back to basics

[slimshady]

what about this for a resolve to the lack of overtaking problem,and also cutting costs as well.why dont they put the cars back on steel brakes or a control brake to increase the breaking zones thus bringing back the "last of the late breakers".cut down on all the wings and flaps for downforce and get them back on slick tyres.thus making it easier to slipstream the car infront.
technology is going to far to take away a drivers skill these days.back to basics for me i say.montoya is gone but had the cars been like this when he was here i think it would have suited him perfectly.
thanks for listening

[fan-veteran]

The entire problem is that Formula 1 is promoted to be the high-tech, the pinnacle of automotive technology. And with relation to the brakes - the current 'graphite carbon-fiber reinforced' (similar to the Space shuttle heat-shield panels !) brakes are high-tech, but steel - not very.

[Mickey T]

Technically, steel brakes don't massively increase the braking distances.

i know some teams have tested them as recently as three years ago, and the advantage is not as big as you'd think.

neither is the issue one of fade, because modern steel racing rotors don't suffer from it terribly.

the issue is one of weight, and it's weight in the wrong area. it's unsprung mass, so it's weight the suspension has to deal with.

the issue is not all aero, in spite of it being the obvious one to prod at. When is the overtaking in F1 at its best? in the rain. When do F1 cars run maximum downforce? in the rain...

aero is a huge factor, for sure, but it's not the whole issue. one of the big issues is the amount of rubber laid down on the racing line during a race weekend, so that to go off line to overtake is tantamount to braking in the wet and trying to pass the guy on line.

but (and while i don't like it, it has to be pointed out) overtaking has NEVER been a major positive in F1. There's just never been that much of it, in spite of the golden periods people eulogise over.

I'd like there to be, but it just hasn't been a typically F1 thing

[luvracin]

but (and while i don't like it, it has to be pointed out) overtaking has NEVER been a major positive in F1. There's just never been that much of it, in spite of the golden periods people eulogise over.



Yep, I remember reading about GP's from the "Golden Days" where winning margins were measured in multiples of Laps not seconds...

As society's attention spans continue to shrink I fully expect NASCAR to start throwing caution flags for ad breaks and having quick 10 minute sprint points races similar to what they do on Cycling Valedromes.

[fan-veteran]

A few weeks ago i saw a 1982 season review. That i call a "golden age". Actually what surpised me - they hadn't made planned pit stops! The narrator said for a Brabham team pit stop in Austria'82 - "the first planned pit stop in modern F1 history".

[Racehound]

what about this for a resolve to the lack of overtaking problem,and also cutting costs as well.why dont they put the cars back on steel brakes or a control brake to increase the breaking zones thus bringing back the "last of the late breakers".cut down on all the wings and flaps for downforce and get them back on slick tyres.thus making it easier to slipstream the car infront.
technology is going to far to take away a drivers skill these days.back to basics for me i say.montoya is gone but had the cars been like this when he was here i think it would have suited him perfectly.
thanks for listening
definitely a good basis from which to start ......something maybe madmax might look at one day in the near future before f1 disappears up its own a*&e :)

[Valve Bounce]

Ban all wings, except a flat one to carry adverts, and ban all computers. There you have it. I call it the Valve Bounce Principle. Genius!!

[Hawkmoon]

but (and while i don't like it, it has to be pointed out) overtaking has NEVER been a major positive in F1. There's just never been that much of it, in spite of the golden periods people eulogise over.

I'd like there to be, but it just hasn't been a typically F1 thing

I agree with you here. Passing isn't everything in motorsports. Look at NASCAR or Moto GP. A pass in NASCAR on an oval is largely meaningless as passes occur constantly throughout a race. It's only the last pass that makes a difference. Same with Moto GP. It's easy to pass on a bike so the riders often time their pass to make sure it's last pass they will make. If they pass too early they are likely to be re-passed by the other guy before the end.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that we don't want to turn F1 into NASCAR where we see an overtaking move at every other corner as it will render the moves meaningless. There's a reason why everybody remembers Hakkinen's move on Schumacher at Spa in '00. Aside from being spectacular it was decisive. If it was only 1 of 20 passes for the lead during the race I doubt we'd have such fond memories of it.

That's not to say that we can't improve the situation we have now. Whilst we do see a lot of overtaking, take Massa at Silverstone and Alonso at Magny-Cours, it's rarely for the leading positions these days. So we do need to make it easier for more equal cars to overtake. Let's not make it too easy though.

[Crypt]

I agree with you here. Passing isn't everything in motorsports. Look at NASCAR or Moto GP. A pass in NASCAR on an oval is largely meaningless as passes occur constantly throughout a race. It's only the last pass that makes a difference. Same with Moto GP. It's easy to pass on a bike so the riders often time their pass to make sure it's last pass they will make. If they pass too early they are likely to be re-passed by the other guy before the end.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that we don't want to turn F1 into NASCAR where we see an overtaking move at every other corner as it will render the moves meaningless. There's a reason why everybody remembers Hakkinen's move on Schumacher at Spa in '00. Aside from being spectacular it was decisive. If it was only 1 of 20 passes for the lead during the race I doubt we'd have such fond memories of it.

That's not to say that we can't improve the situation we have now. Whilst we do see a lot of overtaking, take Massa at Silverstone and Alonso at Magny-Cours, it's rarely for the leading positions these days. So we do need to make it easier for more equal cars to overtake. Let's not make it too easy though.

+1.675

[Hawkmoon]

+1.675

Say again? :confused:

[Shifter]

We need ground effects and more competitive cars on grid.

[Valve Bounce]

+1.675

I prefer 1.61803398876

[ShiftingGears]

Yep, I remember reading about GP's from the "Golden Days" where winning margins were measured in multiples of Laps not seconds...

As society's attention spans continue to shrink I fully expect NASCAR to start throwing caution flags for ad breaks and having quick 10 minute sprint points races similar to what they do on Cycling Valedromes.


I don't see a problem with one car lapping the whole field...

I see a problem with a faster car not being able to overtake a slower one because the machinery inhibits overtaking. A dice for the lead doesnt need overtaking to be exciting, as history points out with the 1970 British Grand Prix, 1981 Spanish Grand Prix, 2005 and 2006 Imola GP, and last years Turkish grand prix as examples. BUT there needs to be opportunities to overtake, and those are infinitely small now due to the tiny distance of braking zones and aerodynamics of the cars. And it isn't going to get any better unless something is done about it, unless F1 wants to put more and more wide, stop start tracks on the calendar. Even then it would be a band-aid solution.

[fan-veteran]

I, personally would like to watch a racing car in F1 driven 'the same' way as all normal (racing) cars are driven - a normal clutch (and a pedal) , FIVE gears to switch over by menas of a lever, brakes and accelerator, and of course a steering wheel. That i call a real racing. I don't care that the cars will not be so high tech. Of course tracks must not be so twisty :) .

[Rollo]

Ban all wings, except a flat one to carry adverts, and ban all computers. There you have it. I call it the Valve Bounce Principle. Genius!!

I vote we enact the Valve Bounce Principle immediately. By removing wings and aero devices, cornering speeds will be slower, the distances that cars would be able to follow each other would also be less.

Yes, Valve Bounce is a genius!! :D

PS: When do I get my fiver?

[janneppi]

Ban all wings, except a flat one to carry adverts, and ban all computers. There you have it. I call it the Valve Bounce Principle. Genius!!
You're watching the wrong sport mate, karting is what you seem to want. ;)

[COD]

what about this for a resolve to the lack of overtaking problem,and also cutting costs as well.why dont they put the cars back on steel brakes or a control brake to increase the breaking zones thus bringing back the "last of the late breakers".cut down on all the wings and flaps for downforce and get them back on slick tyres.thus making it easier to slipstream the car infront.
technology is going to far to take away a drivers skill these days.back to basics for me i say.montoya is gone but had the cars been like this when he was here i think it would have suited him perfectly.
thanks for listening


I couldn't agree with you more. The solutions you have given are the ones needed for making overtaking possible again.

As a quick fix, there could also be a button that would allow the driver let's say 500rpm's more for like three time / event.

[ShiftingGears]

the distances that cars would be able to follow each other would also be less.

Why would that be?

[Valve Bounce]

You're watching the wrong sport mate, karting is what you seem to want. ;)

Don't be silly. :rolleyes: Try being positive for a change.

[Flat.tyres]

Technically, steel brakes don't massively increase the braking distances.

i know some teams have tested them as recently as three years ago, and the advantage is not as big as you'd think.

neither is the issue one of fade, because modern steel racing rotors don't suffer from it terribly.

the issue is one of weight, and it's weight in the wrong area. it's unsprung mass, so it's weight the suspension has to deal with.

the issue is not all aero, in spite of it being the obvious one to prod at. When is the overtaking in F1 at its best? in the rain. When do F1 cars run maximum downforce? in the rain...

aero is a huge factor, for sure, but it's not the whole issue. one of the big issues is the amount of rubber laid down on the racing line during a race weekend, so that to go off line to overtake is tantamount to braking in the wet and trying to pass the guy on line.

but (and while i don't like it, it has to be pointed out) overtaking has NEVER been a major positive in F1. There's just never been that much of it, in spite of the golden periods people eulogise over.

I'd like there to be, but it just hasn't been a typically F1 thing

excellent post and pretty spot on.

changing back to steel brakes will not happen and shouldn't happen (I hope) because of safety reasons). it would expotentially increase the risk of injury to a driver or spectator / marshall. the only reason the FIA has had relative success at tethering wheels is because of the reduced sheer mass at impact of composites.

reduced aero is a different point though. the reason cars can exploite the rubber is because of the huge downforce generated. reduce this and make the penalty for going offline less. even better, have a heratage race right before a GP :devil: (yes, that was a joke ;) )

I have no problem with the current electronically controlled gearboxes because having a driver trying to manage the thousands of gear changes over the weekend at the revs these engines operate at will lead to most of the field shredding their box but I would eliminate braking and acceleration aids. OK, ABS in road cars is a safety measure but it's not in a F1 car. the better drivers who have the true feel for the car will balance better the brake and acceleration transition and demonstrate their worth.

will we get more overtaking? possibly because the better drivers in inferiour machinary will be able to shine easier but the guys at the front will still be pretty static although there will be more opportunity to force moves. dont expect races like Moto GP though with paint swapping every lap but it would be better and more unpredictable I think.

[janneppi]

Don't be silly. :rolleyes: Try being positive for a change.
Banning electronics and silly wings in cars would put them 30 years back,i don't want that, I like F1 being innovative and fighting the rules.
If there isn't a way for manufacturers to compete in chassis building, we could do just fine with a single supplier.

I think FIA is left behind on aero issues, they should hop on to this centerury and make rules for airflows instead of car dimensions, yes I know it would be expensive and quite difficult. And would have loop holes but i'd rather have that instead of Panoz building 24 identical cars.

[Valve Bounce]

Banning electronics and silly wings in cars would put them 30 years back,i don't want that, I like F1 being innovative and fighting the rules.
If there isn't a way for manufacturers to compete in chassis building, we could do just fine with a single supplier.

I think FIA is left behind on aero issues, they should hop on to this centerury and make rules for airflows instead of car dimensions, yes I know it would be expensive and quite difficult. And would have loop holes but i'd rather have that instead of Panoz building 24 identical cars.
You tell me how your ideas can improve racing in F1 - that's what this thread is about.

Me, I'd like to see lotsa power, no wings except for a flat rear wing to carry adverts, and no computers so the drivers must change gears themselves, no Trax, no auto gears, and basically let the drivers race.

But, if you want to give us the pinacle argument, then tell us how your way can improve racing.

Over to you!!

[fan-veteran]

This thread is gonna be about rules :) . If we have a very competitive (technologically) rules then the expenses will be very high. This is the real problem - where the boundary of admissible expense lies, 50 mln$ a year per two cars , 100 m$, or 300m$ ??.

We also must very carefully distinguish between technolgy which doesn't affect the driving (engine, tyres and so on) and technology wich affects driving - ABS, semi-automatic gear changing, traction control.

[janneppi]

You tell me how your ideas can improve racing in F1 - that's what this thread is about.

over to you!!
Ok, Let's dream for a while that FIA magically finds the money and know how to run a wind tunnel to govern airflows.

Rules could define an area y meters behind the car that would need to have a suitable airflow at a certain speed which would allow another car to follow close enough in corners.
Perhaps measuring air pressure and speed of the air flow.
Teams could build anything they wish(with reason) but that area should be with rules.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

One thing wrong with F1.

The cars have more power than grip.

[Valve Bounce]

Ok, Let's dream for a while that FIA magically finds the money and know how to run a wind tunnel to govern airflows.

Rules could define an area y meters behind the car that would need to have a suitable airflow at a certain speed which would allow another car to follow close enough in corners.
Perhaps measuring air pressure and speed of the air flow.
Teams could build anything they wish(with reason) but that area should be with rules.

RIGHT!! Do you have any other other bright ideas?

[Brown, Jon Brow]

As we no longer have a tyre war, why can't we give them tyres that give them less grip?

[Ranger]

As we no longer have a tyre war, why can't we give them tyres that give them less grip?
Well that's what they've done for this year - anyone notice any difference in the racing?
The huge problem in F1 is that the quench for increased technology is mutually exclusive with exciting racing, as sad as it is.

[Valve Bounce]

You want excitement? Remove all the wings and Trax and auto gears. You'll have excitement galore!!

[Easy Drifter]

No aerodynamic devices behind the driver. Engineers and designers would go nuts with all the downforce they wanted at the front and none at the rear. How soon before the driver was behind the engine?

[fan-veteran]

They need wings as an advertisement area :) . Back in 1982 when the ground effect was in it's full strenght (well, sidepods are really for ban) there were cars without front wing even , and the rear wing was relatively small.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

Well that's what they've done for this year - anyone notice any difference in the racing?
The huge problem in F1 is that the quench for increased technology is mutually exclusive with exciting racing, as sad as it is.

They have probably stopped/reduced tyre development, not reduced the grip level significantly.

[Valve Bounce]

No aerodynamic devices behind the driver. Engineers and designers would go nuts with all the downforce they wanted at the front and none at the rear. How soon before the driver was behind the engine?


Allow flat front wings to carry adverts but with no aerofoil section. It is very important for cars to carry adverts these days because that's what the sponsors pay for.