|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
6 May 2003, 08:33 (Ref:590640) | #1 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 4,071
|
Disgrace - New Chicane for Barcelona
http://www.etracks.freeserve.co.uk/News/news_id098.html
Why oh WHY are they doing this...it's already tough enough to pass on that track as it is...why ruin what's alreay there with this mockery... |
||
__________________
Don't let manufacturers ruin F1. RIP Tyrrell, Arrows, Prost, Minardi, Jordan. |
6 May 2003, 08:42 (Ref:590656) | #2 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 7,979
|
Oh my god...
|
|
|
6 May 2003, 08:54 (Ref:590669) | #3 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 5,867
|
Re: Disgrace - New Chicane for Barcelona
Quote:
|
|||
|
6 May 2003, 08:55 (Ref:590671) | #4 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 113
|
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!
|
||
__________________
You should have gone to Specsavers. |
6 May 2003, 09:06 (Ref:590682) | #5 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,294
|
Maybe, just maybe they could be correct in that it could help slipstreaming.
But seeing is believing. |
||
__________________
Sunderland Til I Die! |
6 May 2003, 09:12 (Ref:590685) | #6 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 11,291
|
Again I'll bring up the old argument, its not the tracks that need changing - its the cars...
|
||
|
6 May 2003, 09:17 (Ref:590693) | #7 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 113
|
Quote:
first on the list would be Nick Heidfield .... as for Ralf, he should be given more time preferably to the end of the season. |
|||
__________________
You should have gone to Specsavers. |
6 May 2003, 11:53 (Ref:590844) | #8 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 4,071
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
Don't let manufacturers ruin F1. RIP Tyrrell, Arrows, Prost, Minardi, Jordan. |
6 May 2003, 12:24 (Ref:590883) | #9 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,598
|
I can't understand why a modification designed to increase overtaking would be regarded a disgrace. Huh? The purpose is perfectly clear - to buch cars closer together before the long straight, thereby offering the opportunity to pass. What's wrong with that? The circuit has several other high speed corners, but very few slow ones - I think it is likely to improve the course.
|
|
|
6 May 2003, 12:39 (Ref:590899) | #10 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,727
|
Quote:
If we have them replaced by slow drivers, the chance that the other drivers can overtake the rookies will be definately greater than the chance that anyone can overtake the Germans. ------ But do you really prefer a series with a lot of overtaking over a series with a lot of top drivers? |
||
|
6 May 2003, 12:46 (Ref:590905) | #11 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 5,867
|
Don, you really wanna hear the answer to your question?
|
||
|
6 May 2003, 12:54 (Ref:590918) | #12 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 43,955
|
There was a similar discussion here: http://tentenths.com/forum/showthrea...threadid=36569
|
||
__________________
Brum brum |
6 May 2003, 13:19 (Ref:590967) | #13 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 5,577
|
It looks good to me. The trouble at the moment is that modern cars can't sit right under the rear wing of the car in front through medium/fast corners. By slowing up the last corner trailing cars will be able to get closer on the way out of the corner making turn 1 an easier overtaking point.
|
||
__________________
Brought to you by Glagnar's Human Rinds: "A-bunch-a-munch-crunch-a-human" |
6 May 2003, 14:18 (Ref:591029) | #14 | ||
Subscriber
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,281
|
I feel they are not going in the right direction. Cars are difficult to overtake: fix that (way less aero and more mechanical grip, as many drivers say), but please don't change tracks solely to fit these F1 cars.
We are losing great corners (last corner in Montmelo is exciting), and we are breaking circuits for the others categories (although that particular chicane maybe could be shortcutted for non F1 races). |
||
|
6 May 2003, 15:25 (Ref:591106) | #15 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 4,936
|
If we went to more mechanical grip and less aero, though, we'd need to back the power levels down to about 600hp.
I honestly think we're at a point where the progression of technology and the conditions under which good racing happens are just drawing farther and farther apart. There are going to have to be some very artificial and deliberate steps taken to make for more overtaking. What about ground effects or bias-ply tires? Wacky ideas, I know, but think, they might actually help. |
||
__________________
"Put a ****ing wheel on there! Let me go out again!" -Gilles Villeneuve, Zandvoort, 1979 |
6 May 2003, 15:40 (Ref:591125) | #16 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 11,291
|
They should just do what I suggested years ago, make the rear wing one single piece of bodywork of a pre-determined surface area - this way the purists are happy as teams still have "creativity" to produce superiour parts, and the fans of "racing" will be happy as the less areo would result in more overtaking, simple.
Last edited by Sodemo; 6 May 2003 at 15:40. |
||
|
6 May 2003, 16:00 (Ref:591147) | #17 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 5,867
|
Why don't you just try to be realistic? They just can't change the cars AND survive the process AND provide closer racing!!! It is easy. Adding a chicane is one time expense, and will be good for next years too. And cheap also. Changing the cars, the way you suggest (such as cut the aerodynamic grip etc) means 10 teams have to spend MORE for development, for the entire year, developing in other directions that they did not previously explored.
Want close racing? You mean the performances gap between teams to be reduced? Keep the regulation stable for several years, or if you REALLY need to change things make the transition gradually. |
||
|
6 May 2003, 16:25 (Ref:591192) | #18 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,598
|
Quote:
|
||
|
6 May 2003, 17:09 (Ref:591234) | #19 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 4,936
|
I was wondering when you two would show up to try and convince us that everything is just peachy.
I can't imagine any of us have any illusions that we can get as many passes for the lead in F1 as you'd get in the IRL. Nor would any of us want that! It's pointless and contrived. What I was frustrated about was how easy it was for Ralf to hold up _much_ faster cars, indeed while he was turning the slowest laps of all cars on the track! The medium-speed corners at Catalunya serve to emphasize the problems these cars have in following each other. Front downforce is at such a premium that even following in the slightest wake of the car in front will produce understeer, forcing drivers to back off the throttle. Just look, for once, at some races from the '70s, or even the '80s. Cars were able to follow _much_ more closely. You can't pass a guy when you can't even get up behind him. But the power levels might be too high to cut the downforce. So what about ground effects? They're not so suspectible to disturbed airflow, and they'd leave lots of room for designers to innovate. |
||
__________________
"Put a ****ing wheel on there! Let me go out again!" -Gilles Villeneuve, Zandvoort, 1979 |
6 May 2003, 17:16 (Ref:591240) | #20 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 11,291
|
Im sorry I totally disagree.
If the FIA wasn't so stupid as to reduce mechanical grip and increase reliance on aero grip in 1998, we wouldn't be having this conversation. It was the FIA's fault when they introduced the ridiculous tech rules for 1998. If they had reduced the areo then, - 6 years later ie now, we may have had a level playing field. Don't forget, the less reliant the cars are on areo in the first place the closer the pack will be, as Ferrari have brilliant front / rear wings giving them amazing levels of downforce, take this away and your left with the grip from the tyres which is the same for everyone. So I totally disagree with that sentiment that removing the areo isn't the answer, it IS the answer. It would allow cars to follow through high speed corners, and would reduce the performance gap as the "top teams" would loose their aero advantage, and be left with mechanical tyre grip - which everyone has. |
||
|
6 May 2003, 17:19 (Ref:591244) | #21 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 6,038
|
That might not be as bad as it looks at first......
Those last two highspeed corners spread the field out, as you cannot go through there too close to the guy infront. Thus, when the cars come onto the track they are fairly strung out. A slow speed chicane might help bunch up the cars before they get onto the front straight and head for a passing spot! |
||
__________________
"I used to hate writing, but now I enjoy it. I realized that the purpose of writing is to inflate weak ideas, obscure poor reasoning, and inhibit clarity. With a little practice, writing can be an intimidating and impenetrable fog!" - Calvin and Hobbes |
6 May 2003, 17:22 (Ref:591248) | #22 | ||||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 5,867
|
Quote:
And why do you refuse to accept a common sense thing, even my 4 years old niece is able to get it. YOU JUST CAN'T FORCE MINARDI TO DEVELOP A GROUND EFFECT OR ANY OTHER WINGLESS CAR Actually they do have enough trouble building a car that they do have an idea how to build. I mean, you CAN force them, but to expect them to actually build it is stupid. Sorry. Quote:
Last edited by Red; 6 May 2003 at 17:23. |
||||
|
6 May 2003, 18:19 (Ref:591309) | #23 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 4,936
|
Quote:
Minardi will be dead in another season or two no matter what the rules are! Cripes, you don't even _like_ Minardi! If they can't afford to build the car, Renault sell them last year's! They'll be a hell of a lot closer on pace as well! Should the rules _never_ be changed just to keep Minardi on the grid? Hell, they did away with the 107% rule. What's next, a chassis and aero freeze for three seasons like they have in Champcars? I doubt you'd like that! Also, a ground effects car need not be wingless. Typically front wings were only removed for very fast circuits. Brabham, I believe, was the only team who ran the majority of the schedule without the front wing. More realistically, ground effects would bring the noses back down to the pavement, and front wings would be limited to single elements. Obviously Alonso wasn't going to catch Schumi. Then again, if Ralf hadn't held them both up for laps, things might have been different. Monster- My line of thinking is that downforce was reduced several times in the '90s, and it did little to improve the racing. Indeed, Jean Alesi felt that the dramatic reduction in 1996 made overtaking much more difficult. The level of downforce is not such a problem, but rather the vulnerability of the current cars to disturbed airflow, as well as overall aerodynamic efficiency. And if you remove a lot of downforce, you're going to slow the cars down, and drivers will be braking for corners they've been taking flat out for years. If you take away downforce and change nothing else, you're not going to be able to take Eau Rouge flat, for one thing. Last edited by Lee Janotta; 6 May 2003 at 18:21. |
|||
__________________
"Put a ****ing wheel on there! Let me go out again!" -Gilles Villeneuve, Zandvoort, 1979 |
6 May 2003, 18:35 (Ref:591329) | #24 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 11,291
|
Quote:
I think Jean and the boys found it harder to overtake possibly because the entire nature of F1 changed in 1994 and into 1995. The races became a series of sprints, dictated by fuel stops rather than race craft. It was also the start of the FIA's attack on the circuits, castrating many of the better corners, and slashing straights. And lastly, I don't think I want Eau Rouge to be taken flat, it should be just almost flat, and taken flat for the brave boys. |
|||
|
6 May 2003, 20:14 (Ref:591484) | #25 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 4,936
|
'95 and '96, actually, but yeah, you're right on that. The point about Jean Alesi's complaints about the lack of downforce still hold true, though.
'95 was the lower rear wing, '96 was to reduce the size of winglets. Getting rid of refueling could certainly improve things once again, but that's a whole other rant. I suppose backing down the overall downforce somewhat wouldn't hurt, if it's done in conjunction with other, positive changes. I'd want slicks back, for one thing, and wider cars, for more mechanical grip... And to give the more exuberant drivers an edge. Last edited by Lee Janotta; 6 May 2003 at 20:17. |
||
__________________
"Put a ****ing wheel on there! Let me go out again!" -Gilles Villeneuve, Zandvoort, 1979 |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Pitlane Saftey Disgrace. | bazil | Australasian Touring Cars. | 30 | 7 Feb 2005 11:31 |
F12000 - A Disgrace on the PC | Buckshot | Virtual Racers | 2 | 15 Apr 2000 20:11 |