|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
16 Aug 2020, 15:33 (Ref:3995779) | #3876 | |||
Subscriber
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 12,359
|
Quote:
The changes were made to make the cars faster - they are. https://www.formula1.com/en/championship/inside-f1/rules-regs/2017-season-changes.html This time bodywork and tyres are the centre of attention, with both getting wider in order to boost downforce and grip, making the cars both faster and physically harder to drive. In fact, a reduction in lap time of around 3 to 5 seconds is expected… |
|||
|
17 Aug 2020, 08:24 (Ref:3995901) | #3877 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 18,402
|
I was talking about the racing. It was a short sighted move to make cars more spectacular, but everyone but the FIA it seems could see it was going to ruin the racing. Thankfully some saw sense and came up low downforce cars for 2022
|
|
__________________
He who dares wins! He who hesitates is lost! |
17 Aug 2020, 09:11 (Ref:3995913) | #3878 | |||
Subscriber
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 12,359
|
Quote:
The recent direction on reducing down-force is also not about the 'racing', but about improving safety in the sport. There are many examples of Motorsport that have better 'racing', but that doesn't mean they align with the aspirations of F1 (competitors, fans, governing bodies). This is why there will always be discussions over the right route for technical regulations to take - there is no consensus on what F1 should be, so how can those writing the regulation match people's aspirations. Safety vs spectacle? Speed vs competition? Simplicity vs innovation? Elite status vs accessibility? For every person who states that they could see higher down-force would ruin the racing, there is someone else who wants F1 cars to be as fast as possible..... |
|||
__________________
"When you’re just too socially awkward for real life, Ten-Tenths welcomes you with open arms. Everyone has me figured out, which makes it super easy for me." |
17 Aug 2020, 09:18 (Ref:3995915) | #3879 | |
Veteran
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,211
|
||
|
17 Aug 2020, 09:45 (Ref:3995924) | #3880 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
Quote:
So Griff's post was completely justified. P.S. This change was not about safety, other than Pirelli were not prepared to upgrade the tyres, so the cars had to be made to generate smaller loads to compensate for the tyre's short commings. |
||
|
17 Aug 2020, 09:57 (Ref:3995925) | #3881 | |||
Subscriber
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 12,359
|
Quote:
The aero was not about better racing though, that was part of other changes introduced at the same time. F1's bosses at the time were trying to 'solve' all of the following requirements: 'faster cars, happier drivers, better racing and less financial strain on smaller teams' These were addressed (not necessarily successfully) as follows: Equalising engines Cost - a fixed 12m euros from 2018. Performance convergence - judged, early in the 2017 season, on a lap-time difference of 0.3secs on a reference circuit, calculated on a metric that defines power-sensitivity (the effect of power on lap times). Noise - to increase and improve the sound. Obligation to supply - to formally enshrine the concept that they all ensure no team can be without an engine. More raceable tyres Tyre degradation should be proportional to performance, so the less grippy a tyre is, the longer it will run before it starts to degrade. When a car is closely following another, its tyres should not degrade to the extent their performance cannot be recovered. Faster, more dramatic cars The strategy group set engineers the target of coming up with a set of [aero] rules that made the cars five to six seconds a lap quicker, more dramatic looking and did not negatively affect overtaking. A compromise set of rules was agreed that would reduce lap times by about three to four seconds, but made no reference to affecting overtaking. Ultimately, achieving all of these aims at the same time was going to be difficult at best. But the improved racing was not one of the targets of the aero changes, that was included in the requirements of the engine and tyre changes. The aero changes (once the compromise was made) was purely about improving lap times, which they have. That has been at the detriment of racing, but that doesn't mean the aero changes didn't meet their aim. |
|||
__________________
"When you’re just too socially awkward for real life, Ten-Tenths welcomes you with open arms. Everyone has me figured out, which makes it super easy for me." |
17 Aug 2020, 10:21 (Ref:3995927) | #3882 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
Quote:
P.S. Nice pins in your avatar CR! |
||
|
17 Aug 2020, 11:29 (Ref:3995941) | #3883 | |||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 23,244
|
Quote:
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/a...IY6mEcwsM.html |
|||
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying." Colin Chapman. |
17 Aug 2020, 12:00 (Ref:3995946) | #3884 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,873
|
Quote:
Quote:
While committees can get inadvertently hyper-focused on minutia and/or relatively low priority items, I do think that in general they were trying to address criticism. Richard |
|||
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
17 Aug 2020, 12:28 (Ref:3995957) | #3885 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,550
|
To the best of my memory the idea for the faster cars came from the old FOM i.e. B.C.Ecclestone.
|
|
|
17 Aug 2020, 12:37 (Ref:3995962) | #3886 | |||
Subscriber
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 12,359
|
Quote:
https://www.formula1.com/en/champion...n-changes.html There is no mention of better racing associated with the aero changes. 'This time bodywork and tyres are the centre of attention, with both getting wider in order to boost downforce and grip, making the cars both faster and physically harder to drive. In fact, a reduction in lap time of around 3 to 5 seconds is expected…' Power units were supposed to improve racing though: 'A number of changes have also been introduced aimed at reducing power unit costs, guaranteeing supply for customer teams, and closing the performance gap between engines:' I think it was the reaction to the 2017 changes that contributed to 2019's changes concentrating on better racing. This is almost certainly the case. Liberty Media's purchase of a minority stake was completed in September 2016, but the rule changes had been agreed in April 2016. |
|||
__________________
"When you’re just too socially awkward for real life, Ten-Tenths welcomes you with open arms. Everyone has me figured out, which makes it super easy for me." |
17 Aug 2020, 12:49 (Ref:3995967) | #3887 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,873
|
Quote:
Richard |
||
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
17 Aug 2020, 13:55 (Ref:3995985) | #3888 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 18,402
|
I seem to remember Bernie saying he wanted faster cars. For me though they should have been more powerful, putting in more aero was always going to kill the spectacle and we ended up with those ugly looking winglets, that ruined the cars looked. It was a very short sighted move. I look forward to those low downforce cars in 2022, hopefully without DRS too
|
|
__________________
He who dares wins! He who hesitates is lost! |
10 Feb 2022, 07:01 (Ref:4098031) | #3889 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,203
|
|||
__________________
Bathurst 1977, best day of my childhood Worst thing ever to happen to Ford Aust Motorsport. |
10 Feb 2022, 08:54 (Ref:4098042) | #3890 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 6,094
|
|||
|
10 Feb 2022, 09:07 (Ref:4098044) | #3891 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 18,402
|
||
__________________
He who dares wins! He who hesitates is lost! |
10 Feb 2022, 18:54 (Ref:4098125) | #3892 | ||||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,941
|
Quote:
Quote:
https://www.eurosport.com/formula-1/...21/story.shtml Quote:
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/f...vious-era.html I recall a quote from a GP2 driver who found the power-steering assisted 2016 F1 car to less taxing to drive than his GP2 car during their F1 testing, but I can't quite find it. Those 2014-2016 F1 cars were so darn slow, they were at times 10-15 seconds per lap slower than 2004 F1 cars at the start of a race with full fuel, making them much faster in 2017 was absolutely the right decision. Going 2-3 seconds per lap slower from where they were in 2020 is fine (I think they were 0.5-1.5s per slower in 2021 which made little difference), but to go 10 seconds a lap slower again would be the wrong move IMO. In 2016, Super Formula cars from Japan were much faster than F1 cars in corners (F1 much faster on the straight due to much more power of course). It was ridiculous. The F1 driver could do little more than wait, wait some more and then finally pick up the throttle due to lack of grip -- they couldn't attack the course in the aggressive manner which the Super Formula drivers could. While they are occasionally ponderous due to the weight (due to extra safety measures since 2016), have we not been thrilled by how attacking, exciting and edgy the 2017-2021 cars with their big wings and big tyres were/are, especially in qualifying? When they are on the limit, they are really on the limit, and they can unload and spit the overambitious driver off at any moment which is rather exciting! Qualifying Highlights | 2021 Dutch Grand Prix Of course F1 adding better tracks like Zandvoort, Mugello etc has helped a lot too. Last edited by V8 Fireworks; 10 Feb 2022 at 19:17. |
||||
|
11 Feb 2022, 04:44 (Ref:4098190) | #3893 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 11,183
|
The weight is the most important factor for me, this is where the cars can look slow and lumbering is in the slower corners and on direction change. I know for a long time the cars weighed about 500kg, then in the 90s went to 600kg. Not sure what they weigh now but I believe it’s knocking on for 800kg.
What really stands out for me of the cars from the early 90s is their speed around hairpins and slower corners, corners where spectators can actually view the cars is that they look so much faster. It’s easy to make a fast corner look fast, because 180mph looks similar to 160mph, but it’s the slower corners where the difference is more pronounced. |
||
|
11 Feb 2022, 09:25 (Ref:4098205) | #3894 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 18,402
|
Cars don't need to be mega fast, they just need to look it. They need to look on the edge. MotoGP lap times are a lot slower than F1, but the bikes never look slow, because they are closer to the edge of performance.
Hopefully the new car regs can make that happen, as well as making the racing better |
|
__________________
He who dares wins! He who hesitates is lost! |
11 Feb 2022, 12:43 (Ref:4098241) | #3895 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
Quote:
|
||
|
11 Feb 2022, 12:53 (Ref:4098245) | #3896 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 983
|
Quote:
Yes, 795kg sadly. 685kg with all the current safety features and a 3L V10 with KERS with a smaller cars and smaller/lighter wheels and tires would be perfectly possible. With a wider car a few kilo's more. Unfortunately we will never going to see those weights no more because of the choices made on drivetrain, car and wheel/tire size. Imagine that, the new generation ultra fast cars that are able to follow one another like we haven't seen in more than two decades. Ultra fast in the fast corners due to ground effects and much more nimble in the slow ones because 110kg lighter weight. Add to that a nice sounding V10 that all teams can afford and that runs on 100% sustainable fuel. You'd have the perfect F1 car. Oh well.... Last edited by Taxi645; 11 Feb 2022 at 12:59. |
||
__________________
Constructive discussion: A conversion where participants are maximally open to yet critical of each others (and their own) arguments, with the intend of enhancing the knowledge, understanding and/or handling of it's subject. |
11 Feb 2022, 13:10 (Ref:4098251) | #3897 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,656
|
One thing that struck me yesterday when I was looking at the pictures of the new Aston Martin. It looks so flippin' long! Will they be able to get around Monaco?
|
||
__________________
Incognito: An Italian phrase meaning Nice Gearchange! |
11 Feb 2022, 15:33 (Ref:4098274) | #3898 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,941
|
Quote:
The 2021 cars are about the same length as a Range Rover or long wheelbase S Class (5.3-5.5m), but there is a new maximum wheelbase rule (previously unregulated, now about 100mm less than the old average wheelbase) as well as shorter overhangs for 2022 which makes the cars a little bit shorter. FIA originally proposed 3400mm maximum wheelbase, however teams rejected this due to excessive redesign work. |
||
|
11 Feb 2022, 15:37 (Ref:4098276) | #3899 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,748
|
Quote:
just one of the many things i have learned about tshirts over the years! |
|||
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place |
20 Feb 2022, 02:28 (Ref:4099469) | #3900 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[Rules] Are more rule changes necessary ? | Marbot | Formula One | 51 | 27 Sep 2009 17:19 |
F1 future rule changes | TheNewBob | Formula One | 57 | 20 Dec 2006 09:19 |
Sensible ideas for future technical regs anyone?/Rule changes - more to come [merged] | AMT | Formula One | 74 | 12 Nov 2002 16:09 |
Future Tourer Future | Crash Test | Australasian Touring Cars. | 13 | 17 Jul 2002 23:01 |