The Future of F3

[loon]

Originally Posted by S griffin

It's a shame so many good series have had to die to streamline the ladder

It's not about streamlining it's about feeding the cartel.

[andy97]

Too many single make series occupying the F2 and F3 space.

I miss the days of the Ralt, March, Reynard, Chevron etc rivalry.

[S griffin]

Yes, multi make would be so much better

[Juntos]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Yes, multi make would be so much better

Not possible nowadays.
Who would compete against Dallara today? They are really in another step.

[coppice]

Maybe - but peple have said that about March , Reynard , Ralt and other dominant chassis in the past . Don't see too many of them now though - stuff changes.

[andrewc]

The think is that not that long ago, to be a F3 constructor you needed some tubing, a saw and a welder. Now you need full carbon fibre production facilities including autoclaves, so breaking Dallara's dominance would require massive investment.

[Alessio]

Has anyone considered applying the LMP2 ruleset to F3 or F2 in order to revive the 80s-90s multi-make era? I reckon it could work well - Mygale, Dallara and Tatuus building a chassis to a cost cap with a spec engine.

[NaBUru38]

The Dallara monopoly is over.

The Tatuus T-318 is used at the revamped Formula Renault Eurocup and F3 Asian Championship, and the new Formula Regional European Championship and W Series.

[Motorsport Prospects]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Yes, multi make would be so much better

F3 is a driver development series and as such having a single make chassis allows teams to remove the intangibles such as chassis/engine combination from the driver evaluation equation. In addition, the realities of budget and the cost of running a race team make this a necessary evil for the time being.

[GCCheddaris]

Should Formula Three just be a driver development series ? Should there be other series to develop designers , engineers , mechanics etc . Maybe in this computerised age none of that matters .

One of the problems of the current fashion for one make series is that it stops anyone else even attempting to prove that they can do a better job than Dallara , Mygale or Tatuus . How many times have we heard that ' Dallara do a better job than anyone else ' . Well no one else has had a chance to prove they can do a better job !

Another problem with one make series is that cars rarely filter down into amateur series almost causing the death of single seater racing at a national or club level . Outside of historic series it won't be too long before national level single seater racing is dead .

Andrewc made the point that anyone taking on Dallara would have to make a massive investment . Would it not be possible for a company with a carbon fibre autoclave to supply smaller manufacturers with tubs to the manufacturers own design to which they could attach their own suspension wings etc ? Several hill climb single seater manufacturers supply cars with carbon tubs so it must be possible .

[andrewc]

Originally Posted by Motorsport Prospects

F3 is a driver development series and as such having a single make chassis allows teams to remove the intangibles such as chassis/engine combination from the driver evaluation equation. In addition, the realities of budget and the cost of running a race team make this a necessary evil for the time being.

Not just for a driver...

F3 has always been a stepping stone for mechanics and other team personnel and designers too, so limiting the freedom means they also suffer. F3 allowed freedoms for suspension, aerodynamics, engine development, and allowed mechanics and data analysts to learn their craft in a competitive environment.

Its only in comparative recent years that its been an absolute Dallara monopoly, previously there was Reynard and Ralt who all who had stints in the carbon fibre era as the must-have chassis, with honourable mentions to Mygale, Lola and Martini for trying to crack the Dallara stranglehold.

It would be nice to see a true multi-chassis single seater championship, but sadly all the series between national Formula Ford championships and F1 are now single chassis formulae without opportunity to be clever - F2/GP2, F3/GP3, regional F3 series and F4 series.

[Motorsport Prospects]

Originally Posted by andrewc

Not just for a driver...

F3 has always been a stepping stone for mechanics and other team personnel and designers too, so limiting the freedom means they also suffer. F3 allowed freedoms for suspension, aerodynamics, engine development, and allowed mechanics and data analysts to learn their craft in a competitive environment.

Its only in comparative recent years that its been an absolute Dallara monopoly, previously there was Reynard and Ralt who all who had stints in the carbon fibre era as the must-have chassis, with honourable mentions to Mygale, Lola and Martini for trying to crack the Dallara stranglehold.

It would be nice to see a true multi-chassis single seater championship, but sadly all the series between national Formula Ford championships and F1 are now single chassis formulae without opportunity to be clever - F2/GP2, F3/GP3, regional F3 series and F4 series.

I deal with these teams day in and day out and while the range of engineering is in a lot of ways limited compared to the past there is still plenty of opportunity for mechanics and engineers to develop their craft and move up in the sport. It is as much about relationships and potential as it is about outright formal knowledge.

[S griffin]

Having multi chassis also can increase the drivers technical feedback on how to set up the car best

[coppice]

Originally Posted by Motorsport Prospects

I deal with these teams day in and day out and while the range of engineering is in a lot of ways limited compared to the past there is still plenty of opportunity for mechanics and engineers to develop their craft and move up in the sport. It is as much about relationships and potential as it is about outright formal knowledge.

Sorry- I know you mean your final sentence to make sense but I have no idea what you mean in the context of engineering F3 cars .

[Motorsport Prospects]

Originally Posted by coppice

Sorry- I know you mean your final sentence to make sense but I have no idea what you mean in the context of engineering F3 cars .

What I mean is that it is often more about the relationships that you develop in motorsport than your formal degree that determines your path in the sport. Not always but it is very much a "who you know" that is the key which is why networking is so important.

[coppice]

OK , thanks . But surely , human relations apart, any engineer or mechanic is missing out by working only in a succession of single make formulae , often with very limited scope for adjustment and experimentation ?

[andy97]

Originally Posted by GCCheddaris

Should Formula Three just be a driver development series ? Should there be other series to develop designers , engineers , mechanics etc . Maybe in this computerised age none of that matters .

One of the problems of the current fashion for one make series is that it stops anyone else even attempting to prove that they can do a better job than Dallara , Mygale or Tatuus . How many times have we heard that ' Dallara do a better job than anyone else ' . Well no one else has had a chance to prove they can do a better job !

Another problem with one make series is that cars rarely filter down into amateur series almost causing the death of single seater racing at a national or club level . Outside of historic series it won't be too long before national level single seater racing is dead .

Andrewc made the point that anyone taking on Dallara would have to make a massive investment . Would it not be possible for a company with a carbon fibre autoclave to supply smaller manufacturers with tubs to the manufacturers own design to which they could attach their own suspension wings etc ? Several hill climb single seater manufacturers supply cars with carbon tubs so it must be possible .

Several years ago Ralt attempted to take on Dallara’s dominance in F3 and built a good car. Nelson Piquet Junior tested it at Donington when they first came over from Brazil and were very impressed. They were looking to race the Ralt, but when Dallara heard they offered Piquet’s team 2 new Chassis for free. Commercial considerations won over and Dallara’s dominant position was maintained.

[Juntos]

If that Ralt would be that good, someone else would pick it up. It didn't happen.

[GCCheddaris]

What a sad tale Andy . I had heard that the Piquet's tried the Ralt but just assumed the Dallara was a better car . Some years later of course Lola and Mygale took on and beat ( on occasion ) beat Dallara but ultimately we still have a Dallara monopoly .

I'm sure I remember in the early eighties when Ralt were dominant with their RT3 , Ron Tauranac commented that although Dallara were only a small manufacturer they had to be respected and taken seriously . Sadly , how right he was .

[GCCheddaris]

The Ralt did race on a few occasions but unfortunately without the funds to properly develop their chassis the effort soon fizzled out . And unfortunately that would probably be the fate of anyone trying to take on Dallara these days . I often wonder how did Dallara become so dominant ?

[Motorsport Prospects]

Originally Posted by coppice

OK , thanks . But surely , human relations apart, any engineer or mechanic is missing out by working only in a succession of single make formulae , often with very limited scope for adjustment and experimentation ?

I always thought so but from what I hear when I talk to the mechanics and engineers a lot of it is on the job training. The basics tend to be the same, there is just more opportunity for experimentation as you move up and it is learnt in a mentoring type of situation from senior to junior. It does not seem to be as big an issue as I would have thought.

[bella]

Originally Posted by Motorsport Prospects

I always thought so but from what I hear when I talk to the mechanics and engineers a lot of it is on the job training. The basics tend to be the same, there is just more opportunity for experimentation as you move up and it is learnt in a mentoring type of situation from senior to junior. It does not seem to be as big an issue as I would have thought.

i've always heard opposite from people who have worked in both open and spec formulae. spec series are nowhere near as complicated or challenging from an engineering perspective and the limited parameters stop both drivers and engineers from properly exploring and learning.

formula fords were complicated in the right way, and straight forward in the right way. none of the faff with wings and aero, loads of variation and learning space with mechanical setup. and relatively cheap to test so people inside and outside the car can actually *learn* and develop.

also, the idea that it's mostly about networking is true to a point. we're in an incredibly small sport where it's hard not to make a vast number of contacts. otoh, you can network all you want but if you're not a good engineer or mechanic you're not going to get anywhere.

[Alessio]

Originally Posted by GCCheddaris

The Ralt did race on a few occasions but unfortunately without the funds to properly develop their chassis the effort soon fizzled out . And unfortunately that would probably be the fate of anyone trying to take on Dallara these days . I often wonder how did Dallara become so dominant ?

It took a couple of wins in the USF3 championship, albeit with only 3 competitors it wasn't much to shout about. Apparently, its gearbox and suspension were fragile though.

Dallara may have been the 'chassis to have' but that didn't mean it was better, just that in buying a Dallara you would have had a market of spares, plenty of existing set-up data and a proven track record. The reason they took off was a few seasons of dominance in the early 90s I believe. When competitors start to see one chassis manufacturer consistently doing so well aligned with smart marketing, then it just becomes the obvious choice. That happened in 90s F3000 with Reynard and in karting with TonyKart.

Lola and especially Mygale proved that others could compete but Dallara was still the logical choice to have and as such, they never sold as well. Mygale could have been a potential competitor but unfortunately, F3 started to die off just as they started to take off, then the F312 arrived and the rest was history.

I don't think multi-make in the same vein can exist any more. It could potentially work for a season or two but I'm sure prices would just elevate to an unreasonable level.

Like I mentioned earlier, I really think an LMP2-style ruleset could work wonders for either F2 or F3. Sell a contract to 3/4 manufacturers (Dallara, Mygale, Tatuus and Oreca all come to mind), set a cost-cap and restrict development, lump a 'low-cost' production based motor (Renault?) in the back, and perhaps apply a balance of performance. Cost-effective and potentially a more interesting concept. LMP2, GT3 and TCR all use similar concepts and look at how well they've done in recent years.

[andy97]

Originally Posted by Alessio

It took a couple of wins in the USF3 championship, albeit with only 3 competitors it wasn't much to shout about. Apparently, its gearbox and suspension were fragile though.

Dallara may have been the 'chassis to have' but that didn't mean it was better, just that in buying a Dallara you would have had a market of spares, plenty of existing set-up data and a proven track record.

Lola and especially Mygale proved that others could compete but Dallara was still the logical choice to have and as such, they never sold as well. Mygale could have been a potential competitor but unfortunately, F3 started to die off just as they started to take off, then the F312 arrived and the rest was history.

I don't think multi-make in the same vein can exist any more. It could potentially work for a season or two but I'm sure prices would just elevate to an unreasonable level.

Like I mentioned earlier, I really think an LMP2-style ruleset could work wonders for either F2 or F3. Sell a contract to 3/4 manufacturers (Dallara, Mygale, Tatuus and Oreca all come to mind), set a cost-cap and restrict development, lump a 'low-cost' production based motor (Renault?) in the back, and perhaps apply a balance of performance. Cost-effective and potentially a more interesting concept. LMP2, GT3 and TCR all use similar concepts and look at how well they've done in recent years.

Agree with all of that, and if the chassis and major components, could be shared between F2 and F3, as in the 70s and 80s, there could be cost savings from longer production runs.

[andrewc]

That is already in use - the Tatuus F4 tub forms the basis of the BRDC F3 car, albeit it with a more powerful engine and better aero.

Dallara also tried, with their Formulino concept which was envisaged in 3 versions - basic which was wingless, plus, and pro which was roughly F3 performance. This formed the basis of the MRF challenge car.