More Passing?

[SkyBiz]

Here's an idea to discuss.
We all know that F1 racing is becoming boring because of the lack of passing.
We know that taking of the wings and putting slicks on will make it better.
But the teams don't won't this because it will cost them too much money from sponsership.
What if we could somehow organise a worldwide boycott of all companies that advertise on the wings e.g. Marlboro, West, Benson and Hedges. Therefore the teams will basically have to pay sponsers to advertise there and voila! off come the wings and everyone is happy.
Just something to think about.
Remember, we're the fans, the racing is for us, if we don't like it we can do something about it.

[R]

I agree that this is a problem, and should be dealt with. A couple of years back the regulations were changed, according to FIA it was done to increase safety and produce closer racing.

By introducing grooved tyres in stead of slicks, speeds were brought down. However, F1 is constantly developing, and when new regulations are being introduced, the teams adapt by making other changes to make the cars go faster. This is a constant process, which means the change to grooved tyres in order to increase safety was not a good idea. The speeds are now back to where they were before grooved tyres were introduced.

The cars were made narrower, according to FIA this was to make overtaking easier and get closer racing. The opposite happened. Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I can remember overtaking was more common three years ago than now.

I think the FIA should at least revert back to the rules from three years ago. F1 is not safer now than in 1997, and the races are more boring. In a "normal" race, there are only two exciting factors: The start and the pit-stops. In addition we get excitement when someone has problems, for instance TGF's slow puncture in Barcelona. And we get excitement when it rains, like at Nürburgring. F1 should not be like this, we should not be dependant of drivers having problems or shifting weather to have exciting races!

Look at CART, they're having exciting races all the time. I'm not a very technical person, but they must be doing something right! Maybe F1 should have a look at that. In CART there is even a lot of passing on street circuits! So maybe the circuits in F1 are the problem. But I would rather think it's a combination of several things. Mickey Mouse circuits, short straights, to many chicanes, narrow cars, to much downforce due to the wings, grooved tyres ...

Do we want it to continue like this? No! But what can be done? We keep watching, don't we? And as long as the money keep flowing in, does Bernie & Co. care? Boycott of wing sponsors could be a good idea, but does enough people care about this to make it work? They surely have a lot of customers who are not watching F1 as well? And even a lot of F1 fans would not take part in such a boycott, I fear. I really think this could be a very difficult situation to solve, but thanks for bringing it up. Let's hope enough people care about this, not least within the F1 body itself, to make some changes for the better.

[Sparky]

Welcome, SkyBiz!

We're discussing this very topic right now.

The thread title is "Why do we watch Formula 1?" it can be found at http://tentenths.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/002087.html

Enjoy!

[Crash Test]

Taking the wings off....hmmmm....no.

Trim the wings, YES. Getting rid of the wings would make them a bit of a joke, heck, what classes don't have wings? Junior FFords etc..
No, I don't think that Bernie will be doing that...

[Sparky]

NO! NO! NO!

"Wings only create downforce in a straight line"


If they could, the teams would rather have no downforce along the straights - it slows them down.

The downforce is only used to get round corners quickly. If you take the rear wing off for example, but leave the front on, the cars will have ridiculous oversteer. They'll spin at the drop of a hat.

Do the reverse, front off, rear left on, and the front of the car will be so light, it will plough straight on into the gravel. (that's if it doesn't take off)

Removing wings altogether is not a good move. No downforce whatsoever will result in a dangerous twitchy missile that is difficult to steer and accelerate. The problem there is that the drivers will either want to go as fast as they used to, or be forced into it by team pressure. Either way it's dangerous.

Formula fords are fun to watch, they have no wings. Put an 800 hp V10 in the back and see how fun that would be to drive...actually...Nah!)

[SkyBiz]

Why do you not think that taking the wings off will increase passing? I'm not a very technical person and can only speak on what I hear off TV (Martin Brundle) or in mags (F1 Racing). From these two sources I have heard many references about the wings affecting passing.
From what I understand the rear wing creates "dirty air" behind the cars. This affects the overall downforce generated by the rear wing of a closely folowing car, up to 50% less. This is why we see cars that are obviously faster than another following at a certain distance (about 2-3 metres) race after boring race.
Secondly in relation to the grooved tyres. The wings only create downforce in a straight line. So when a car gets out of shape by up to 5 degrees it loses all of the grip generated by these wings. With the grooved tyres these cars are doomed to the sandtrap.
No hard feelings but I just can't understand why you are against taking off the wings. I think trimming them is also a good idea, and could very definately work. I love F1 racing and I can't imagine ever giving up on it because of bordem. I know many people feel the same and will continue to watch it because it is F1. But I think we need to think hard about why we are still watching.

[Red]

The wings generate also drag, not only downforce and in straights it is really annoying. Downforce is good when you need higher friction force between tyre and asphalt: braking when entering a corner, in corners to allow higher centrifugal force without sliding, exit of corner (no wheel-spin when accelerating). And of course at start. Do you remember those flexible front wings used by Ferrari in '97 (one or two races, after that they've banned them. Hmmm FIA plot against Ferrari )? They were bending in straights so generating less drag, but come back to original shape when the speed was lower (downforce again). <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Trebuchet MS, Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>From what I understand the rear wing creates "dirty air" behind the cars. This affects the overall downforce generated by the rear wing of a closely following car, up to 50% less.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I think, the worst effect is on the front wing of the following car. The downforce generated by front wing helps front (steering) wheels press harder on the asphalt and the car becomes difficult to handle in turbulent air.
There are also some other side effects, like disturbing the air-stream that is cooling the brakes (at least at front wheels) and radiators ==&gt; overheating.
Anyway, not only the wings generate this dirty air. The problem is that the car is very dependent on them (if it likes to run fast). The car itself, not to mention the wheels, produces turbulent air also.

[Devlin]

I agree with Sparky and Red. I don't think removing wings is the way ahead, in fact it would be suicidal. The late Jochen Rindt tried it on his Lotus, and we all know what happened. There could be alternative ways of producing more overtaking, such as allowing wider-track cars, slick tyres and, as Martin Brundle proposed in a recent interview, returning gear-levers instead of the buttons (or pads) they have now. Another thing - Mr. Mosley announced certain rule changes for next season which would allow for "a decrease in aerodynamic grip, so that cars would have to rely more on mechanical grip". Let's wait and see...

[This message has been edited by Devlin (edited 24 May 2000).]

[EERO]

Wings do produce dirty air in their wake, but F1 has had them for more than thirty years and passing was not so much of an issue in the past, nor is it still in CART.
It's my understanding that the great quantity of dirty air in the wake of an F1 comes from the diffuser and the extremelyconvoluted paths air takes as it passes over winglets, around barge boards, through the "Coke Bottle". Couple this disruptive airflow with skinny grooved tires and a narrow track, and we have cars whose transistional point between grip and a spin is knife-edge. Allow designers more freedom with design and encourage them to clean up the the shape of the cars. Smaller wings and bigger tires will make approaching the transition point easier and allow drivers to ride the edge more easily.

[Sparky]

EERO, I recently read an interview with a chief designer (team undisclosed) who admitted that up to 30% of wind-tunnel time was spent ensuring that 'maximum dirty air' could be generated with 'minimum drag'. This is done with Gurney strips and members added to rear wings.

What we need is to get these devices outlawed...NOW!

I wish I could get a confirmation from somebody 'in the know' who could say when these Gurney strips were first used for this pupose. We could track the reduction of overtaking back to that point and make a 'case' for their removal. (Quite what we'd do with our case, I dunno!)

Wings and downforce are fine. But acheiving your own aero advantage at the expense of the guy behind who can't get within 5 metres of your car is wrong.

[slicktoast]

Bring back the slicks. Outlaw diffusers; flat bottom to and 1 meter rearward from r-axle line. Limit wing size and elements. Ban refueling until 90% of the race is completed (splash 'n dashes are usually time killers). Make driver rollover protection improvements. One tire change stop, with the exception of a wet race or puncture (impound the offending tyre). Widen the braking zone to the apex of certain turns at tracks that need more passing areas.

[EERO]

Thanks for the correction, Sparky.

There is still the point though, that a dirty wake will have a greater cumulative effect upon a car so dependant upon aerodynamic grip than a car that gains its braking advantage with fat slicks and benefits from a wider track in the turns.

Still hate diffusers though....

[This message has been edited by EERO (edited 25 May 2000).]

[Sparky]

EERO, my friend - consider it an 'addition to' rather than a 'correction of'!


Diffusers are more trouble than they're worth. Why the FIA didn't mandate a flat floor from nose to tail I'll never understand.