|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
15 Feb 2022, 00:34 (Ref:4098716) | #76 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 44,018
|
Those periods included refueling. As such there were more times a driver had light tanks and around pit stops there was always an incentive to get your in laps right for race points not just for the fastest lap point. Fastest pole at Monza was 2020.
And as pointed out, there are way more circuits were the lap record is more recent. Fortunately the cars are being slowed to protect those rare halcyon days. |
||
__________________
Brum brum |
15 Feb 2022, 01:00 (Ref:4098717) | #77 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
Quote:
These cars may be able to set lap records because of the massive aero allowed to accomplish just that, but they are way too fat to be considered anywhere close to the pinnacle of F1 design. |
||
|
15 Feb 2022, 01:19 (Ref:4098719) | #78 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 44,018
|
And the benefit of a tyre war.
But I was merely commenting on the selective choice. Every rule set is comedy in some way. But it is reasonable to consider that these most recent cars are (or were) the fastest. However that was achieved. |
||
__________________
Brum brum |
15 Feb 2022, 01:49 (Ref:4098720) | #79 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
Quote:
This is the the bit that just does my head in from 2000. https://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns02353.html "THE minimum weight limit in Formula 1 is 600 kilograms, complete with the driver ..... This was designed to reduce the cost of Grand Prix racing by getting rid of the need for expensive exotic lightweight materials. .... ...some of the top F1 cars these days carrying as much as 80 kgs of ballast " So that is a (excluding ballast) 520 kg car including the driver, then we come along with a 795kg car and try and pass it off as the pinnacle of motor racing engineering. Everyone bangs on about the sport and entertainment aspect of F1, but it is actually the engineering that has been most compromised at the alter of commercial interest. What would a car properly designed for minimum weight and performance actually weigh? |
||
|
15 Feb 2022, 07:43 (Ref:4098744) | #80 | ||||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 991
|
Quote:
Quote:
The last V10's had a maximum wheelbase of 3.100mm. In 2010, with the addition of KERS to the V8's, that went to 3.400mm. Last generation cars had a maximum of 3.700mm. For this generation they wanted to go back to 3.400mm, but after team objections (probably too much stuff to package on these ultra complex V6 hybrid's), they settled on 3.600mm. I hope in 2026 with the drop of the MGU-H, we will be able to go back to 3.400mm or perhaps a 100mm less even. It depends on how bulky the electric components are going to be with their power so much increased. If we keep the tire diameter proportionate to the wheel base than a 3.300-3.400mm wheel based car would have an equally proportioned tyre diameter with 66-68cm compared to the current generation with 72cm. So the proposed 16-inch wheel with 67cm diameter tires would be pretty much spot on. Quote:
https://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=28901 Reasonable minimal weight with equal modern safety (good), equal cost saving on common parts (good) and the same equal chance system for heavier drivers (good): V10 with KERS: ~685kg V6 turbo with KERS: ~700kg V10 without KERS: ~655kg V6 turbo without KERS: ~670kg 2026 V6 turbo with very strong electric component: who knows but hopefully below 725kg. Last edited by Taxi645; 15 Feb 2022 at 07:52. |
||||
__________________
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. |
15 Feb 2022, 12:35 (Ref:4098806) | #81 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,256
|
One of the reasons the cars are heavier and "fatter" is mostly overlooked: driver safety. Time was (and it wasn't that long ago really!) that F1 cars were metaphorical bathtubs filled with fuel, with the driver's safety right at the bottom of the priority pile at the design stage.
The central tub of all of the cars is massively over-engineered compared to what it could be, but that's one of the reasons drivers like Grosjean & Alonso got to escape from extremely high speed crashes. Yes, they're laid up from carbon fibre and other complex composites to keep the weight down and strength up, but when you look at the mandatory crash test requirements they need a lot more material than they used to. Make the cars lighter by all means, but don't compromise the human holding the steering wheel! |
|
__________________
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. |
15 Feb 2022, 15:02 (Ref:4098844) | #82 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 991
|
Quote:
|
||
|
15 Feb 2022, 20:47 (Ref:4098872) | #83 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 44,018
|
Great chart on the weight increases. Thanks.
During that period we had a ban on refueling and then tighter limits on fuel tank size. The former will increase the average weight in the race and the later will reduce. Would be interesting to consider this. Ultimately we got a bigger increase in 2010 from that perspective. However the qualifying pace will definitely be related to the above. Although there was that have to start on you qualifying rule thing. Last edited by Adam43; 15 Feb 2022 at 20:52. |
||
__________________
Brum brum |
16 Feb 2022, 00:06 (Ref:4098882) | #84 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,014
|
Quote:
You are not wrong on any of this, but are perhaps overlooking the main point of Formula One Management going to 725mm & 18" rim -- a tactical decision to allow suppliers like Michelin or Goodyear to transition from supplying Le Mans prototype tyres (which have those parameters) to supplying F1 tyres more easily. It's true that Bridgestone still made 13" tyres for Super Formula and now Yokohama supplies 13" Super Formula, and Hankook were perfectly happy to supply 13" for one season on their F1 tender. But for whatever reason FOM has little interest in those tyre suppliers compared to the tender & commercial package of Pirelli. [ If it was up to me I'd go to a true low profile, be it 16" or 18" doesn't matter, as undamped tyre spring is not good really and make the chassis engineers design more travel into their suspensions! While heavier rotational mass of a larger wheel is not good, it's not like the undamped spring of a tall tyre sidewall is good either! It's really a compromise between the two. The concerns of F1 designers not wanting to make space for suspension systems with more travel seem to have won out in this instance. ] Last edited by V8 Fireworks; 16 Feb 2022 at 00:19. |
||
|
16 Feb 2022, 09:10 (Ref:4098906) | #85 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 11,292
|
I used to think that more weight would be a good thing as it would increase braking distances, but I think the knock on effect to car handling would be too great. I do think it’s ironic when so much emphasis is placed on efficiency but adding a load of weight to cars is the opposite of efficient. I can appreciate that it’s a necessary evil but just seems at odds with the messaging.
|
||
|
16 Feb 2022, 09:12 (Ref:4098907) | #86 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 991
|
You're welcome, though just to be clear I didn't make it, just the guy in the linked topic. But it does paint a clear picture. Quote:
What I suspect what happened is, F1/Pirelli perhaps initially wanted to switch to 18-inch wheels with about 690mm tires. The aero of the new cars and the simplified suspension requires the suspension to be set up pretty hard. I could image that the teams argued that with this already very stiff suspension, making the tires that unforgiving would put to much stress on the suspension and make the ride for the drivers almost unbearable. As a result of these discussions with the teams, the tire wall height was increased with the diameter eventually going up to 720mm (730mm on the full wet’s). Now the tire diameter had gotten a bit out of hand, but so much fuss had been made about going to the 18-inch wheel that they couldn’t go back to 17-inch or even 16-inch because they would’ve lost face and the whole marketing bla bla of going to the “road relevant” 18-inch wheels would be undermined. So now we’re stuck with this contraption. Synergy with the LMP tyres is limited because the tyre wall ended up higher after-all and compound requirement is very different (LMP: built to last, F1: earlier, controlled drop of to promote pit-stop/strategy interest). In my opinion, if the synergy is that limited anyway (the tyres are certainly not interchangable between F1 and LMP). Then that whole part of the argument for 18-inch drops away. I would then say, it was a nice idea in theory but it did not work out in practise. Acknowledge that you now don't have the synergy and a very poor design for an open wheel class car and go back to something that does have a more modern side wall height, but on a rims size that makes actual sense for the car used. Any synergy in side wall technology would still be there in a smaller wheel size. |
||
__________________
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. |
16 Feb 2022, 09:49 (Ref:4098910) | #87 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,882
|
I reply to V8 Fireworks, although FOM may have some input into the decisions about how the cars are regulated - they do sit on the frameworks committee meetings, alongside the teams and suppliers (sometimes even potential suppliers) - the awarding of contracts for tyres and other things such as the standardised ECU are made by the FIA. Or so I believe.
|
||
|
16 Feb 2022, 17:23 (Ref:4098971) | #88 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 991
|
Broken record coming in:
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/w...cerns/8204993/ After, Vettel, Verstappen and Norris now also Albon and Latifi raise concerns over visibility: “On open tracks, you can see far ahead of you. With the blind spots of the tyre and all the deflectors, it takes away a lot of that immediate view as you're looking into the corner. "So what you end up doing is you're looking actually further around the corner. “However, on a street track, obviously past a wall, there's only more wall, so you can't see much around it. I think that's going to be the tricky one." |
|
__________________
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. |
16 Feb 2022, 17:29 (Ref:4098974) | #89 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 12,483
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
16 Feb 2022, 17:41 (Ref:4098975) | #90 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 991
|
True. Words are from the article title BTW. That said, if five drivers mention it, it probably is not trivial. We'll see the coming season how much of an issue it really is.
|
|
|
16 Feb 2022, 19:43 (Ref:4098987) | #91 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 11,292
|
Didn’t they say the same thing about the Halo before they were all told to fall in line?
|
||
|
16 Feb 2022, 20:01 (Ref:4098990) | #92 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 12,483
|
Quote:
My point being - if there is a journalistic narrative being pushed, then asking drivers if the visibility is reduced will get the answers the journalists are looking for. |
|||
__________________
"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 Feb 2022, 10:27 (Ref:4099057) | #93 | ||||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,014
|
Quote:
How do touring cars drivers like Sutton cope when all can they see is the dashboard? https://i.ytimg.com/vi/SCNEOQS42KU/maxresdefault.jpg But they do, so I wouldn't worry about it, even if the Grand Prix driver sits quite a bit lower. Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by V8 Fireworks; 17 Feb 2022 at 10:40. |
||||
|
17 Feb 2022, 10:53 (Ref:4099059) | #94 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 12,483
|
Quote:
There are some (many?) who are not in favour of the 18" wheel for many factors, and are trying to formulate an argument against their use in F1. However a lot of the 'evidence' is just a recognition of the situation, none of it as actually an issue that needs to be resolved. Every time I hear a driver talk about difficulty, challenge, adapting etc, I'm reminded of the amount of times F1 cars are claimed to be 'too easy' to drive. |
|||
__________________
"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." |
18 Feb 2022, 07:39 (Ref:4099216) | #95 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 991
|
The problem is not that they don't see the tires, the problem is they see too much of the tires and a result not seeing what they need to see.
Here is an article with James Allison from 1.5 years back: https://www.racefans.net/2020/06/04/...lower-allison/ I think what he is "trying to formulate" is a more acute summary of the situation: It's a worse racing tyre, but it is what it is and we'll will make due. I feel we are not really furthering the discussion much and will refrain from posting more talking about lack of visibility from the drivers until we get some races going and especially Jeddah and Monaco. Then we know a bit more what how much the visibility is really going to be an issue. |
|
__________________
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. |
18 Feb 2022, 07:49 (Ref:4099220) | #96 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 12,483
|
Quote:
If I (selectively) look at some other things he says in that article about the new tyres: 'a step backwards for car performance but could make the competition closer' 'the new tyres are going to be heavier, lower grip and worse for ride – all other things being equal. So they’re going to slow the cars down by somewhere between a second and two seconds, something like that.' 'aesthetically they appeal to some people' 'aligning our world better with the road car world means it’s probably more relevant, what we are doing, to the road cars. That’s important' 'If you have a lower-profile tyre because there’s less tyre and that tyre is more rigid in its sidewall, it moves less. And so it presents less of a dilemma to the car designer. So if you were in the FIA and FOM and wanting the grid to compress up, there’d be more of a catfight from front to back, having tyres that don’t interfere so much with the aero is a good thing from our point of view.' 'this new tyre is an opportunity' So I can read that article as an argument for tyres that will:
which could all be seen as positives for the sport? |
|||
__________________
"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." |
18 Feb 2022, 08:21 (Ref:4099226) | #97 | ||||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 991
|
Quote:
“All things being equal the bigger rims, low-profile rubber is always going to be a worse tyre than the sort of tyres that we have on our racing car today,” It may not be based on experience with this particular tyre, but it is based on his vast experience as a motorsport engineer at the highest levels. Quote:
Quote:
Anyway I'm pretty much done for the moment. I'm not here to argue for arguments sake. It's becoming a bit of a slug fest. Most arguments have been brought forward (and were ignored, forgotten or little effort was made to understand them), new insights are not likely now. So as said I will refrain from adding to the subject till there will be more real life experience. |
||||
__________________
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. |
19 Feb 2022, 06:54 (Ref:4099377) | #98 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
Quote:
|
||
|
19 Feb 2022, 10:59 (Ref:4099394) | #99 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,014
|
Quote:
So if they are going to bother to change now, I suspect they feel they may as well change directly to 18" which is a standard size for racing car tyres in both LMP, GT and Touring Car. There seems little use in going to the intermediate 16" size. Quote:
Onboard with Theo Pourchaire at Monte Carlo for a bit of fun, Pourchaire seems to have no difficulty in placing the car: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=395fYmc4QaY The original 18" tyres with a smaller total diameter - 7 years ago, that's how slow things change in F1! - were certainly more pleasing, but it is what it is. F2 have raced the LMP diameter tyres without issue. Last edited by V8 Fireworks; 19 Feb 2022 at 11:10. |
|||
|
19 Feb 2022, 15:24 (Ref:4099416) | #100 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,256
|
Quote:
However, I was referring more to the visual perception of the cars being "fat". They look the way they do because there's simply more _stuff_ around the driver. I'm quite liking the variation we're getting this year though. |
||
__________________
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. |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
tyres tyres tyres | f2boy 460 | Racing Technology | 14 | 14 Oct 2014 10:00 |
4 stolen wheels and tyres | Stuart H | Racers Forum | 1 | 13 Nov 2011 12:15 |
Smaller turbo engines and bigger wheels planned for WTCC | JMeissner | Touring Car Racing | 100 | 22 Dec 2008 21:09 |
spare tyres and wheels! | gadgit | National & International Single Seaters | 5 | 15 Feb 2004 16:45 |