Quote:
Originally Posted by TRuss
I love old stuff. I have very little interest in all of the modern trappings of life and I have no desire whatsoever to own a modern car or most likely anything that's coming down the pike. Regardless of what is being used for power.
This is where I contradict myself...
|
I for one, can totally relate to what you're saying. It's been awesome to see new tech come down the pipe; IMO, the rudimentary stuff is what has made F1 great...stuff like like pneumatic valve actuation, Ferrari's torsion bar suspension, McLaren's 3rd brake pedal (before it was banned. WTF.), moveable ballasts, and that sort of thing. Cool thing about that stuff was, it didn't take an engineering degree to relate to it in both form and function. Good engineering is still about making more with less; but the digital age has skewed the optics of that a bit.
"Grey area" tech (to me) is stuff like active suspension; cool and innovative, but taking away a bit more than it gives, perhaps, in terms of the car being "raw" (I feel F1 should lean more toward "untamed beast" territory, but not everyone may agree). Basically, any driver's aid that serves to lessen the significance of a driver's senses and skill would fall in this category, and should be viewed with trepidation.
"Parody tech" is stuff like the wooden skid block, grooved tires, DRS (I'm sure there have been many others during the time I signed off from F1 for a time). Stuff that are obviously "compromises for the spectacle" and/or just lazy work-arounds (for problems that perhaps don't even exist).
I've always thought a standardized tub could be part of the answer, eliminating design variables (and save a ton of money) so teams could get to the meat of the car right away, in tandem with freeing up the design windows (here's your block of wood; carve whatever you want!). I wonder if some standardized engine components - a'la NASCAR - is the way to go too.
Thinking out loud.
