Onboards..

[scoobiesnoop]

I was just looking at the onboard vids at the official F1 site (single laps only) and (if you watch) the Button Monaco 09 lap shows something quite remarkable. Everyone knows how the cars like to move about but I always thought a well balanced (set up) car would be super stable and not really move about much. Buttons car is all over the shop and you really get a sense that these cars are a handful even if they are the best on the grid. I got the impression that the car always wants to get away from the driver so I have an even bigger respect for F1 drivers than I already had. At first I thought it was just because Monaco is bumpy but if you watch other tracks (other drivers) you see the same thing (although to a lesser degree). Makes you think, maybe us armchair drivers would 'struggle' if we were to ever get the opportunity to drive an F1 car!

[JeremySmith]

I have said for a while now that the cars are way to loose, They are all over the place, the new aero rules have not worked as expected this year..

Steve Machett from Speed TV was saying that the Brawn diffuser has made overtaking way harder this year..Which in one way is quite clever on their behalf on the other it's gives us the same old problem for the teams running behind the Brawn cars..

If you watch the cars as they get really close to the rear end of the car in front the wash away, making overtaking just as hard as it was before.

So I would like to see good looking F1 cars again, without these cheap looking rear and front wings and stupid looking shark fin engine covers...

[runshaw]

It is true that the cars are difficult to drive, even though people often refer to years gone by when the cars were 'more' difficult to drive. For instance Sebastien Loeb said that driving the Red Bull around Barcelona was more difficult than driving his C4 on a rally stage, which is surprising! Anthony Davidson said the cars are often ridiculously hard to handle on the pressue of a qualifying lap, getting on the throttle out of a slow-ish corner with that much power and so little weight can immediately send you off into the barriers. I'm still amazed they keep it on the limit for 70 laps, even if they do have semi-automatic boxes! You have to drive round a track on or near to the limit to appreciate that it isn't easy at all, even when your just in a relatively quick sportscar. Can only imagine what its like in an F1 car...

[Jimmy Magnusson]

Anything but this simply isn't enough in my opinion:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjWtLYzopUU

I'm not saying F1 cars are easy to drive. But that stuff sure looks better!

[Lotusonpole]

That's why they drive F1 cars and I drive a desk.

P

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

I have said for a while now that the cars are way to loose, They are all over the place, the new aero rules have not worked as expected this year..

If the cars were 'running around on rails' the problem would be even worse.The cars are running much closer this season,but they haven't gone far enough in making them 'loose' enough.

[ROB IS THE STIG]

I want to see the "best" drivers in the world having to really "drive" these cars, no traction control - great, no perfect aero - great, get rid of kers, launch control and anti stall and then we'll see who can handle them.

[scoobiesnoop]

Originally Posted by ROB IS THE STIG

I want to see the "best" drivers in the world having to really "drive" these cars, no traction control - great, no perfect aero - great, get rid of kers, launch control and anti stall and then we'll see who can handle them.

Yeah I think they still need to loose aero but I guess the fact that the cars are moving about so much mean that it is more and more becoming a good driver that wins rather than a good car.

[Adam43]

OT: "KERS" makes "a" car "more" difficult to drive, "IMHO".

These cars are difficult to master. They are removed from the experience of most normal people. Sometimes a car that moves around alot, if it is in a controlled way can be easier to drive. It can give more margin.

The Carroll video is cool, but it was a mistake and has never been the quickest way to drive a car. The front and rear aren't together. That was cool like a chase in the A-Team is. Cool, but it aint quick.

[sizzle]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Cool, but it aint quick.

And that is a problem because?

[HughGJohnson]

Originally Posted by Marbot

If the cars were 'running around on rails' the problem would be even worse.The cars are running much closer this season,but they haven't gone far enough in making them 'loose' enough.

The cars have monster front wings and small ineffective rear wings. Plus the tires are the same size. The aero rules didn't work and the cars are extremely aero dependent. These cars have been designed to have wicked oversteer, there more aero sensitive than ever and you want to loosen them up? Forget overtaking you couldn't even get close enough to think about it.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by HughGJohnson

The cars have monster front wings and small ineffective rear wings. Plus the tires are the same size. The aero rules didn't work and the cars are extremely aero dependent. These cars have been designed to have wicked oversteer, there more aero sensitive than ever and you want to loosen them up? Forget overtaking you couldn't even get close enough to think about it.

They are actually much less aero sensitive than before,the cars do actually get closer because of the configuration of the wings.Unfortunately they probably have now already got around the same amount of downforce that they had last season!

[HughGJohnson]

Originally Posted by Marbot

They are actually much less aero sensitive than before,the cars do actually get closer because of the configuration of the wings.Unfortunately they probably have now already got around the same amount of downforce that they had last season!

How much less aero sensitive can they be if they have the same downforce?

I was mostly concerned with your solution. More oversteer is not the anwer. I thought it was criminal that they legislated an unbalanced racecar and I was shocked that you thought the didn't go far enough.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by HughGJohnson

How much less aero sensitive can they be if they have the same downforce?

Down force and aero sensitivity aren't necessarily as one.

Originally Posted by HughGJohnson

I was mostly concerned with your solution. More oversteer is not the anwer. I thought it was criminal that they legislated an unbalanced racecar and I was shocked that you thought the didn't go far enough.

I would prefer it if they were 'loose' at both ends.Hopefully next seasons regulations will make ammends to this.

[kartracer41]

The intention was to lose some aero and make up for it with mechanical grip (slick tires). Brawn had to spoil that with the diffuser. Now everyone is back up where the aero was.

I wouldn't say the cars were designed "unbalanced". I am sure they are quite balanced. It might be unbalanced in terms of how much aero vs mechanical grip at each end. But grip wise, I am sure they are quite balanced. Some drivers can't drive a car unless it's loose, while others like a tight car, so there is going to be some margin of balance. Also, a car that has a push can appear loose when too much steering input is given to overcome a tight condition which causes the rear to step out.

[JamesH]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Magnusson

Anything but this simply isn't enough in my opinion:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjWtLYzopUU

I'm not saying F1 cars are easy to drive. But that stuff sure looks better!

I think that's a really well set up car. Notice how the front wheel always pointed exactly where the car needed to go and how the back didn't just snap back, but was nice a smooth. The driver was also pretty good as well!

[HughGJohnson]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Down force and aero sensitivity aren't necessarily as one.



I would prefer it if they were 'loose' at both ends.Hopefully next seasons regulations will make ammends to this.

I didn't say the were. I asked how much difference could there be, given the same downforce. I'd say not much, otherwise why is a car that's 2.5 seconds faster not able to overtake? I wouldn't and didn't say there was for sure no difference.

There is no such thing as loose at both ends. You mean (a balanced car with) less overall grip.

[HughGJohnson]

Originally Posted by kartracer41

I wouldn't say the cars were designed "unbalanced". I am sure they are quite balanced. It might be unbalanced in terms of how much aero vs mechanical grip at each end. But grip wise, I am sure they are quite balanced.

They're not balanced. The design regulations did not intend for that to happen, but that's what happened. The the regualtions forced the teams to build an unbalanced car. That's what I meant by 'designed unbalanced'. That's why the diffuser teams had an immediate advantage. Rear grip is at a premium this year. Bridgestone annonced almost immediately after the start of the season that they would design a smaller rear tire for next year to reduce front grip and balance the car. Remember how much oversteer all the cars (save Braun) had? It's gotten better with the new diffusers and developement, but the cars were 'designed' loose and most teams are just starting to get it under control.

[Gingers4Justice]

Read through the comments, and I don't think the fact that these cars are difficult to handle has a thing to do with overtaking. Just think, without TC and power steering, in the narrow streets of Monaco, using H-pattern gear boxes, some drivers were still able to overtake. Unlike now.

The main issue is aero. Ban diffusers. Shrink rear and front wings untill you can barely see them - better still remover them. Make the tires skinny.

Ofcourse, I know it wouldn't be safe to do so. But I'm sure if all the engineers were to really bang s, they'd come up with a solution.

I also have another theory. The cars go so fast now, that to come off line to outbrake someone is impossible. Each car is so on the limit, so close, that they just aren't able to pull out and manouvre. Look how many times in a GP drivers will look but will then pull back in and think better of it. Barrichello against Vettel last GP springs to mind.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by HughGJohnson

There is no such thing as loose at both ends. You mean (a balanced car with) less overall grip.

Yes,that is what I meant.

Which isn't really anywhere near what we currently have.Although some would say that the DDDs have made the cars more balanced now.

[jab]

Originally Posted by Gingers4Justice

I also have another theory. The cars go so fast now, that to come off line to outbrake someone is impossible. Each car is so on the limit, so close, that they just aren't able to pull out and manouvre. Look how many times in a GP drivers will look but will then pull back in and think better of it. Barrichello against Vettel last GP springs to mind.

Of your 2 points, this is the most pertinent. I think it has a lot to do with modern circuit design. You don't see corners like Tarzan anymore where there was more than one line to take. Les Combes is one of the few - you can overtake on the inside and outside there if you get a bit of a slipstream

But I believe the main thing that's "affecting" overtaking is the standard of driving and car construction. The drivers are so good they don't make mistakes, and the cars are all quite close in performance

But I really don't think there's that much of a problem with overtaking. I used to believe all the stuff about the dirty air being caused by the winglets (which was nonsense) or the grooved tyres making it more difficult (which was also nonsense), but having now watched a few old races back in full, the truth is that F1 has never seen that much overtaking. Races used to be far more boring than now because of the massive performance differences - the leader used to scamper away from the car in 2nd, the car in 2nd used to scamper away from the car in 3rd, and so on. If you really believe the racing was that much better until Schumacher came along, you're just rose-tinting

In fact, I'm starting to think maybe the refuelling ban isn't going to help either. I still think drivers are less inclined to make moves if they know they or the driver ahead has got a stop coming up, but I'm not so sure it'll make that much of a difference. It takes out a variable

What has changed that has made the racing less interesting is reliability - the cars are virtually bulletproof now. You don't see many failures anymore. It used to be possible up until the last couple of years to have half the cars in the field retire. It doesn't happen now. And you can't uninvent things

[Gingers4Justice]

Originally Posted by jab

If you really believe the racing was that much better until Schumacher came along, you're just rose-tinting

I beg to differ. There are several GPs I have watched that my Dad recorded in the 80s, and the races were just far better.

[jab]

Hmm, were they stand-outs to start with, though? Or just normal races?

What swung me was watching the 1995 Brazilian and Argentine GPs. They looked like reasonable races on the review, but when I actually watched them in full, they were really dull. It wasn't that it was impossible to overtake - the cars were just so spaced out. This was the same year that the Pacifics were qualifying 10 seconds behind the front teams

[Gingers4Justice]

Originally Posted by jab

Hmm, were they stand-outs to start with, though? Or just normal races?

What swung me was watching the 1995 Brazilian and Argentine GPs. They looked like reasonable races on the review, but when I actually watched them in full, they were really dull. It wasn't that it was impossible to overtake - the cars were just so spaced out. This was the same year that the Pacifics were qualifying 10 seconds behind the front teams

But still, if current cars are close, as you say, why can't they overtake? Atleast cars could overtake then. It's hard to compare, really, but I suppose the closest thing to F1 cars in terms of technology, cornering speeds and variety of constructors etc is LMP racing - and when Audi and Peugeot floor it properly, which happens once or twice a season, it's the most exciting thing in motorsport.

The fastest single seaters are then GP2, IRL or FRenault 3.5. Both produce far better racing regularly than F1.

[kartracer41]

Originally Posted by HughGJohnson

They're not balanced. The design regulations did not intend for that to happen, but that's what happened. The the regualtions forced the teams to build an unbalanced car. That's what I meant by 'designed unbalanced'. That's why the diffuser teams had an immediate advantage. Rear grip is at a premium this year. Bridgestone annonced almost immediately after the start of the season that they would design a smaller rear tire for next year to reduce front grip and balance the car. Remember how much oversteer all the cars (save Braun) had? It's gotten better with the new diffusers and developement, but the cars were 'designed' loose and most teams are just starting to get it under control.

Okay, so aerodynamically, they may not be balanced front/rear, but you can't honestly think that the best engineers in the world are going to let the fastest race cars in the world go to the track "unbalanced". The advantage of the diffuser teams was that they had a bunch more aero available at the rear, which allowed them to set the car up with more grip in the front. The other teams did not have that extra grip available in the rear or their cars, so they designed less grip into the front. You are always going to see the rear ends of these cars sliding out. If they aren't, the drivers are pushing hard enough. I would bet most of the drivers on the grid would prefer a "loose" race car over a "tight" car, so you are likely going to see oversteer as opposed to cars pushing when the drivers go over the limit.