfy (and no logic ever will) is the longing for a very loud and crazy sounding race car.
Many if not most (?) racing fans have grown up with a racing car making a racket (as you put it) and that racket has always been an intrinsic part of the race fans' enjoyment of the racing.

It seems that "noise" lobby have been heard and the teams with the FIA are looking into how to increase the aural impact of the latest cars, with solutions likely to be tested at the post-Barcelona test, F1 is full of very clever engineers and i'm sure that they will come up with a solution to make the cars a little more tuneful, though for me, having races of the quality of yesterday's is a higher priority!

Link: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/113317

[henners88]

It seems that "noise" lobby have been heard and the teams with the FIA are looking into how to increase the aural impact of the latest cars, with solutions likely to be tested at the post-Barcelona test, F1 is full of very clever engineers and i'm sure that they will come up with a solution to make the cars a little more tuneful, though for me, having races of the quality of yesterday's is a higher priority!

Link: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/113317
Brilliant news.
Its just a small part of the show but its important IMO. We can have races like yesterday even if the sound is tuned differently. I can't see a logical reason why changing the sound would stop an exciting race? Anyway, good news for everybody.

[philipbain]

Brilliant news.
Its just a small part of the show but its important IMO. We can have races like yesterday even if the sound is tuned differently. I can't see a logical reason why changing the sound would stop an exciting race? Anyway, good news for everybody.

I wasn't inferring that sorting the noise out will have any impact on the racing, I was just saying that I see good quality racing as being of greater importance than the way the cars sound, that is all!

[henners88]

I wasn't inferring that sorting the noise out will have any impact on the racing, I was just saying that I see good quality racing as being of greater importance than the way the cars sound, that is all!
I agree the racing comes first, but there is nothing wrong with sorting the noise out as well. It can be done without engineer's neglecting the racing side of things and its good news for fans like myself who thought the engines sounded weak. Good news all round.

[Bagwan]

Plank scrape .
Anyone heard that before ?

It was one of the sounds that I heard this race , and I had never heard it before .

I have heard the blast of the V10s and the wails of the V8s in person , and so , understand the feelings that have people so passionate about the sound of F1 past .

But , I quickly forgot about the former ear-splitting , when I started to hear sounds that were more subtle , like that plank scrape .

I hope now that they can't figure out how to change it to make it louder .

[SGWilko]

I'm almost speechless! Seriously?

But he's right! Fans that want loud cars and no fuel restrictions will get in the way of road relevance, and using the technical bods mass test bed of knowledge to vastly increase the speed at which road cars become more fuel efficient and have electric cars that don't need recharging jaust as you pull off your drive to go on holiday!

If it was noise I wanted, I'd stop the housekeeping payments to my wife!

If was gas guzzlers I wanted, I'd fly to the States and stand by the motorway (sorry, freeway).

If you don't like the new for 2014 F1 sound, go stand next to the chap digging up the road with a jack hammer.......

[henners88]

But he's right! Fans that want loud cars and no fuel restrictions will get in the way of road relevance, and using the technical bods mass test bed of knowledge to vastly increase the speed at which road cars become more fuel efficient and have electric cars that don't need recharging jaust as you pull off your drive to go on holiday!

If it was noise I wanted, I'd stop the housekeeping payments to my wife!

If was gas guzzlers I wanted, I'd fly to the States and stand by the motorway (sorry, freeway).

If you don't like the new for 2014 F1 sound, go stand next to the chap digging up the road with a jack hammer.......
Or continue to watch F1 in the hope they adjust the sound. The technology can still be relevant and I am yet to own a car that has ever sounded like an F1 car! I think there is a compromise here to suit car manufacturers and fans who enjoy the sport. Its not as easy as just telling people to stop watching if they don't like something. Since when has that been an answer? :)

[Whyzars]

But he's right! Fans that want loud cars and no fuel restrictions will get in the way of road relevance, and using the technical bods mass test bed of knowledge to vastly increase the speed at which road cars become more fuel efficient and have electric cars that don't need recharging jaust as you pull off your drive to go on holiday!

If it was noise I wanted, I'd stop the housekeeping payments to my wife!

If was gas guzzlers I wanted, I'd fly to the States and stand by the motorway (sorry, freeway).

If you don't like the new for 2014 F1 sound, go stand next to the chap digging up the road with a jack hammer.......

Bitch slap. Ouch. :D


When we're standing next to the guy with the jackhammer, should we give him our money as well?


Saying that F1 fans who like the smell of high octane fuel and industrial deafness are not wanted anymore might be the new strategy. F1 goes stupid (grooved tyres) and then comes to its sensors (pardon the pun). :)


Thing is, it might be too late for 2014. They've already gone down the ERS route. Change one thing, fine. Change a hundred things, not fine.

They may hope that the engineers can come up with something but the V6's might not let them do much. Rev higher, limit exhaust harnessing, increase fuel consumption, who knows.

One quick way out would be to allow teams to run last years cars/engines if they so desire - with a lot of restrictions/handicapping. If half the field takes up this option then it might save some of the furniture. Ferrari anyone?

I've got nothing against battery operated cars but if I wanted to watch them race I would. ERS/Battery technology didn't make F1 folklore what it is today and over-enthusiastic adoption of ERS/battery technology could have quite a negative affect on the image of F1.

It could be argued that just because its called F1 doesn't actually make it F1.

[Storm]

It seems that "noise" lobby have been heard and the teams with the FIA are looking into how to ...... though for me, having races of the quality of yesterday's is a higher priority!

Link: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/113317
of course top quality racing is the higher priority, even for so-called "noise" lobbyists like me and henners. We just enjoy racing and race cars more if they also have an exciting, loud engine sound - not necessarily noise.
BBC Sport seems to have an axe to grind about people who want to hear the engines and seem to think that the low noise/high efficiency engines are the sole reason of such a great race.

[rjbetty]

NO TC EVER EVER EVER AGAIN!

Sorry to shout, but F1 made that mistake for 2001, thinking traction control needed another chance. It was such a slog to get rid of it. Now those for me were the bad old days.

[Robinho]

would it be beyond the realms of poosibility to turn up the trackside microphones in relation to the commentary team, so the cars "seem" louder? most of us would have no idea that this was artificial, and, as it was before, i am sure that in real life the cars are louder than they seem on the the telly.

To me, 3 races in, and i've pretty match forgotten about the new funny noses and the noise - they both seem normal, as long as the racing continues in the same vein as at Bahrain (our 1st dry weekend) i'll be happy

[Koz]

Do you guys want to the noise to be artificially increased?

Surely, the sound has something to do with character of the cars rather than sound for sound's sake?

[journeyman racer]

They could hire Michael Winslow?

[Whyzars]

They could hire Michael Winslow?

Brilliant. :D

If anyone can get 24 starving monsters to sound like a field of F1 cars he can.


They had a microphone mounted which the cars were going over at high speed.

The sound of the cars took me back to younger days playing cowboys and using my finger as a pretend gun - pioww pioww pioww.


If they do go for a minimum dB rule and let the brains trust at it we'll need a separate thread for helpful suggestions.

[Bagwan]

Sorry , we know you won , but you weren't loud enough , so you're disqualified .

[SGWilko]

Sorry , we know you won , but you weren't loud enough , so you're disqualified .

Ha! I did comment to the wife that maybe Vettel will blame his early qually exit either on the fuel flow sensor or the engine being too quiet!

[Tazio]

Not a big fan of Vettel, but I must say that from outward appearances he is handling the major issues with the PU without an abundance of whining....lately.

[airshifter]

would it be beyond the realms of poosibility to turn up the trackside microphones in relation to the commentary team, so the cars "seem" louder? most of us would have no idea that this was artificial, and, as it was before, i am sure that in real life the cars are louder than they seem on the the telly.

To me, 3 races in, and i've pretty match forgotten about the new funny noses and the noise - they both seem normal, as long as the racing continues in the same vein as at Bahrain (our 1st dry weekend) i'll be happy


I'm more than happy with the new engine notes. I like being able to hear the tires and the wear planks bottoming on occasion. It's nothing like the ear bleeding note that the V8 cars made, but to go to lengths to try to change the exhaust sound is rather crazy IMO. If it's about tech and promoting tech as F1 has always done, then it's an example that big power doesn't have to be made with big decibels.

I'm sure that live the cars are far from quiet, but I don't think people really have a proper perspective of just how crazy loud the V8 cars were.

[Doc Austin]

The engines don't sound that great, but the racing has been so fierce that it doesn't matter to me. these engines are the sound of the future so we'de better get used to them. Whether we like it or not, the sport is bent on a "green" footprint, and eliminating the noise pollution (regardless of how much we love that kind of pollution) is simply going be part of the plan.

It's the only way that such a gleefully wasteful sport can survive in today's insane political environment.

[Zico]

But he's right! Fans that want loud cars and no fuel restrictions will get in the way of road relevance, and using the technical bods mass test bed of knowledge to vastly increase the speed at which road cars become more fuel efficient and have electric cars that don't need recharging jaust as you pull off your drive to go on holiday!

If it was noise I wanted, I'd stop the housekeeping payments to my wife!

If was gas guzzlers I wanted, I'd fly to the States and stand by the motorway (sorry, freeway).

If you don't like the new for 2014 F1 sound, go stand next to the chap digging up the road with a jack hammer.......


Sgt Bilko- Yes of course F1 does need to road relevant... but if you actually bothered to read my original reply to Phillip Bain before trying to make me look a Bearded tit you will see that I was only suggesting that there needs to be a better balance because a large fan base IS extremely important, something so obvious that it should go without saying.
Almost everyone I know with even the remotest interest in F1 has commented on how dull they sound this year, you can't afford to ignore that.

F1 is not the best test bed/proving ground for the development and evolution of new innovative green technologies with its extremely tight, fixed regulations. F1 just needs to show that it is doing something towards being environmentally friendly without going OTT on the green side to the extent that the 'show' is adversely affected.

Me? Yeah, being a TV race watcher I much preferred the howl of the V8's but wow!... what great wheel to wheel racing we enjoyed last weekend and unless Mercedes decide to put a stop to it, we could be in for a real treat this year.

[Whyzars]

Sorry , we know you won , but you weren't loud enough , so you're disqualified .

It does make me wonder exactly where they will go with this.

F1 has evolved over the years but the ear destroying sound has always been the constant.

[Whyzars]

NO TC EVER EVER EVER AGAIN!

Sorry to shout, but F1 made that mistake for 2001, thinking traction control needed another chance. It was such a slog to get rid of it. Now those for me were the bad old days.


I know what you're saying but I don't see the DRS as any sort of brilliance. For me, we are in the bad old days.


With the new engines and difficult rear ends of today's cars, selective TC on specific corners could achieve the same as the DRS but in a different form.

Rather than passes at the end of a straight that are not able to be defended, TC at select corners could see a whole slew of new elements introduced to the races.

Different lines for following cars to avoid rear ending the car in front for one.

When the beneficial effect of TC becomes equalised then we may see wheel to wheel races down the straight finishing at the end. Straight line speed becomes more important.


As long as there is the DRS then I don't believe any option can be seen as unsuitable.

[SGWilko]

Sgt Bilko- Yes of course F1 does need to road relevant... but if you actually bothered to read my original reply to Phillip Bain before trying to make me look a Bearded tit you will see that I was only suggesting that there needs to be a better balance because a large fan base IS extremely important, something so obvious that it should go without saying.
Almost everyone I know with even the remotest interest in F1 has commented on how dull they sound this year, you can't afford to ignore that.

F1 is not the best test bed/proving ground for the development and evolution of new innovative green technologies with its extremely tight, fixed regulations. F1 just needs to show that it is doing something towards being environmentally friendly without going OTT on the green side to the extent that the 'show' is adversely affected.

Me? Yeah, being a TV race watcher I much preferred the howl of the V8's but wow!... what great wheel to wheel racing we enjoyed last weekend and unless Mercedes decide to put a stop to it, we could be in for a real treat this year.

Bearded tit? I had you more as a Dartford Warbler. ;)

PS - I wasn't aiming my post entirely at you - and it wasn't intended to be personal. Just that I think in the current climate, road relevance over waste and excess is much more important that guaranteeing dentists income by having your fillings knocked out by the noise! :)

[schmenke]

As has been already mentioned, unless attending a live event (which is a fraction of the global audience), the sounds of the sport are only as good the microphone pickups at the track, along with the quality of the viewer’s home audio equipment.

As someone who has not attended a live event in years, the sound of today’s cars makes little impact on my interest (or disinterest to be precise) in viewing a televised race :mark: .

[Jag_Warrior]

I don't think you understand the article.

While that's possible, I believe that I do understand that the FIA fuel flow regulations have limited engines DESIGNED to exceed 15K rpms down to 10K rpms. Think about that for a second. The engines are maxing out at 67% of the rpm limit that they were DESIGNED for.


???

Unless I am missing something, Jag is criticizing the current fuel optimised typical 10-11k rpm revs used by the new power units.

Exactly. While I can still greatly enjoy the racing (and I am), it's rather obvious to me that it was a waste of engineering resources to design engines capable of running (reliably) at a 15k rpm limit (not a redline), and then throttle them back to 10k rpms because of a fuel flow limit. F1 is about designing components that can perform at an optimal level before they break. These aren't passenger car engines. Why waste money designing something that's only going to be allowed to operate at 67% of its (supposedly) mandated limit?



The engines are more powerful now with turbo,s and don't have to rev to 18000 revs any more .As has been said by the commentators they have to be careful out of corners,putting the power on ,or they get wheelspin in 5th gear
And lap times are as fast as last year with the normally aspirated V8s

The engines are substantially less powerful than the previous 2.4 V8s. I've seen estimates that ranged from 550-600 for the 1.5 turbos vs. 750 +/- for the V8s. The total output from the power-unit is in the same ball park, depending on which manufacturer is being looked at.

[Zico]

The engines are substantially less powerful than the previous 2.4 V8s. I've seen estimates that ranged from 550-600 for the 1.5 turbos vs. 750 +/- for the V8s. The total output from the power-unit is in the same ball park, depending on which manufacturer is being looked at.

The cars are already almost as quick as last years V8's and that's even with less aero.
I share your feelings on the optimum revs used but personally I have no problem with the power figures. They may not have the same amount of bhp but they do have substantially more torque on the whole which takes them up to about the same performance level. It also makes them a harder to drive which puts more emphasis on driver skill... a really positive thing in my book.

[driveace]

I dont agree with Traction Control .Lets see who can drive the cars well dry or wet without all the Gizmo,s
As Zico says the cars are more or less as fast,and lap times are only slightly less than with last years V8s,even with less aero and smaller wings .
Next year with development continuing the lap times may even be lower than with the old engines