Car revisions ahead on safety grounds?

[Super Tourer]

A snippet in Motorsport News claims that rising speeds are prompting discussions on the future configiration of F1 cars.

Patrick Head is quoted as saying "There is a background discussion about mechanisms to pull cars back, maybe in 2006 or 2007"

These are rumoured to include 2.4 litre V8 engines and major aerodynamic changes.

It's worth noting that virtually every other speed reduction revisions have only been successful in the short term, as all they do is to focus new effort onto other areas of the car to claw back speed. Grooved tyres were implemented to curb speeds, but the recent tyre war has seen massive leaps in tyre technology and lap records and pole times are tumbling again.

However, it's interesting that the topic is arising again and will be even more interesting watching the teams try and reach agreement on any revision.

Time to bring out the poker table again I feel.

[Mr V]

Originally posted by Super Tourer


These are rumoured to include 2.4 litre V8 engines and major aerodynamic changes.

If this is the case, and i for one, hope they don't reduce engine power, the earliest this can happen is 2008 when the current concorde agreement expires.

Then of course, the FIA have to get the teams to agree for the new agreement

[Kicking-back]

Don't need teams agreement if its on "safety grounds".

Interesting times ahead.

The cars do need to be slowed - but I'm very taken with an idea of Frank Dernie's.

He reckons to improve overtaking they need more aero grip and less mechanical grip.

We've been hearing the opposite for years - so maybe they should test his seemingly radical idea.

[Stephen Green]

surely they already have more aero and less mechanical, so how can he say that will make for easier overtaking when we all know its not the case?

[Mr V]

Originally posted by Kicking-back
Don't need teams agreement if its on "safety grounds".

Engine regs are fixed till the end of 2007, a reduced engine size won't happen before then!

[Kicking-back]

Originally posted by Stephen Green
surely they already have more aero and less mechanical, so how can he say that will make for easier overtaking when we all know its not the case?

Aerodynamics are being heavily restricted all the time and it makes it increasingly difficult to get a tow.

Frank also sites the case of 82/83 when skirts were banned.

That saw aerodynamic downforce slashed massively and it didn't lead to more overtaking.

[F1Pete]

Bring back the turbo!

[Kicking-back]

Why?

[Jordi]

Cars are not too fast...

[Bononi]

Originally posted by Jordi
Cars are not too fast...

Yeah ! Bring back the turbo era.

[Sodemo]

Frank is just plain wrong.
Maybe he's going senile but if you watch any other formula like Formula Ford, which has no areodynamics, the racing is fantastic.
What we need is a

-70% reduction in downforce

-Increase braking distances by 25 metres

-Wider cars (pre 98)

[006_007]

Originally posted by The Monster
Frank is just plain wrong.
Maybe he's going senile but if you watch any other formula like Formula Ford, which has no areodynamics, the racing is fantastic.
What we need is a

-70% reduction in downforce

-Increase braking distances by 25 metres

-Wider cars (pre 98)

I think the series you are talking about that is close to what you describe is called CART?



I want to see the technology constantly being pushed, some of it will eventually get to a road car that I might own one day.......

[bluebeard]

hmmmmmmmmm.......... technology getting onto road cars.... now theres 1 way to increase braking distances, go back to steel brakes? i dont think its possible for carbon brakes to be used on a road car due to operating temperatures required or am i wrong in this thinking?

[swatty]

Bluebeard I beleive that Ferrari are using carbon fibre brakes on the Enzo, and that they work just as well at road speeds as they do on the track

[paulzinho]

I remember my Dad saying that they should put Formula Ford tyres on the cars, then you'd see them having fun and some pretty huge shunts!!!

Don't think he was being too serious though

[John Abrahamsen]

Put big turbo engines with 2000 hp and legalize groundeffect and huge jumbo wings, then we will se real racing imo . Maybe a few will die in the making but who cares .

[006_007]

Originally posted by paulzinho
I remember my Dad saying that they should put Formula Ford tyres on the cars, then you'd see them having fun and some pretty huge shunts!!!

Don't think he was being too serious though

That series is called NASCAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[f1atic]

Which would you prefer, basically unlimited technologically developed cars, or have the drivers be drivers?

As long as the majority seem to favor the concept of F1 bein all about technology, there will be little opportunity for a driver to actually do more than push buttons and steer. I know that is over simplifying it, but this takes me back to about 1996 or 97 when M$ took a vintage (from the early '80s) F1 car on a circuit. His comments afterward were absolute - "Driving that thing is dangerous! There are too many things that have to be done with the hands besides steering."

[006_007]

Originally posted by f1atic
Which would you prefer, basically unlimited technologically developed cars, or have the drivers be drivers?

As long as the majority seem to favor the concept of F1 bein all about technology, there will be little opportunity for a driver to actually do more than push buttons and steer. I know that is over simplifying it, but this takes me back to about 1996 or 97 when M$ took a vintage (from the early '80s) F1 car on a circuit. His comments afterward were absolute - "Driving that thing is dangerous! There are too many things that have to be done with the hands besides steering."

I can not think of anything that was as fascinating as the full song n dance fully active suspended Williams of the early-mid 90's. I remember all the problems they had developing it, when Nigel refused to drive it at his home race and they fitted the Judd powered williams with traditional setup for that one race, and how the system was embraced once the bugs were worked out.

Fascinating stuff!

[golem]

Hmm, what about air-restrictors like in Sportscars?
Another helper would be stating the use of titanium half shafts from diff to wheel of no greater than ??mm, and that the rotation speed of the wheel must remain at 1:1 to the rotation speed of the halfshaft.

That would limit torque, though whoever gets a hold of the best titanium would be able to use more torque so, most probably wouldn't absolutely work. But it'd go pretty close.

[GTV27]

I think reduced power (via smaller V8's) would have a limited impact on safety. Ignoring the open wheel/open cockpit issues (which are probably the most dangerous aspects of F1, but are traditional and therefore won't be touched), the high cornering speeds is the source of most danger.

To reduce cornering speeds we need to reduce grip - either mechanical or aero induced (or both).

The easiest and cheapest way that I can think of to do this is to make the tyres HARDER. I'd have to think that cutting the wings would help too (although, I'd be interested to hear Frank Dernie's view - he's no dill).

[Glen]

Originally posted by The Monster
Frank is just plain wrong.
Maybe he's going senile but if you watch any other formula like Formula Ford, which has no areodynamics, the racing is fantastic.
What we need is a

-70% reduction in downforce

-Increase braking distances by 25 metres

-Wider cars (pre 98)

Well, erm, I think he might just know a thing or two!

You compare to FF but make no effort to separate out other big differences... what about the fact that all FFs have the same engine with virtually identical performance? What about the tyres which can be over-driven without losing the grip (F1 tyres can be ruined in a single lap)? What about the point that the entire formula (FF) was devised to limit costs, and that therefore the teams are very much closer together? (btw, I do realise that FF has grown over the years some way away from it's cheap and cheerful roots.)

Why would you want wider cars? Surely slimmer cars are easier to get past?

[Gt_R]

I don't know about anybody else, but i for one would not like to see the engine displacement and engine cylinders to drop any further.

To slow cars down, let's just go for a weight increase of 100kg, then to make sure that those all the increase weight do not increase ballast and such, we can also increase the safety impact test standards. So we'd basically have a slower car, with better safety, and longer braking distance..

As for wider cars, besides the physical effects it has on the car, doesn't it make it "harder" to overtake especially on narrow tracks?

[golem]

Less engine power = slightly less downforce & slightly less corner entry speed. or it should do. The way I see it, each team searches for the optimum downforce/speed tradeoffs for their package, but when you drop the engine's power they'll want to drop downforce too, so they can get some more straight line speed back.

More weight is not what I'd call doable so long as any team is using ballast under the current regulations. It just increases the potential energy involved in a collision.

Allowing a non stressed, default perspex/carbonfibre boned canopy might be a start.

Dropping the allowable bodywidth and wing width would be the single easiest way but the money grabbers wouldn't have a bar of it, despite the fact it'd achieve the task at hand.

One way would be to determine maximum leading and trailing edges allowed by the rules for any bodywork, and the wings to be reduced to single elements. These two would produce drops in aero grip / drag ratio. Skinny tyres promote straight line speed over cornering speed but drop available braking grip so increase braking distances but decrease emergancy braking distances (though in F1 this is pointless, because if you're emergancy braking, chances are you're stuffed regardless as it is)

PS: I'm all for putting 2.2 litre 6 cylinders or less, and narrow ass tyres myself. Bring back the slipstreaming masters I say. Top speed be damned.

[Glen]

If less power = less wing then we'd see the Renault using far less wing and trading-off corner speed to get some straight line speed. But we don't - they use superior corner speed and traction to get a little head-start down the straights and then their lack of top end power doesn't hurt them so much. Therefore, smaller engines will not do much for corner speeds.