FIA Formula 2 to return? - Page 2

ivanalesi · 1 Jun 2014, 01:42 (Ref:3413430)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mystery

I'm not sure I agree. With the artificial addition of reverse grid races you do get races that guys just would not have won without the prized eighth place finish!

Reverse grid races are for keeping mid grid drivers happy and give opportunity to the top drivers to show their race craft. Forget about their winners, sorry Nasr, but they have little value.
Actually I would be happy to hear Berger's opinion on reverse grid races and tire preservation in GP2.

p-matt · 1 Jun 2014, 06:28 (Ref:3413464)

But tyre preservation and race craft are key skills for F1 that GP2 tests in a way that no other series does. The reverse grid winner may not mean much, but you can see who the decent drivers are that can make their way through the pack.

And all this talk about the GP2 grid being poor except Vandoorne and Marciello? You might want to open your eyes and see that Palmer and Nasr have been rock solid consistently fast all year. Only Sainz has done the same in 3.5, and that's in a much less complex car.

ivanalesi · 1 Jun 2014, 10:10 (Ref:3413632)

That's what I'm saying you don't necessary look at the winners in reverse grid races, you look at those who make the most ground. I have nothing against reverse grid races, they keep many drivers on the grid.
Someone was telling me that actually it's a bit too much to expect the small GP2 teams to understand the odd behaving Pirellis, so the element of luck is often very much present. Which is logical when you consider that F1 teams need plenty of people concentrating just on the tires, whereas GP2 teams have in total 4 or 5 engineers. If you remember, many people were convinced Grosjean had such a big initial advantage because of his tire testing with Pirelli and in fact ever since then DAMS have been the best team.

Alessio · 1 Jun 2014, 10:20 (Ref:3413638)

Quote:

Originally Posted by p-matt

You might want to open your eyes and see that Palmer and Nasr have been rock solid consistently fast all year.

In their 4th and 3rd seasons. I'm not saying they're poor but they're at the front because they have experience.

p-matt · 1 Jun 2014, 10:32 (Ref:3413658)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alessio

In their 4th and 3rd seasons. I'm not saying they're poor but they're at the front because they have experience.

They aren't at the front solely because they have experience - they also have the talent and ability to be up at the front. Look at someone like Daniil Move. Was it 7 seasons in 3.5? Was he getting results because of his experience? No, he wasn't.

And it's always amused me that in junior single seaters experience is seen as such a negative. These cars are a step away from F1 and are tough to master. It took Grosjean 4 years to win the title, and no one doubts that he's worthy of his place in F1. As I've said before, I'd rather see a learning curve in GP2 rather than drivers like Korjus in 3.5 do brilliantly as a rookie, and then fading into the midfield in his career after that.

Tal Aras · 1 Jun 2014, 10:43 (Ref:3413667)

Quote:

Originally Posted by p-matt

They aren't at the front solely because they have experience - they also have the talent and ability to be up at the front. Look at someone like Daniil Move. Was it 7 seasons in 3.5? Was he getting results because of his experience? No, he wasn't.

And it's always amused me that in junior single seaters experience is seen as such a negative. These cars are a step away from F1 and are tough to master. It took Grosjean 4 years to win the title, and no one doubts that he's worthy of his place in F1. As I've said before, I'd rather see a learning curve in GP2 rather than drivers like Korjus in 3.5 do brilliantly as a rookie, and then fading into the midfield in his career after that.

Unfortunately, with the speed the likes of Hamilton and Vettel rose through the ranks, sponsors (and fans) now expect the same thing from all drivers. This could easily lead to a driver having difficulty getting sponsorship because of an assumption if he's in his third or fourth year and hasn't won the championship yet he can't be any good.

It's similar to the problem that allegely arose for the last set of FIA F2 drivers. The series was set up to be as low cost to enter and the drivers were percieevd as second rate because if they were first rate they'd have got sponsorship into GP2/WSR. This would be true if sponsorship followed talent but unfortunately it doesn't always do so.

Go_For_Pole · 1 Jun 2014, 19:57 (Ref:3413875)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ivanalesi

Someone was telling me that actually it's a bit too much to expect the small GP2 teams to understand the odd behaving Pirellis, so the element of luck is often very much present. Which is logical when you consider that F1 teams need plenty of people concentrating just on the tires, whereas GP2 teams have in total 4 or 5 engineers. If you remember, many people were convinced Grosjean had such a big initial advantage because of his tire testing with Pirelli and in fact ever since then DAMS have been the best team.

He is wrong Ivan, top GP2 teams have informal alliances with F1 teams for many reasons including tyres.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alessio

In their 4th and 3rd seasons. I'm not saying they're poor but they're at the front because they have experience.

Nasr has won every series he has raced in so he is every bit as good as they come.

@Tal Aras: F2 car was poor. Very poor. That killed the series right when after the first few races.

Go_For_Pole · 1 Jun 2014, 20:00 (Ref:3413876)

What an arrogance:

Quote:

GP2 is a logical next step up for an F3 driver, but GP3... I don't even know who is there except Alex Lynn! I always say we should just concentrate on a perfect product for the young boys [F3], and if we do this then we're going to be successful anyway."

Apart from bad mouthing a perfectly talented field, F3 can't be the perfect product if his talentless nephew is near the top.

Alessio · 1 Jun 2014, 20:04 (Ref:3413882)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Go_For_Pole

Nasr has won every series he has raced in so he is every bit as good as they come.

Personally, I just don't see him making it to Formula One on talent alone. Honestly, after 2012 I thought he would be a front runner but 2013 was quite disappointing and this season he hasn't been dominant either, just consistent. But this is only my opinion.

Juntos · 2 Jun 2014, 09:53 (Ref:3414132)

Berger is doing well his job. He won't make many friends on the running but he is 'cleaning' the feeder series.

Why do we need GP3 if we have F3? Ecclestone minions are on probation by FIA.

Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Even the best laid plans can go bust.

kotkot · 2 Jun 2014, 17:32 (Ref:3414396)

Why GP3? Last, and also this season shows GP3 and FIA F3 can have great fields without undermining the other. These two series had more talent one championship could handle.

madfast · 2 Jun 2014, 18:57 (Ref:3414440)

Quote:

Originally Posted by kotkot

Why GP3? Last, and also this season shows GP3 and FIA F3 can have great fields without undermining the other. These two series had more talent one championship could handle.

every series will have back markers and perennial contenders. the best talent should be in one series, one premier championship. everyone else can race elsewhere in "secondary" championships. right now GP3 is promoted on the F1 calendar but F3 is the traditional championship. ideally F3 would be on the F1 calendar, thus attract all the talent, and GP3 would be another secondary championship like FR2.0

Biscuits In A Red Bull · 2 Jun 2014, 19:52 (Ref:3414455)

Quote:

Originally Posted by madfast

ideally F3 would be on the F1 calendar, thus attract all the talent, and GP3 would be another secondary championship like FR2.0

I have no idea which FR2.0 series you are on about...

madfast · 2 Jun 2014, 21:10 (Ref:3414480)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biscuits In A Red Bull

I have no idea which FR2.0 series you are on about...

if F3 was promoted with F1, it would be the premier series. and GP3 would be "just another support series" not unlike Formula Renault 2.0...

Go_For_Pole · 2 Jun 2014, 21:45 (Ref:3414491)

If F3 was promoted with F1 people on the stands will be sleeping by the time F1 race would start

kotkot · 2 Jun 2014, 21:55 (Ref:3414495)

If you merge the field of two championships, the paying backmarkers will not disappear but there will be less seats for the talents who can't afford to pay the full price.

As much fun would be to see the likes of Tuscher, Niederhauser or Rosenqvist without a seat, I still prefer the 40-50 seats offered by two series than 30 by one.

Mekola · 3 Jun 2014, 01:26 (Ref:3414538)

The feeling of many is "One team, one series.. One vision". Queen rocks again.

Biscuits In A Red Bull · 3 Jun 2014, 10:43 (Ref:3414690)

Quote:

Originally Posted by madfast

if F3 was promoted with F1, it would be the premier series. and GP3 would be "just another support series" not unlike Formula Renault 2.0...

Oh come on, I was joking about the sheer amount of FR2.0 series' there are...

NaBUru38 · 3 Jun 2014, 13:34 (Ref:3414765)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juntos

Why do we need GP3 if we have F3? Ecclestone minions are on probation by FIA.

GP3 cars have twice the power than F3. The F3 to GP2 jump in performance is too high, not to mention driving talent. GP3 and FR3.5 are good intermadiate steps.

ivanalesi · 3 Jun 2014, 14:26 (Ref:3414790)

Berger needs to understand that F3 is a rival to FR2.0, not to GP3! F3 isn't boring only when they crash, otherwise it's a qualifying formula. It would be perfect for preparing drivers for the 2007 F1 season when qualifying was everything, not nowadays.

Biscuits In A Red Bull · 3 Jun 2014, 18:45 (Ref:3414892)

To be honest, GP3 started in the days when the F3 Euroseries grid attracted 12 or so cars...

...2010...

wolfhound · 3 Jun 2014, 18:52 (Ref:3414895)

Quote:

Originally Posted by NaBUru38

GP3 cars have twice the power than F3. The F3 to GP2 jump in performance is too high, not to mention driving talent. GP3 and FR3.5 are good intermadiate steps.

It's not that long ago that the good drivers went straight from F3 to F1 where the power difference was an even bigger jump.

Biscuits In A Red Bull · 3 Jun 2014, 19:02 (Ref:3414900)

Kvyat just jumped from GP3 to F1 and he's coping really well. Of course Kimi went from Formula Renault into F1 (albeit with a lot more testing), but with enough talent, even nowadays F3 to F1 is do-able.

ivanalesi · 3 Jun 2014, 21:59 (Ref:3414989)

One of the reason for drivers not jumping from F3/GP3 to F1 is the lack of testing in F1, but interestingly Lewis Hamilton believes nowadays it's easier for drivers to jump to F1 because simulators are much better.

ger80 · 7 Jun 2014, 11:12 (Ref:3416529)

The current F3 chassis are in the 2nd season. Mygale is planing to compete with Dallara in 2016.
I think they should make the basic chassis rules the same for F3 and F2. Then we could have
- national F3 with standard aero parts and
- FIA F3 with same chassis and some limited areas of e.g. suspension and aero development for the teams
- FIA F2 with same chassis and aero parts and with a bigger engine
The chassis price should be cost capped like in LMP2 and the teams should be allowed to reproduce the standard aero and suspension parts themselves, so the chassis manufacturers have to release the drawings

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
FIA Formula Two / FIA F2 - 2012 Season	jondownunder	National & International Single Seaters	197	10 Dec 2012 15:21
A return to a fuel efficiency formula?	JAG	Sportscar & GT Racing	17	5 May 2010 12:55
[Formula Ford, Aus] Dale Wood Gives Mygale Perfect Return With Formula Ford Victory	chezza	Press Releases	1	15 Aug 2006 08:30
[FIA GT] Return of the FIA Sportscar Championship?	Bentley03	Sportscar & GT Racing	30	21 Apr 2005 15:30
Formula 2 to return	cos	National & International Single Seaters	23	13 May 2003 15:20