Home  
Site Partners: SpotterGuides Veloce Books  
Related Sites: Your Link Here  

Go Back   TenTenths Motorsport Forum > Single Seater Racing > Formula One

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 4 Oct 2021, 13:04 (Ref:4076921)   #26
Richard C
Veteran
 
Richard C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,801
Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
everything that could be done to improve the situation is valuable.
Actually not it is not. "Everything" is quite large. For example, should we provide a climate control system on each track? Cover with a roof, control temperature, humidity, etc.? Of course we should not. The heavy rain situation is a corner case in which we should not "overly" optimize for.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
It's not that going back to narrower tyres would be the magic bullet, it's not a black and white thing. However narrower tyre would improve the chances considerably to be able to race in the more difficult circumstances.
And this I can agree with. It is not black and white. You have to measure how often heavy rain disrupts the entire event to the point of not racing. If you want that to be zero, you are investing too much to cover rare situations. I personally think that the frequency of this is problem is low enough that it is not a problem that needs to be solved.

Richard
Richard C is offline  
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one."
Quote
Old 4 Oct 2021, 14:43 (Ref:4076938)   #27
Taxi645
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Netherlands
Posts: 979
Taxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridTaxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Casto View Post
Actually not it is not. "Everything" is quite large. For example, should we provide a climate control system on each track? Cover with a roof, control temperature, humidity, etc.? Of course we should not. The heavy rain situation is a corner case in which we should not "overly" optimize for.

You are right, I should have said everything within reason.


Quote:
And this I can agree with. It is not black and white. You have to measure how often heavy rain disrupts the entire event to the point of not racing. If you want that to be zero, you are investing too much to cover rare situations. I personally think that the frequency of this is problem is low enough that it is not a problem that needs to be solved.

Richard

I might agree with that if not for the other reasons listed in the first post. Better wet race performance would be just one of the many advantages of going back to smaller wheels and tyres.
Taxi645 is offline  
__________________
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.
Quote
Old 4 Oct 2021, 15:37 (Ref:4076947)   #28
VIVA GT
Veteran
 
VIVA GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
England
Leicestershire
Posts: 5,647
VIVA GT is going for a new world record!VIVA GT is going for a new world record!VIVA GT is going for a new world record!VIVA GT is going for a new world record!VIVA GT is going for a new world record!VIVA GT is going for a new world record!VIVA GT is going for a new world record!VIVA GT is going for a new world record!
Just a quick comment about fitting mudguards over the wheels to reduce the spray created poor visibility. Surely this would also be counter productive as the water displaced from the track is unable to dissipate into the air, and can only fall back down onto the track surface behind the wheels and therefore making the track no drier?
maybe (just maybe) I'm over-thinking things here...
VIVA GT is online now  
__________________
Incognito: An Italian phrase meaning Nice Gearchange!
Quote
Old 4 Oct 2021, 17:57 (Ref:4076959)   #29
Richard C
Veteran
 
Richard C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,801
Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
I might agree with that if not for the other reasons listed in the first post. Better wet race performance would be just one of the many advantages of going back to smaller wheels and tyres.
If there is better wet race performance. So what? I don't think that is even a problem to solve. Is this about improving wet performance (does it need to be improved) or about trying to move the potential to cancel a race due to heavy rains closer to zero?

You call out a combination of general improvements for dry weather and wet weather. Depending upon who you ask here, some (myself included) would say that the dry weather "improvement" you mention are mostly not improvements and would in fact be negatives. The same applies to the idea of reducing the diameter. For example. Lower un-sprung weight. As compared to what? A future 2022 car? Maybe so. But a gain "so what" as everyone is in the same boat.

Does any of this really improve the overall racing of F1? I am extremely doubtful about narrower cars making it easier to pass. I am on the fence about extending the length of the braking zone to improve passing. But lean toward it not being any type of magic bullet.

I think that overall. This discussion was kicked off due to the Spa rain race. That people were upset about it. And the natural inclination is to try to "solve" the problem. Was it unfortunate for fans, teams and F1 in general? Yes. But 30 days on, nobody is talking about it.

If this "problem" (and I view the problem as "inability to race at all in heavy rain") was to become more frequent then maybe options should be examined. But right now, this is the very definition of a "corner case". This stuff is pretty rare. There are any number of other potential issues that might cause problems. It makes little or no sense to try to prevent relatively rare situations that don't have significant lasting impact. Especially if the solutions are baggage (physical and financial) that have to be carried all of the time (wet, dry or otherwise)

I believe the cost to solve these problems is not worth the benefit. I am very curious about your thoughts on this being a corner case and why you think it needs to be solved?

Richard
Richard C is offline  
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one."
Quote
Old 4 Oct 2021, 20:35 (Ref:4076977)   #30
chillibowl
Veteran
 
chillibowl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Canada
winnipeg, canada
Posts: 9,718
chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!
following on that...if they were to go to narrower wet tires, would all the tires have to become narrower because that would be costly.

although such an expense could justify artificial wet weather races in order to use said tires!

im also curious to know if any tire from the narrower past (a Bridgestone or Michelin wet tire from the height of the tire war for example) could have dealt with the amount of water and continuing level of rain that occurred at Spa?

i suppose what i am getting at, was this race to far past acceptable for any race of any era using whatever equipment?
chillibowl is online now  
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there
I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place
Quote
Old 4 Oct 2021, 21:04 (Ref:4076979)   #31
Mike Harte
Veteran
 
Mike Harte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
United Kingdom
W. Yorkshire
Posts: 5,471
Mike Harte will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameMike Harte will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameMike Harte will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameMike Harte will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameMike Harte will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameMike Harte will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameMike Harte will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameMike Harte will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameMike Harte will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Fame
I may be just imagining this, but don't F1 already use narrower wheels and tyres for wets? And maybe also for the intermediates, as well?
Mike Harte is offline  
Quote
Old 4 Oct 2021, 23:14 (Ref:4076989)   #32
Casper
Veteran
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,211
Casper should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridCasper should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Not so long ago everyone was moaning about the lack of wet races to add some chance to the results.
Casper is offline  
Quote
Old 4 Oct 2021, 23:33 (Ref:4076990)   #33
Adam43
14th
1% Club
 
Adam43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
European Union
New Orleans
Posts: 42,422
Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!Adam43 is the undisputed Champion of the World!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Harte View Post
I may be just imagining this, but don't F1 already use narrower wheels and tyres for wets? And maybe also for the intermediates, as well?
IIRC, they are the same width wheels. Maybe a slightly different type profile, but nothing that dramatic. They have a slightly bigger diameter to raise the car a tad.
Adam43 is offline  
__________________
Seriously not taking motorsport too seriously.
Quote
Old 5 Oct 2021, 05:09 (Ref:4077009)   #34
crmalcolm
Subscriber
Veteran
 
crmalcolm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Nepal
Exactly where I need to be.
Posts: 12,292
crmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Fame
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam43 View Post
IIRC, they are the same width wheels. Maybe a slightly different type profile, but nothing that dramatic. They have a slightly bigger diameter to raise the car a tad.
Yes.

All 7 types of tyre currently used are 305mm (front) and 405mm (rear) wide tread.
The slicks are 670mm diameter, inters 674mm (front) 675mm (rear) and wets 680mm.

From 2022, width is remaining the same, diameter increasing by 50mm.
crmalcolm is offline  
Quote
Old 5 Oct 2021, 07:25 (Ref:4077019)   #35
Mike Harte
Veteran
 
Mike Harte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
United Kingdom
W. Yorkshire
Posts: 5,471
Mike Harte will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameMike Harte will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameMike Harte will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameMike Harte will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameMike Harte will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameMike Harte will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameMike Harte will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameMike Harte will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameMike Harte will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Fame
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam43 View Post
IIRC, they are the same width wheels. Maybe a slightly different type profile, but nothing that dramatic. They have a slightly bigger diameter to raise the car a tad.

Sorry, I must live in the past.
Mike Harte is offline  
Quote
Old 6 Oct 2021, 15:11 (Ref:4077211)   #36
Taxi645
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Netherlands
Posts: 979
Taxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridTaxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Casto View Post
If there is better wet race performance. So what? I don't think that is even a problem to solve. Is this about improving wet performance (does it need to be improved) or about trying to move the potential to cancel a race due to heavy rains closer to zero?
Better wet performance of the tyres means the cars are better able to drive in wet conditions. This means less boring laps behind the safetycar, less race interruptions and yes also less chance of a cancelled race.

As said, since wet races are the most interesting to watch (I think most would agree), every opportunity (within reason ) to improve the chances of the cars being able to run in the more wet conditions is welcome.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Casto View Post
You call out a combination of general improvements for dry weather and wet weather. Depending upon who you ask here, some (myself included) would say that the dry weather "improvement" you mention are mostly not improvements and would in fact be negatives.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Casto View Post
The same applies to the idea of reducing the diameter. For example. Lower un-sprung weight. As compared to what? A future 2022 car? Maybe so. But a gain "so what" as everyone is in the same boat.
With that argument we could even race lawnmowers and call it the pinnacle of motorsport. Let's be serious. I reckon 18-inch was chosen, because they were afraid the fanbase would reject rims smaller than on their own car and wanted the new car to look good. Secondly it is more inline with endurance racing sizes. The difference is, endurance is not open wheels so they are not as much effected by the drag and dirty air from the wheels.

F1 cars have been gain more and more weight each year and it's getting out of hand. Some were because of safety reasons (good) and some in my view are the result of ill chosen technical regulation (current drivetrain and now 2022 wheels sizes).

Quote:
Does any of this really improve the overall racing of F1? I am extremely doubtful about narrower cars making it easier to pass. I am on the fence about extending the length of the braking zone to improve passing. But lean toward it not being any type of magic bullet.
Nothing is a magic bullet. It's a package of changes that makes the real difference. On width, I guess we wouldn't have Max on top of Lewis in Monza if they had 2 x 20cm more room. The width is not something I feel strong about, but if it were op to me the cars would be 1,8m again.

Quote:
I think that overall. This discussion was kicked off due to the Spa rain race. That people were upset about it. And the natural inclination is to try to "solve" the problem. Was it unfortunate for fans, teams and F1 in general? Yes. But 30 days on, nobody is talking about it.
Nope I have been saying this for quite a while.

Quote:
If this "problem" (and I view the problem as "inability to race at all in heavy rain") was to become more frequent then maybe options should be examined. But right now, this is the very definition of a "corner case". This stuff is pretty rare. There are any number of other potential issues that might cause problems. It makes little or no sense to try to prevent relatively rare situations that don't have significant lasting impact. Especially if the solutions are baggage (physical and financial) that have to be carried all of the time (wet, dry or otherwise)

I believe the cost to solve these problems is not worth the benefit. I am very curious about your thoughts on this being a corner case and why you think it needs to be solved?
As said, the performance of the tire in really wet conditions is just one of the drawbacks of the wide tires. Yes, a race cancelled because of the rain is really a corner case. A race paused due to heavy rain or endless rounds behind the safetycar have been a regular occurrence.

I just don't appreciate regulations that are chosen for marginal gains or for the wrong reasons (in my book) when the disadvantages are so numerous.
Taxi645 is offline  
__________________
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.
Quote
Old 6 Oct 2021, 16:54 (Ref:4077224)   #37
Richard C
Veteran
 
Richard C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,801
Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
Better wet performance of the tyres means the cars are better able to drive in wet conditions. This means less boring laps behind the safetycar, less race interruptions and yes also less chance of a cancelled race.
Again, is it that much of a problem? I don't think it is. Especially with respect to how much time is either spent behind a safety car or races not happening due to extreme weather. See my comments at the end about actual data.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
As said, since wet races are the most interesting to watch (I think most would agree), every opportunity (within reason ) to improve the chances of the cars being able to run in the more wet conditions is welcome.
See above.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
With that argument we could even race lawnmowers and call it the pinnacle of motorsport.
That is a fair comment. But F1 as some type of technological showcase (with a few exceptions such as the current power units) long ago stopped being particularly innovative due to the rules continuing to box them in. Next year will be even more so. Regardless, nobody is ready to open up wheel regulations for "competitive" or "technology demonstration" reasons. At best you might find interest in more than a single tire provider, but with standard wheel sizes (see comments below about tire manufactures likely wanting to gravitate toward larger diameter wheels). As cool as it might be, nobody is looking to replicate something like Tyrrell small diameter wheels in which each team might have their own bespoke tire? If we want to lower unsprung weight, might we just move brakes back inboard, etc. Nobody really wants to do these things because the ability to gain over a rival is small and temporary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
Let's be serious. I reckon 18-inch was chosen, because they were afraid the fanbase would reject rims smaller than on their own car and wanted the new car to look good. Secondly it is more inline with endurance racing sizes. The difference is, endurance is not open wheels so they are not as much effected by the drag and dirty air from the wheels.
While visual difference between F1 and pretty much most everything else was a factor, I believe your second point is the primary reason. Tire manufactures didn't want to continue to invest in technology that pretty much supports only F1. Other top level series are going in the same direction. Why not build data on wheels that are 18" and with a specific diameter and be able to apply that to multiple series?

Regarding aero issues. That is a red-herring. Overall diameter is generally the same. If they are concerned about the delta with respect to aero by the wheels themselves then they can aero covers if they want. Which I believe is exactly what F1 is doing for 2022.

There are pros and cons to both 13" vs 18" wheels. The smaller 13" have lost that battle.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
F1 cars have been gain more and more weight each year and it's getting out of hand. Some were because of safety reasons (good) and some in my view are the result of ill chosen technical regulation (current drivetrain and now 2022 wheels sizes).
Generally this is a topic that is unrelated to wheel and tire sizes. Yes, the new combo is slightly heavier. But the teams generally have a strategy that if there is something new, instead of working to adjust to a new minimum weight, they rather push for the minimum weight to be increased. The teams want the cars to be as heavy as they are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
Nope I have been saying this for quite a while.
Yes, I was overly broad when I said "nobody" is talking about this. I expect there is a very, very small group who is pushing for this. You included. But when looking at the big picture. The advocates for smaller width tires (especially to try to increase the amount of time spent running in wet weather) is effectively zero. Does it make you wrong? Not up to me. IMHO, it does question the validity of the size of the problem and solution you propose.

Apologies for my bluntness, and I really don't mean to offend, but IMHO, this proposal is very Don Quixote-esque.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
As said, the performance of the tire in really wet conditions is just one of the drawbacks of the wide tires. Yes, a race cancelled because of the rain is really a corner case. A race paused due to heavy rain or endless rounds behind the safetycar have been a regular occurrence.
Endless round behind the safetycar? Can we move beyond the hyperbole? To be fair, you called me out for making small numbers zero. But don't make small numbers huge or infinite!

Can you provide some data? Look back over a few decades and total up the number of races cancelled due to extreme wet weather. And what is the number of wet laps run under safety car vs. green flag, but wet conditions? I don't have the numbers. My gut tells me that cancelled races and ratio of safety vs. green laps (in wet) is extremely low.

I am not trying to make this argument FOR this. If I was, I would show the data. Show the benefit (especially with respect to what you think it will do with regards to wet weather outcomes) I think it's up to you to make the case and that should include actual data. Show me where you are right and I am wrong with data. Even then. Lets look at the recent spa race. How much of a change would have to have been made to the tires and cars to really keep the spray down enough to allow racing? I suspect it would have taken drastic changes (so drastic as to gather no real support) to the tires and cars to make that happen. It will always eventually rain so hard that whatever solution you bring is not enough.

Richard
Richard C is offline  
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one."
Quote
Old 6 Oct 2021, 19:30 (Ref:4077242)   #38
Taxi645
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Netherlands
Posts: 979
Taxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridTaxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Casto View Post
Again, is it that much of a problem? I don't think it is. Especially with respect to how much time is either spent behind a safety car or races not happening due to extreme weather. See my comments at the end about actual data.

That is a fair comment. But F1 as some type of technological showcase (with a few exceptions such as the current power units) long ago stopped being particularly innovative due to the rules continuing to box them in. Next year will be even more so. Regardless, nobody is ready to open up wheel regulations for "competitive" or "technology demonstration" reasons. At best you might find interest in more than a single tire provider, but with standard wheel sizes (see comments below about tire manufactures likely wanting to gravitate toward larger diameter wheels). As cool as it might be, nobody is looking to replicate something like Tyrrell small diameter wheels in which each team might have their own bespoke tire? If we want to lower unsprung weight, might we just move brakes back inboard, etc. Nobody really wants to do these things because the ability to gain over a rival is small and temporary.
And sadly, F1 is loosing it's lightweight spirit because of it.

Quote:
While visual difference between F1 and pretty much most everything else was a factor, I believe your second point is the primary reason. Tire manufactures didn't want to continue to invest in technology that pretty much supports only F1. Other top level series are going in the same direction. Why not build data on wheels that are 18" and with a specific diameter and be able to apply that to multiple series?
The requirements endurance racing puts on tyres are completely different than what F1 wants from it's tyre supplier. Any data or synergy between the two would be so basic it could also come from a different diameter tyre with the same sidewall height and basic construction.

Quote:
Regarding aero issues. That is a red-herring. Overall diameter is generally the same.
Not true, see below.

Quote:
If they are concerned about the delta with respect to aero by the wheels themselves then they can aero covers if they want. Which I believe is exactly what F1 is doing for 2022.
Yes, yet more parts to correct the problem.

Quote:
There are pros and cons to both 13" vs 18" wheels. The smaller 13" have lost that battle.
It's not simply a case of the old 13'' vs the new 18''. One of the main benefits of the new wheels is the lower tyre wall. The idea being that lower tyre walls provide more stable aerodynamics. This in turn should help the smaller teams who don't have the resources of the bigger ones to also simulate and design for every aero changes due to tyre side wall movement. This should help with getting the field more equal.

So that an absolutely fine goal. I'm not arguing to stick with the 13'' wheels and balloon tyres. I'm arguing, keep the benefits of the lower side wall, but put it on a smaller 16'' wheel.

Had they done that the tyre diameter would've only grown 10mm instead of the 60mm it has grown now. You would've had all the benefits of the lower side wall, but without the drawbacks of adding so much weight, drag and dirty air by going to the 18'' wheel.

Quote:
Generally this is a topic that is unrelated to wheel and tire sizes. Yes, the new combo is slightly heavier. But the teams generally have a strategy that if there is something new, instead of working to adjust to a new minimum weight, they rather push for the minimum weight to be increased. The teams want the cars to be as heavy as they are.
And that's exactly what I'm speaking up against. All this political concorary and self interest has lead to cars now being 800kg soon. Again F1 has slowly lost it's lightweight spirit.

Quote:
Yes, I was overly broad when I said "nobody" is talking about this. I expect there is a very, very small group who is pushing for this. You included. But when looking at the big picture. The advocates for smaller width tires (especially to try to increase the amount of time spent running in wet weather) is effectively zero. Does it make you wrong? Not up to me. IMHO, it does question the validity of the size of the problem and solution you propose.

Apologies for my bluntness, and I really don't mean to offend, but IMHO, this proposal is very Don Quixote-esque.
Well, you could've said the same in 2016 when I was saying that going high downforce for 2017 (probably to please Red Bull, in their fight against Mercedes) was a going to be a very bad idea and they should have stuck with the ground aero concept that was previously floated around. Now we've had 5 year of cars being very bad at following each other before doing in 2022, what should've been done in 2017 straight away.

Quote:
Endless round behind the safetycar? Can we move beyond the hyperbole? To be fair, you called me out for making small numbers zero. But don't make small numbers huge or infinite!

Can you provide some data? Look back over a few decades and total up the number of races cancelled due to extreme wet weather. And what is the number of wet laps run under safety car vs. green flag, but wet conditions? I don't have the numbers. My gut tells me that cancelled races and ratio of safety vs. green laps (in wet) is extremely low.

I am not trying to make this argument FOR this. If I was, I would show the data. Show the benefit (especially with respect to what you think it will do with regards to wet weather outcomes) I think it's up to you to make the case and that should include actual data. Show me where you are right and I am wrong with data. Even then. Lets look at the recent spa race. How much of a change would have to have been made to the tires and cars to really keep the spray down enough to allow racing? I suspect it would have taken drastic changes (so drastic as to gather no real support) to the tires and cars to make that happen. It will always eventually rain so hard that whatever solution you bring is not enough.

Richard
This is not meant as a cop out, but I just don't have time to gather the data. The fastest way would be to track back all wet races of the last few years and turf what percentage of them was held up rounds behind the safety car, had the race postponed or paused. That would probably be the quickest way to do it, but I simple don't have the time.

Last edited by Taxi645; 6 Oct 2021 at 19:47.
Taxi645 is offline  
__________________
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.
Quote
Old 6 Oct 2021, 19:54 (Ref:4077247)   #39
chillibowl
Veteran
 
chillibowl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Canada
winnipeg, canada
Posts: 9,718
chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!
any changes to tires and aero is going to create other unintended complications and even if a solution is found for better racing in the rain, next year there will be a new car design and new problems to overcome.

so i wonder if there are other ways to crack this egg via other technologies to consider, specifically if the main issue here is visibility (caused from the spray).

this may seem far fetched (or not even possible), but solutions involving real time telemetry, using different parts of the light spectrum, and/or augmented reality overlays fitted to either glasses or the drivers visors that they wear during wet races could improve their ability to see in both the wet and dark.

grip in the wet is never going to be as good as in the dry so that issue is one drivers will have to live with but if improving their ability to see could be done without changing a race car then surely that is the better solution.

probably should watch less Sci-F1!
chillibowl is online now  
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there
I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place
Quote
Old 7 Oct 2021, 00:54 (Ref:4077264)   #40
Richard C
Veteran
 
Richard C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,801
Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
The requirements endurance racing puts on tyres are completely different than what F1 wants from it's tyre supplier. Any data or synergy between the two would be so basic it could also come from a different diameter tyre with the same sidewall height and basic construction.
You call out a lack of synergy between the two, but then also call out that broadly the construction is likely to be similar. Yes, there will be differences between 18" Rally, Endurance and F1 tires. But there would be a lot of similarity from a suppliers perspective. You can Google comments from Michelin from a number of years ago in which they don't care to do tires just for F1. That for them, until F1 moves forward to 18" they have no interest. That for Michelin, lower sidewall tires more closely matches what they want to do from a design perspective. They clearly think there is synergy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
I'm arguing, keep the benefits of the lower side wall, but put it on a smaller 16'' wheel.
16 vs 18. Frankly there is little difference between the two IMHO for your purposes. Other than, again, F1 would be bucking the trend for little or no reason or benefits (see comments from Michelin). 16" would be a change from the current situation, but still not help address one of the core issues which is nobody (in general) wants 16" wheels. If you argue this is about street car relevance then 16" wheels is another "no go". Street cars have been moving away from 16" wheels for a long time. And while they are still available, the selection of tires for 16" wheels in road cars is starting to get thin. In short, 16" wheels is not going to make much of anyone happy. The wheel diameter within reason is relatively arbitrary. Other than they have been 13" for a long time, the usage of 13" is pretty arbitrary. If you start picking sizes larger than 13" you eventually hit at 18" as being "the current" sweet spot for if any other reason, it is where many motorsports are gravitating.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
This is not meant as a cop out, but I just don't have time to gather the data.
Fair enough. I don't have the time either. But I think the burden of proof is on you as you are swimming upstream on this on many fronts. I think broadly I am out of this discussion as on my end the points have been made and the my arguments still stand. We are starting to go round and round (no pun intended on this) So there really is nothing more for me to add at this point.

Cheers.

Richard
Richard C is offline  
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one."
Quote
Old 10 Feb 2022, 06:26 (Ref:4098028)   #41
Taxi645
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Netherlands
Posts: 979
Taxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridTaxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
https://www.racefans.net/2022/02/09/...lt-verstappen/

Another driver pointing to the poor visibility with the new tyres:

“For me actually, the biggest thing is just the view in the cockpit with these big tyres,” he said. “To hit an apex in some tight corners is a bit more difficult.

Red Bull’s chief engineer Paul Monaghan:

“It’s certainly put a bit of weight onto the car, the tyre is bigger overall, so it has a fairly significant aerodynamic effect.
Taxi645 is offline  
Quote
Old 10 Feb 2022, 17:59 (Ref:4098119)   #42
V8 Fireworks
Veteran
 
V8 Fireworks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,923
V8 Fireworks should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridV8 Fireworks should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridV8 Fireworks should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
Another driver pointing to the poor visibility with the new tyres:

“For me actually, the biggest thing is just the view in the cockpit with these big tyres,” he said. “To hit an apex in some tight corners is a bit more difficult.
Formula Two have been running these tyres for two seasons with no problems.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
Well, you could've said the same in 2016 when I was saying that going high downforce for 2017 (probably to please Red Bull, in their fight against Mercedes) was a going to be a very bad idea and they should have stuck with the ground aero concept that was previously floated around. Now we've had 5 year of cars being very bad at following each other
We have had five years of thrilling cars, stupid fast ("is that in fast forward?"), that produced racing at least as good as 2016. Those low downforce cars were like watching paint dry, they were just not exciting and thrilling.

They also looked ridiculous -- like they have been squashed -- at 1.8m wide instead the traditional 2.15m of a Grand Prix. 2m is not fully corrected, but it is a darn sight better than 1.8m!




Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
but if it were op to me the cars would be 1,8m again.
1.8m wide may be fine for Formula Ford or Formula Three, but for top class Formula One cars it looks ridiculous. For reference, the GP2 were always at least 1.9m (so 10cm wider than F1) even since 2005 as Dallara had more common sense than to make super narrow cars! Indycar & Champcar are 2.05m width IIRC.

Ironically narrow cars make the dirty air problem WORSE as the tyres are now directly in front of the floor, so you need more bargeboards and other stuff to push the tyre wakes out beyond the sides of the car and therefore the cars are more sensitive to the bargeboards and winglets working correctly. Did the '98 1.8m or '93 2m cars improve racing compared to '97 or '91 when they were wider? Quite the opposite!

As for advocating for 13", many teams ran 15" fronts in the 1980's when it was permitted. 13" is just an arbitrary regulation.

Of course it would be better if the total diameter was still 670-680mm (and 645mm diameter on the front, which was Goodyear had, but Bridgestone used the full 660mm when they came into the spoort), of course it would be better if the front tyres were 245mm wide like in the 90's instead of 305mm and the cars therefore had a more rearwards weight distribution and were shorter.

The new rules originally had the front tyres at 270mm section width, down from the 305mm, but I guess the teams had their say and didn't want to redesign their stuff so much. The new rules originally had the maximum wheelbase at 3400mm, but the teams had their say and were only prepared to have a wheelbase of 3600mm (so ~100mm less rather than ~300mm less than 2021, wheelbase was actually one of the only dimensions of the car which was free choice under the old rules).

Last edited by V8 Fireworks; 10 Feb 2022 at 18:22.
V8 Fireworks is offline  
Quote
Old 10 Feb 2022, 18:14 (Ref:4098120)   #43
Richard C
Veteran
 
Richard C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,801
Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
Another driver pointing to the poor visibility with the new tyres:

“For me actually, the biggest thing is just the view in the cockpit with these big tyres,” he said. “To hit an apex in some tight corners is a bit more difficult.
Now, wrap it in bodywork that requires you to not just see over the tires, but the fenders as well, then look through an oil streaked windscreen, put other slower cars around you and finally do it at night without the circuit being fully illuminated. Is it difficult? Yes. Is it doable? They have been doing for decades in another series.

Richard
Richard C is offline  
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one."
Quote
Old 10 Feb 2022, 21:03 (Ref:4098153)   #44
chillibowl
Veteran
 
chillibowl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Canada
winnipeg, canada
Posts: 9,718
chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!
speaking of smaller cars, and the R25 specifically as i brought it up in the other thread but really all of those cars from the mid to latter part of the 2000s were not always nice to look at with all their winglets and antennae.

the mind plays tricks maybe, but those smaller less wide cars weren't exactly providing better racing then what we are seeing today with the larger cars no?
chillibowl is online now  
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there
I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place
Quote
Old 10 Feb 2022, 22:04 (Ref:4098162)   #45
V8 Fireworks
Veteran
 
V8 Fireworks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,923
V8 Fireworks should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridV8 Fireworks should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridV8 Fireworks should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by chillibowl View Post
speaking of smaller cars, and the R25 specifically as i brought it up in the other thread but really all of those cars from the mid to latter part of the 2000s were not always nice to look at with all their winglets and antennae.
They varied, people got used to them I suppose:




Quote:
the mind plays tricks maybe, but those smaller less wide cars weren't exactly providing better racing then what we are seeing today with the larger cars no?
It's annoying that shape and proportions were defined by misguided regulations and not by engineering progression. Changes to the dimensional regulations of the cars from 1993 onwards like narrow cars, narrow tyres, rectangular nose box cross section, grooved tyres etc only seemed to make the cars worse (with notable exceptions like the X-wing exclusion zone which was a good idea, and the minimum radius rule for the sidepods which was a good idea).

Do people really think the narrow second car on grooved tyres with its FIA-mandated rectangular nose cross-section, looks better than the wide former car on slick tyres with its elegant round nose... Really?



The FIA only ever reduced the width of the rear tyres too, not the fronts. That's why when the tyres were scaled up equally front and rear in '17, we ended up with ridiculously wide front tyres.



Last edited by V8 Fireworks; 10 Feb 2022 at 22:34.
V8 Fireworks is offline  
Quote
Old 11 Feb 2022, 09:30 (Ref:4098206)   #46
S griffin
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 18,325
S griffin is going for a new world record!S griffin is going for a new world record!S griffin is going for a new world record!S griffin is going for a new world record!S griffin is going for a new world record!S griffin is going for a new world record!S griffin is going for a new world record!
Those cars with winglets were horrible. It really went too far and it was soo good when they finally got rid of them. I don't mind odd looking cars, like the 6 wheeled Tyrrell, just as long as the bodywork is clean. Shame they allowed some of those ugly winglets back in 2017, but they seem to have recognised their mistake and we will have cars with beautiful in 2022
S griffin is offline  
__________________
He who dares wins!
He who hesitates is lost!
Quote
Old 11 Feb 2022, 10:15 (Ref:4098219)   #47
Taxi645
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Netherlands
Posts: 979
Taxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridTaxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks View Post
Formula Two have been running these tyres for two seasons with no problems.

True, but the F2 cars don't have the the wake deflector on top off the tire like the new F1 cars which add, say 5cm to the height. 5cm is exactly the difference between 18 and the 16 inch wheel I'm proposing.

I will say that with the new cars the suspension attachment to the hub is now inside the new larger 18-inch wheels. I don't know if that would be possible with 16-inch wheels as well.


Quote:
Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks View Post
We have had five years of thrilling cars, stupid fast ("is that in fast forward?"), that produced racing at least as good as 2016. Those low downforce cars were like watching paint dry, they were just not exciting and thrilling.
Hold on, I'm not saying they should've stuck with the 2016 cars. I'm saying they should have launched the current ground effect cars in 2017 straight away as was originally the plan. I suspect the concept change by threat of red bull walking away of F1. I was quite disappointed in motorsport journalism not giving more attention to this mayor shift in philosophy on the 2017 rule change.

I would not be surprised as this or next year the cars will be equally fast as the previous generation and the year after they will be quicker still. So faster cars should not have been an argument against the ground effect cars.
Taxi645 is offline  
__________________
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.
Quote
Old 11 Feb 2022, 12:39 (Ref:4098240)   #48
Taxi645
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Netherlands
Posts: 979
Taxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridTaxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks View Post
Of course it would be better if the total diameter was still 670-680mm (and 645mm diameter on the front, which was Goodyear had, but Bridgestone used the full 660mm when they came into the spoort), of course it would be better if the front tyres were 245mm wide like in the 90's instead of 305mm and the cars therefore had a more rearwards weight distribution and were shorter.

The new rules originally had the front tyres at 270mm section width, down from the 305mm, but I guess the teams had their say and didn't want to redesign their stuff so much. The new rules originally had the maximum wheelbase at 3400mm, but the teams had their say and were only prepared to have a wheelbase of 3600mm (so ~100mm less rather than ~300mm less than 2021, wheelbase was actually one of the only dimensions of the car which was free choice under the old rules).
The larger 720mm diameter tyres make them look narrower than they are. So they would look better with a smaller diameter as well.

I wouldn't be against narrower front tires; less drag, aero disturbance and lower weight. Together with a lighter still 670mm diameter tire on 16-inch wheels with the same tire wall height as the 18-inch ones and think it would be an improvement in:

- Visibility.
- Weight.
- Lower centre of gravity.
- Less drag.
- Less aero distrubance.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Casto View Post
Now, wrap it in bodywork that requires you to not just see over the tires, but the fenders as well, then look through an oil streaked windscreen, put other slower cars around you and finally do it at night without the circuit being fully illuminated. Is it difficult? Yes. Is it doable? They have been doing for decades in another series.

Richard
The relevant question then is, is the drivers head in those cars equally low to an F1's car.
Taxi645 is offline  
__________________
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.
Quote
Old 11 Feb 2022, 13:13 (Ref:4098255)   #49
VIVA GT
Veteran
 
VIVA GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
England
Leicestershire
Posts: 5,647
VIVA GT is going for a new world record!VIVA GT is going for a new world record!VIVA GT is going for a new world record!VIVA GT is going for a new world record!VIVA GT is going for a new world record!VIVA GT is going for a new world record!VIVA GT is going for a new world record!VIVA GT is going for a new world record!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
T...
The relevant question then is, is the drivers head in those cars equally low to an F1's car.
I would say that the answer to this question is that it isn't. This doesn't mean that the problem can be blamed on the new (mandatory) tyres, the designers need to lift the drivers up a bit higher to compensate.
VIVA GT is online now  
__________________
Incognito: An Italian phrase meaning Nice Gearchange!
Quote
Old 11 Feb 2022, 13:52 (Ref:4098261)   #50
Richard C
Veteran
 
Richard C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,801
Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
The relevant question then is, is the drivers head in those cars equally low to an F1's car.
Image pulled from discussion elsewhere. Are they identical? No. Are they very close? Close enough to support my opinion? In my opinion absolutely. The position is slightly different all over, but the larger difference is leg/feet height and not eye height.



The reduction in visibility is real. The slightly taller tires and the aero bit that goes over it does reduce the sightlines from before. But... In the grand scheme of things your argument that this means (or is a strong argument for) moving to either narrower or shorter tires is empty because other top level series all the way up to saloon cars have it much much worse and drivers deal with it. And yes, there are accidents in prototype racing which can be attributed to visibility challenges.

Just extend your argument to Karts vs most every thing else. You clearly see over the wheels. You have excellent visibility. How are drivers able to make anything other than Karts work today? I am not sure if I can drive safely to the grocery store later today. I can't begin to see the corners on anything?

I think what you are seeing in that quote. Is the same comments you see when open wheel drivers move to closed cockpits. They commonly call out that they just can't do what they did previously (and probably privately wonder how anyone drives those cars quickly). But they just have to adjust their style. It is more challenging, but no so unsafe that all racing should be open wheeled with tiny wheels (i.e. Karts)

If you want a F1 visibility issues to try to solve, how about the challenges they face in seeing who is beside/behind them?

Richard
Richard C is offline  
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one."
Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

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


All times are GMT. The time now is 17:51.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Original Website Copyright © 1998-2003 Craig Antil. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2004-2021 Royalridge Computing. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2021-2022 Grant MacDonald. All Rights Reserved.