|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
9 Oct 2018, 17:05 (Ref:3855714) | #226 | ||
Team Crouton
20KPINAL
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 39,527
|
Well I watched a fair bit of it and some of the guys (I accept not all) were making a pretty good job of acting as if they were on (or very near) the limit, IMO. It was also mesmerisingly good to watch. Great looking cars (yes, some rose-tinted specs there, I'll admit) but seeing some great drivers peddling (including some at the top of their game in major championships) was marvelous to see. Maybe nothing happens for stretches of time - as is the case in 99 races out of a 100, but it was still hugely entertaining.
|
||
__________________
96 days... |
9 Oct 2018, 17:14 (Ref:3855719) | #227 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,067
|
Quote:
Taking your opener to that sentence though - that's the way pretty much all racing has always been, NASCAR and short oval stuff excepted. Right now in F1 there may be a dearth of overtaking and it may be that the tech rules have made it that way, but F1 has hardly been a festival of lead changes throughout its entire history. There's a reason we can all remember fantastic passes round 130R, up Raidillion, round Copse and so on - because they're not really very common, and never have been. The current, dare I say, 'obsession' with overtaking is definitely one from the rose-tinted-spectacles bowl in my view. Sure, it'd be good if the cars could run closer together but with the current crop of machinery being run right on the edge of every tolerance they've got, it just isn't going to happen. |
||
__________________
Walk a mile in someone else's shoes. When they realise you have, you'll be a mile away and you'll have their shoes. |
9 Oct 2018, 19:26 (Ref:3855741) | #228 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 10,912
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wru5CPm4H1A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Tt4mSImzSA Not on the limit? These guys weren't told about that. |
|
|
9 Oct 2018, 20:55 (Ref:3855759) | #229 | ||
Team Crouton
20KPINAL
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 39,527
|
Exactly.
|
||
__________________
96 days... |
10 Oct 2018, 03:43 (Ref:3855817) | #230 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
Quote:
I wouls also hazard that a few of these drivers are better than some of the members of the F1 grid. Also interesting to note that Nico Rosberg has stated that he has no wish to go historic racing because it is too dangerous. Then people disparage Historic racing. |
||
|
10 Oct 2018, 04:07 (Ref:3855822) | #231 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,803
|
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." |
10 Oct 2018, 05:48 (Ref:3855831) | #232 | ||||
The Honourable Mallett
20KPINAL
Join Date: Feb 1999
Posts: 37,234
|
Quote:
Quote:
If the cars were ten seconds a lap slower but could run close in traffic and actually looked like they were difficult to drive then it would increase the spectacle. |
||||
__________________
I've decided to stop reaching out to people. I'm just going to contact them instead. |
10 Oct 2018, 15:43 (Ref:3855926) | #233 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,803
|
Quote:
My point is that while those cars are probably excellent examples of vintage racers and no doubt well maintained, they are also built to a lower standard. They are production based, they are old, they are dinosaurs in every sense of the word. So if you compare them to what could be done with the same material (steel, rubber, etc.) they are in fact quite poor solutions (aka "crappy cars"). I was purposefully pushing buttons on the commentary about the cars. My dig about "budget caps" also is that these cars are quiet restricted in their solutions. So, I don't know the history of that particular race, but I expect it was restricted to saloon cars of a particular era and maybe displacement and ultimately those cars probably race under a specified set of historic rules (nowhere close to being an "open" series). Meaning that you can't put in bespoke race engines, or recreate the entire car, but at 80% scale, or built it out of unobtanium material. And in the end, while the owners are likely quite rich, they probably have finite funds of which are quite less than an F1 team. So a budget cap due to lack of someone willing to spend the money and some level of diminishing returns. As to purposefully slower cars that are difficult to drive, etc. I think it is technically doable. But as I frequently say... I have no interest in professional vintage racing being the top open wheel series. And even if we did, I expect it would be difficult to create a set of rules in which engineers can't find ways to work around that goal. The intent might be "make them difficult to drive", but the designers and race engineers jobs (of which they are quite good) will be to tame the beasts and they will. Just like they have in F1 today. We keep taking away "drivers aids" (traction control, real active aero, active suspension, launch control, etc.) and yet they seem to get easier and easier to drive. Richard |
||
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
10 Oct 2018, 15:49 (Ref:3855930) | #234 | ||
The Honourable Mallett
20KPINAL
Join Date: Feb 1999
Posts: 37,234
|
Yes I know what you mean. And yes those are production based cars so little relevance to F1. But not only did we take things away, we added semi automatic gearboxes, multi ratio diffs, power steering and all sorts of things that should, in my opinion, not be part of racing.
|
||
__________________
I've decided to stop reaching out to people. I'm just going to contact them instead. |
10 Oct 2018, 17:23 (Ref:3855952) | #235 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,718
|
Quote:
would it be possible to take a set of regulations from a prior season (year doesnt really matter for this question but for sure some years had 'better' regs/racing than others but for arguments sake lets just say 1989) and told the teams that these will again be the regs for 2019...would that work, how would that work, would it actually create something more sound then we have today? no doubt the 2019 versions of the 1989 regs would benefit from better material knowledge, better building techniques, modern technology etc. also, as you say, teams cant unlearn what they know and over time (within the course of a season at least) they will discover new areas to exploit and new loopholes. these would be issues for sure, but that aside, would be possible to have a modern day version/builds of historics racing? following along the line of not being to unlearn the past, it strikes me there may also be an opportunity here. rather if they were to revert to a 'year zero' of sorts and start the evolution process all over again, shouldn't it be possible to avoid the pitfalls of the past which F1 currently find itself trapped by (too much aero for example)? |
|||
__________________
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 |
11 Oct 2018, 11:39 (Ref:3856099) | #236 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,923
|
Quote:
Many things the innovative F1 constrctors have added like tractional control, active suspension, ground effect fans, and even CVTs ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3UpBKXMRto ) have of course been banned, and these things could be banned too, of course. |
||
|
11 Oct 2018, 11:43 (Ref:3856103) | #237 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,923
|
Quote:
An aerodynamic restriction would be a good place to start: restrict the front wing even further than 2019 rules, ban slots in the floor, clean up the bargeboard area (perhaps just ban bodywork being there altogether!), remove the rear wheel winglets that purport to be "brake ducts" etc. If you make the cars have to run in their own dirty air from their tyre wakes (by removing these flow conditioning devices, which primarily have the job of pushing the wheel turbulence away from the underbody and diffuser) then the cars won't be as sensitive to external turbulence. ^ It would be very easy to ban these slots in the floor, which do the job of creating a vortex to stop turbulence from air going around the rear tyre ("tyre squirt") leaking into the diffuser. The teams have a lot of resources so they can finely tune every tiny little detail, the job of the regulator then is perhaps to detune these details and force the teams to make their car simple. Similarly on the power unit front, it's little wonder power unit A with every little detail finetuned with no expense spared for compact packaging costs far more per unit than power unit B. Power unit A [Not only is there a turbo hidden under there somewhere, there is an even an electrical motor (MGUH) crammed in there too!] Power unit B Should the regulator detune these hugely complicated power units too [I would suggest joining two of the current 1.6 V6 ICEs together to make a 3.2 V12 , the lean combustion stuff like turbulent jet injection can be kept as it has already been developed ]? Or do fans love the complicated power units and complicated aero? To lose them, would be to damage F1!? Last edited by V8 Fireworks; 11 Oct 2018 at 12:12. |
||
|
11 Oct 2018, 16:13 (Ref:3856130) | #238 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 943
|
The F1 organisers can be held responsible for many things but they usually (thankfully) don't live in the past like some 'fans' do.
|
|
|
11 Oct 2018, 18:41 (Ref:3856152) | #239 | |||||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,803
|
Quote:
IMHO, putting safety content aside, there are generally two major areas in the technical regulations. First is the basic chassis and the other is the engine. I think on the chassis side, it may be hard to pick a prior year (or even decades ago) and give it a go. Because I believe today's regulations are an evolution of the prior starting points but with various exclusions and clarifications. So as an extreme example, if you go too far back then you will have teams doing active aero, fan cars, ground effect skirts, etc. All stuff that the newer regulations have banned. So the idea doesn't work if you are trying to create a car from a given era "before" someone exploited the rules to create innovation X, Y or Z. The second is engine regulations. I think those have probably been more heavily reworked over the years. So those might be more successful to try using the idea you mention. But you will still run into similar problems in that those regulations were fine until someone did something that caused problems. For example using exotic and expensive materials (which were eventually banned). Basically it all boils down to my comment that the designers can't unlearn what they already know. Drop a current, but merely "capable" designer back into F1 of a number of decades ago (via time-machine), and he would trounce everyone else on track. The car would be radical in comparison to it's peers and this would just be on pure knowledge alone (meaning using construction capabilities of the destination era). For example, image current aero "knowledge" dropped into mid-1960's F1. In short, reverting back to mid-1960's regulations is not going to result in a bunch of Eagle Mk1 clones. Quote:
Quote:
I will say that your two images show quite a contrast between now and then, but make no mistake (and I am sure you know this), even "simple" modern bespoke race engines are not quite the thing of beauty as they were decades ago. They will have a semi-ugly airbox and complex intake system, multiple sensors, wiring looms and fuel rails covering the engine, etc. For example below is the spec Gibson 4.2L NA V8 used for LMP2. Its still a good looking engine, but not quite Cosworth DFV or Weslake V12 pretty. 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." |
11 Oct 2018, 20:36 (Ref:3856165) | #240 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,664
|
Quote:
And....more importantly...many (not all) that reject the past just because it is passed find themselves not learning (better or worse ideas) from it by choice which is the definition of ignorance, no? When one doesn't consider (miss-defined as "live in" to some) it, if nothing else, the same mistakes can, may, and often are, repeated. Likewise disregarding ideas that may improve the present. Like Forrest, "That's all I have to say about that"... edit: Except....on to the U.S. GP!!! |
|||
__________________
"Those were the days my friends. We thought they'd never end..." jimclark |
11 Oct 2018, 21:12 (Ref:3856173) | #241 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 7,979
|
||
|
12 Oct 2018, 06:13 (Ref:3856192) | #242 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,923
|
||
|
12 Oct 2018, 08:11 (Ref:3856204) | #243 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 18,325
|
We're not living in the past. Some things like the current qualifying system has been a great addition, but some things have clearly not worked
|
|
__________________
He who dares wins! He who hesitates is lost! |
12 Oct 2018, 08:19 (Ref:3856206) | #244 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,664
|
No offense, but, huh? That's exactly what Sprinkles is sayin'. 'Not "livin'" in the past so 'not bringing it back.
Is it really necessary anyway with the fg billiard table smooth circuits mandated now? (Much to my chagrin) |
||
__________________
"Those were the days my friends. We thought they'd never end..." jimclark |
12 Oct 2018, 08:27 (Ref:3856207) | #245 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,664
|
To each their own but I preferred the times from practice. More cars more time on track tryin' to improve and mastery of traffic....goes right along with my desire for hard tires that a new set would last all race and pretty much improve as more rubber is laid on track; not fall off and marbled off line.
|
||
__________________
"Those were the days my friends. We thought they'd never end..." jimclark |
12 Oct 2018, 08:32 (Ref:3856208) | #246 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,191
|
2 points for pole
1 point for fastest lap in race |
||
|
12 Oct 2018, 08:37 (Ref:3856211) | #247 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,664
|
|||
__________________
"Those were the days my friends. We thought they'd never end..." jimclark |
12 Oct 2018, 09:24 (Ref:3856215) | #248 | |
Registered User
Racer
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 175
|
Why make qualifying anymore important than it already is by attaching points to it? Points for fastest laps would just see people in 14th or 15th making a pit stop for ultra softs 3 laps from the end.
|
|
|
12 Oct 2018, 17:24 (Ref:3856310) | #249 | |||
Team Crouton
20KPINAL
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 39,527
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
96 days... |
12 Oct 2018, 22:40 (Ref:3856358) | #250 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
Quote:
Go jim! |
||
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
DP's Fix | gttouring | Sportscar & GT Racing | 31 | 31 Mar 2003 13:52 |
Is this a fix? | Peter S | Formula One | 28 | 25 Mar 2003 14:17 |
Williams trying to "fix car" 2 weeks before Melbourne? | Sodemo | Formula One | 8 | 28 Feb 2003 10:12 |
If you want to fix it | mtpanorama | Road Car Forum | 3 | 17 May 2001 02:09 |
How to fix F1 | Crash Test | Formula One | 2 | 24 Jun 2000 23:23 |