Lap Speeds F1 Vs ChampCar

[oziengineer]

Just a little note, i did some detective work the other week and compared the champcar fastest lap at Montreal (Bourdais, 1:20.840) was much slower than the F1 fastest lap(Barrichello, 1:13.622). It's quite extraordinary.

[oziengineer]

Thats a 7.218 sec difference. DAMN.

[dubby99]

geez 1:13 is very fast but all this speed comes from a tyre war and a buget that almost rivals NASA's space program.

[Kicking-back]

F1 has more downforce, lighter cars, stickier tyres and more power.

Go figure....!

[luke]

Champcars are also much harder to drive and also what KB pointed out above.
Also if they were not limited in the late 90s they would be a lot qucker.

[Kicking-back]

I dispute the suggestion ChampCars are harder to drive.

Most drivers who've done both say a ChampCar is a lot more forgiving on the limit than an F1 machine.

[Amar7605]

Maybe some of the reduction in F1 time could be due to the fact that F1 cars are built to turn on a dime quicker. Champ Cars seem to lag a bit when turning because the drivers have to brake earlier. In F1 the drivers are able to brake and turn later.

Add all of those milliseconds, plus the development of tires, and you have your 7 seconds at Montreal.

[macdaddy]

ChampCars are heavier, the laws of physics dictate that they'd be harder to slow down and/or accelerate. Coupled with the actual braking systems used, the engine power, the tires... It's quite easy to see why F1 cars are quicker.

[tramp]

actually no. champcars have superior specs like MUCH wider chassis,slicks and underbody aero...if the f1 machine is 7 sec faster then thats truly amazing.

food for thought: comparing a rotax and a shifter...the shifter is faster only by about a second or maybe just under 2, but the difference is larger than that of f1 and champcars. shifters have more power,stickier tyres and yes they 'shift'.

[Kicking-back]

Tramp - F1's grooved slicks are much stickier than ChampCar's slick slicks, the compound is a lot softer.

The narrower F1 chassis generates less drag, and the downforce provided by F1 wings gives more downforce than the ChampCar undertray.

That doesn't mean a ChampCar has superior specs.

It's an irrelevant argument anyway - it's not about being faster than another series, it's about being faster than the other guys in the series you're in!

[jjspierx]

Originally posted by Kicking-back
I dispute the suggestion ChampCars are harder to drive.

Most drivers who've done both say a ChampCar is a lot more forgiving on the limit than an F1 machine.

A Champcar is harder to drive in the fact that is more physical and wearing on the driver. But yes, a Formula 1 car is less forgiving than a Champcar to drive at the limits.

One of the main reasons an F1 car is harder to drive at the limits is because of its superior grip level. First off, the grip from their tires is hugely superior to Champcar. The more mechanical grip you have, the sharper the drop in traction when the tires are pushed beyond their limits(generally). That is why "drifters" use old hard tires, cause they are easy to slide because of the low grip level. Another reason for the massive difference in grip levels is the superior aero grip of a Formula 1 car. When an F1 car starts to operate at large slip angles, or when an F1 car starts to slide, the airflow over the wings and through the vanes starts to attack at a different angle than designed. This causes a dramatic loss in aero grip. This makes recovery from a slide much more difficult than in a Champcar which has dramatically reduced aero grip compared to F1.

F1 is lighter, has more HP, and they use carbon brakes which are VASTLY superior to Champcar, so the 7 second difference in lap times at Montreal does not come as a surprise to me in the slightest.

Tramp - I am not sure why you think Champcar has superior specs. A wider chassis does not necessarily mean superior, its just different. As for the slick tires, yes Champcar has slick tires, but they are still vastly inferior to an F1 tire which uses much softer compounds and different construction than a Champcar tire. This is mainly due to the fact that Champcar has 1 tire manufacturer so they don't really have to do an R&D to make the tires constantly faster to stay competitive like Michelin and Bridgestone in F1.

Also Tramp, as for your comparison of a shifter vs. a Rotax, at any track I've been too the difference between a Rotax and a shifter is usually more than a second. A 125cc Shifter, is the same size motor as a Rotax. Plus Rotax engines are designed to have torque, while a shifter only has high-end power, since you can shift to stay in the powerband.

[Snrub]

Part of the issue is that F1 has not reigned in the performance increases as it historically has whereas CART has not increased in performance due to regulations and series issues. Take a look at the F1 lap times, they've decreased massively. Compare how long they've been at the 3.0L engine compared to how quickly they changed from the 4.0L to 3.5L to 3.0L in the early to mid 90's.

I've brought this up several times, but if you go back a few years things would have been very different. F1 had atleast 100 hp less, CART had hundreds of hp more. F1 tires were FAR less sticky, CART tires were at tire war stickiness levels (althought that's no where close to current F1 stickiness). In the last few years F1 has had unprecedented levels of R&D spending and competition by manufacturers to improve aero/chasis performance.

As for "which spec is superior", there's no reason why everything F1 has done couldn't be done on a champ car and still have the undertray. I'm not saying champ car is "better", but in some respects they haven't limited the technology as much.

[tramp]

when i say,i mean as in 'CONCEPT'.the champcars tyres are hard not because they 'are supposed to be' but because much oney and talent isnt spent on em'. specs as a noun dont mean performance. formula 1 is called that because it is made on a set of rules.they are much compicated than chamcars rules.here 'complicated' means detailed. if formula 1 cars were built along champcar 'specs' or 'rules' they would be undrivable.

also power would make little on a race track(not a oval).power increase since lets say 1999 has made a difference of only about 1.5 seconds.adiing the fact that the 'increased' power because of regulations would be delivered by turbo engines= lesser difference....here another reason.modern champcar engines are more reliable and hence more money is spent on development.if they had more power then less development would take place coz champcars is poor. more time comes from mapping and other variables than 20 hp more power.

champcars dont have money,so less techno and hence better 'specs'.

Attack the posts, not the posters. Insults like this I've just editted will not be tolerated around here. Neither will that attitude.

[tramp]

MAY I ADD THE POINT ABOUT CHAMPCARS TYRES GIVING 'LESS DRAG' IS TRUE. BUT COMPARE THAT TO HOW MUCH CHAMPCARS GAIN BECAUSE OF AN UNDERBODY, AINT NO COMPARISON.NOW I KNOE F1 MAKES MORE DOWNFORCE.WITH AN UNDERTRAY THAT MAKES DOWNFORCE THEIR IS ALMOST 'NO' DRAG

DO NOT YELL AT US!
- macdaddy

[captain crunch]

Here's some food for thought- f1 teams spend 10 times as much as champcar teams, yet only gain 7 seconds in performance. Doesn't strike me as value for money, considering the minardis are usually 3 seconds or so off the pace....

[Hazard]

::double post::

[Hazard]

Somehow I've missed the point of this thread. At some point someone is saying that Champcars should be faster than F1 cars?

Well, they aren't as the opening gambit states - they were 7 seconds slower...so if it isn't the car it must be the driver right?

So if we stuck Michael Schumacher & Sebastian Bourdais in the same (unfamiliar) machinery - would we find Seb more than 7 secs slower than Schu? If you believe so, then yes - Champcars must be faster.

If not, Champcars are obviously slower than Formula One cars...sorted!

Here's some food for thought- f1 teams spend 10 times as much as champcar teams, yet only gain 7 seconds in performance. Doesn't strike me as value for money, considering the minardis are usually 3 seconds or so off the pace....

So we've got a car to replace the Reynard then and give Lola a challenge - if the PS03 could be made a CART legal chassis.

[evo]

Personally I don't see the point of a Champcar vs. F1 lap time thread. Who really cares? They are two totally different forms of racing.

[jj2728]

f1 cars have always been faster on road courses..it's been that way since the early 70s.....

[macdaddy]

This thread is nothing compared to the one that started when ChampCars first went to Montreal!

[Fogelhund]

It's the same old story. How fast do you want to go? It's all dependent on how much money you have.

Of course, a team like Ferrari spends more in a year, then the entire budget spent by OWRS AND all the teams. They better be faster for that kind of money. Champcars are pretty darned quick for the money.

[jjspierx]

Originally posted by evo
Personally I don't see the point of a Champcar vs. F1 lap time thread. Who really cares? They are two totally different forms of racing.

Two totally different forms of racing? I dispute that statement wholeheartedly. While there are major differences between the series, the fact remains they are both top-level open-wheel, high HP, road racing(primarily) series.

[jjspierx]

Originally posted by captain crunch
Here's some food for thought- f1 teams spend 10 times as much as champcar teams, yet only gain 7 seconds in performance. Doesn't strike me as value for money, considering the minardis are usually 3 seconds or so off the pace....

7 seconds is a LOT of time in terms of lap time performance between 2 cars. Toyota Atlantics are around 7 seconds slower than Champcar at some tracks, so for Formula 1 to be 7 seconds faster at Montreal is very significant and impressive. I personally can't wait to get more tire/engine manufacturers back so Champcars will start getting back towards their performance in the the late 90's.

[Phoenix1]

Just a quick thought - the Cosworths are detuned so they do not blow up and Bridgestone use a harder compound than the F1 version. Even the 'red tyre' gives an instant 1 second advantage.

[gttouring]

i love open wheel- and well i have too face it, as the porsche cup provides some of the best racing period- F1 some of the fastest and LeMans provides the thrilling battle, Champcars have racing as good as any, even if they are SuperFormulaFords- nothing lost really, it simply rules to watch them- and those sounds...!
the fact that the two series F1 amd Champcar are regarded as the best open wheel and "toppest" tier of racing is why the comparison rises time and again... but they are save for being open wheel- now that indy cars will race on road courses will there be a triple comparo of speed and times?
really all these cars are Blazingly fast, would we notice the difference one race after another? in the same race perhaps- but not one after another...
i would be curious as to exactly where the time is lost in a champ car and the speed graph, and the G's pulled
just to understand where the F1 speed is actually gained
because i doubt it is in the straight line speed, but for sure in the corners and the braking distance.
(it would be best to compare montoya and CDM's times though as they have driven both cars and the styles of driver is too off.