Your F1 BHP?

Sodemo · 18 Sep 2001, 00:08 (Ref:147683)

how much horsepower do u think F1 cars should have?
More, less, or just about right where we are at the moment (850bhp)

Well I personally would like to see a cut in horsepower, to about 650-700BHP. Maybe this way it would slow the cars enough to warrant the:

return of wide cars - slower down straights/faster round corners
return of slicks - faster round corners
reduce downforce to 1 element - slower round corners

and so on.

EERO · 18 Sep 2001, 02:03 (Ref:147714)

450-500 bhp works for me

It worked in the early 70's too.

JeremySmith · 18 Sep 2001, 02:31 (Ref:147723)

IMHO 650BHP,SLICK TYRES,much less downforce,No TC,NO LT....No blinking re-fuelling, NO brake lights,no cell phone calls while driving....

Jeremy says hello!

Gt_R · 18 Sep 2001, 02:34 (Ref:147724)

Hmm...personally, i would like to see it tagged at 850bhp. Lowering the horsepower would mean slower cars along the straights, and then GP's in Hockenheim and Monza would be so slow...

I just like the sight of speed!

EERO · 18 Sep 2001, 02:37 (Ref:147727)

The fastest GP of all time was at Monza, 1971. 450 BHP cars, small wings, no chicanes.

Wrex · 18 Sep 2001, 03:00 (Ref:147734)

Quote:

Originally posted by Jersound
no cell phone calls while driving....

unless they have a hands free kit.

I don't think anyone would object to slick's making their return. Lower downforce is the easiest way to slow the cars (harder to cheat too).

Lower engine capacity (2.5L V6). Everyone would jump up and down about the power and the noice at first, but we'd get used to it. And lets face it, 5 years from now they will have those V6's going so quick that we need to knock em back to straight 4's.

Ban Refuelling. It's dangerous, and is killing the racecraft of many a good driver. How many are'nt 'taking the dive up the inside' because they're sure their team has the best pit stops? Imagine the different strategies teams could run. Multiple tyre changes and flat out, or none stop to the finish.

I want Bernie's job.

**Stephen Green** · 18 Sep 2001, 09:22 (Ref:147770)

Eero, wasn't that before they put the new chicanes in place though?

I subscribe to the view that if you leave the power to the engineers but drastically cut the downforce, the cars will find their own level. I would also ban traction control, launch control, automatic gearboxes, but re-introduce wide slicks. That way the driver would be the one in control once again, not the computer engineer in the back of the garage!

EERO · 18 Sep 2001, 12:47 (Ref:147820)

Quote:

Originally posted by Stephen Green
Eero, wasn't that before they put the new chicanes in place though?

I always say, when debating, "Never give away any evidence which might undermine your own arguement."

**Bononi** · 18 Sep 2001, 13:20 (Ref:147830)

Quote:

Originally posted by Wrex
I want Bernie's job.

WREX, it's yours !

**Stephen Green** · 18 Sep 2001, 14:09 (Ref:147852)

A wise motto Eero!

rlinter · 18 Sep 2001, 14:16 (Ref:147857)

Quote:

Originally posted by Sodemo
how much horsepower do u think F1 cars should have?
More, less, or just about right where we are at the moment (850bhp)

How about an even more radical idea that would see F1 technology reach the average road car much sooner:-

take the maximum engine capacity to about 1100cc then re-introduce Turbos and limit the amount of fuel they can use to say 20 litres.

That would make the manufactures have to develop some seriously powerful lean burn engines.

Could be interesting

**Adam43** · 18 Sep 2001, 15:20 (Ref:147888)

I think the power/grip ratio should be increased. Either more power or less grip!

Less wing, but proper slicks. Combined with more power! hmmmm! Sort of 80s ish!

Whatever this needs to be combined with no traction control or the power is immaterial! To a certain extent.

Actual value? What about 1000bhp, a nice round number! Maybe not quite that much. What we have now is OK. It should be more than you can get in a road car.

Sodemo · 18 Sep 2001, 17:36 (Ref:147954)

Yeah, you have to remember that the F3000 cars produce around 450BHP, so F1 cars with the same horsepower wouldn't make much sense, as there would be no point in "stepping up" to the next level, though CART cars have more Mumba than F1 cars so....? I dunno.

Put it this way, the F3000 cars reach 170MPH at tracks like Monza with 450BHP, so even if F1 cars had 600BHP they would easily still top 200MPH.

Number Juan · 18 Sep 2001, 18:33 (Ref:147977)

i think that people are being a bit nostalgiac and a bit idealistic. i dont think that the FIA would warrant slick tyres in a million years now. i think that they would maybe warrant wider cars on safety grounds (safer side protection).

i think that another engine cut would not do anything positive for overtaking as, the faster the cars go, the more drag they produce - and with the little amount of drag that these cars produce now, there would be like zero overtaking. i think that they should think about sticking a bit of sandpaper to the top of the sidepods to produce more drag - unless there are any other suggestions?

Sodemo · 18 Sep 2001, 20:21 (Ref:148041)

Yeah but the slower the cars go, the closer they can follow one another through corners.

Making the cars wider would increse drag.

Maybe a mandantory piece of bodywork just to create drag would be benificial, say to the designers -"right u have to have a peice of bodywork which stretches the length of the rear wing, with a given surface area". it could be positioned at 90 degrees to create max drag.

**Stephen Green** · 18 Sep 2001, 20:55 (Ref:148066)

Well as I understand it, the level of downforce achieved through undertrays and wings etc is enormous. When another car gets close to the one in front, the dirty air destroys the downforce thereby making it very difficult to keep traction for overtaking. I'm not an aerodynamatist so can't be sure I'm not talking a load of toffy. But to me, if you get ris of the aerodynamics and give more mechanical grip, you get more chances of overtaking. Now call me a sentimental old fool if you wish, but that's what I want to see in all forms of motorsport...OVERTAKING!

**Adam43** · 19 Sep 2001, 08:01 (Ref:148209)

If cars were more difficult to drive (more power less grip, no traction control) then there would be more overtaking. I'm talking about little mistakes here, where say the back end is lost briefly and caught which results in a loss of time allowing the car behind to get a run on it.

Do you think that the cars are a bit too sensitive at the moment, i.e. when lost they are in the gravel? Obviously I'm not a world expert, never driven one! But they seemed to be a bit more progressive in the old (ah nostalgia) days when they had more grip from the tyres. I do also think that the grooves look silly!

LucaBadoer · 19 Sep 2001, 08:48 (Ref:148220)

Quote:

Originally posted by Wrex
Ban Refuelling.

Great idea, Wrex. I hope u r the next Bernie - you'll do a good job!!!

**Stephen Green** · 19 Sep 2001, 10:16 (Ref:148236)

Well Adam, the idea of traction control is that the driver should be able to keep his foot down throughout the bend and the electronics do the rest. In reality there are occasions when it doesn't work. However, it does take away the input the driver has in the car in my opinion. If we did away with all the 'gismos' like Traction Control and Launch Control the emphasis would be put back squarely on the drivers shoulders.

If in addition you did away with the aerodynamics of the car, ie the intricate undertrays and wings and spoilers, it would give the car much less aerodynamic grip, then bring back fat sticky slick tyres and the driver then has total control over the car and how fast he corners.

Even the car designers have been saying this is the only way to bring back some chance of overtaking other than in the pit lane as currently happens. When are the FIA etc going to listen to them?

**Adam43** · 19 Sep 2001, 10:24 (Ref:148239)

Couldn't agree more.

The aerodynamics of a car will always be a factor (the car moves quickly through the air!!!!), but what we need is regulations that reduce the importance of these aerodynamics. Especially the importance of the front wing, which presumably is the most effected.

The FIA should (and presumably could) sort this out. I bet it's not easy to get all the teams to agree to the same set of rules though!

Sodemo · 19 Sep 2001, 18:05 (Ref:148387)

The teams wouldn't support it? I suppose the smaller teams wouldn't support any major rule changes, as it would take them a lot longer to catch up to the big teams.

But so what, the FIA should enforce it no matter what.

**Adam43** · 20 Sep 2001, 08:02 (Ref:148596)

Coincidentally this weeks Nigel Roebuck's column on Autosport.com answers a question on the subject.

Tristan · 20 Sep 2001, 18:07 (Ref:148762)

Hmmmm...... if there WERE a cut in BHP (inevitable in the long run), how would it be implemented??? A CC cut?? I wouldn't be too keen as this would result in tiny buzzy engines running at stupendous revs. Hows about a rev limiter at, say 10,000rpm?? Or would that be too drastic?? Make a lovley engine note, mind (or would it be an ugly sound of the engines banging the top end of it all the time??) Questions questions, la la la......