Max Mosely in sane suggestion shock!

[Sodemo]

Taken from autosport.com...

"Max Mosley is advocating a massive reduction in downforce and a return to slick tyres in a bid to bring overtaking back to Formula 1.

As well as drastically reducing the costs involved in competing at the top of the sport, the FIA president is also determined to increase the amount of wheel-to-wheel racing in F1".

Whoopie!

[Keith Wheeler]

Is it April 1st?

[luke]

Originally Posted by The Monster

Taken from autosport.com...

"Max Mosley is advocating a massive reduction in downforce and a return to slick tyres in a bid to bring overtaking back to Formula 1.

On the ovals CART originaly thought less downforce made the races more exciting, and there was uneventful races, then the IRL have plenty of downforce, therefore wheel-to-wheel exciting racing.

But I know this is oval racing not road racing, but could it mean the same? that less downforce could mean less overtaking?

[Testure]

The suggestion from my paper copy of Autosport here is: "Very substantial reduction in downforce (e.g. down to 10 per cent of current levels)". That'd give an F1 car about the same aerodynamic profile as a breeze block, I think.

Luke - not everybody likes the kind of aero-controlled oval racing that the IRL provides.

[Super Tourer]

I think that suggestion came from BAR, in the Feb issue of F1 Racing two BAR engineers did a Q&A article whereby their opinion was that a 30% to 40% reduction in aero would have 'little effect on the racing spectacle' - their reckoning was that it would take a 90% cut to produce 'significant' improvement - however it would also see the cars slow by 15 to 20 secs per lap!

We seem to be in peak 'kite flying' time as far as suggestions go, we've heard it all before, time after time - we need someone to impose some of the suggestions and mean it.

By the end of this year we should have a clearer idea what form F1 will take in the future, there will be plenty of pitches, more kite flying and negotiation before then though.

[James North]

I dunno...

The thoguht of F1 lapping slower than makes such as Gp2, and F3000, and very possibly F3 if we aren't careful, is pretty lame.

[Knowlesy]

It would be odd if F1 was slower than GP2, given that they race at the same weekends. That would be mildly dissapointing really, wouldn't it?

[luke]

Originally Posted by knowlesy

It would be odd if F1 was slower than GP2, given that they race at the same weekends. That would be mildly dissapointing really, wouldn't it?

And the fact it's a support series, and supposedly the last step up to F1.

[Dog Faced Boy]

For me reducing downforce and speed is not the answer. I have two suggestions.

1) Rather than reduce the downforce just change the regs to make the aerodynamics cleaner/simpler and get rid of the dirty turbulace coming off the back of cars. This would get back to the days where cars created a sizeable hole in the air allowing drafting and easier overtaking.

2) Create some sort of variable on engine power. Im not advocating the return of turbos but in those days you could whack the boost up to go on a charge or overtake so drivers could be faster in some parts of the race and not others. I don't know if it would be possible but some sort of fuel mixture dial could be added so you could richen up the fuel to go fast and the reduce it for conservation. The amount of fuel could be limited so you couldn't run all race on the richest mixture.

What d'yall think?

[luke]

Originally Posted by Dog Faced Boy

For me reducing downforce and speed is not the answer. I have two suggestions.

1) Rather than reduce the downforce just change the regs to make the aerodynamics cleaner/simpler and get rid of the dirty turbulace coming off the back of cars. This would get back to the days where cars created a sizeable hole in the air allowing drafting and easier overtaking.

Indeed! Also make the cars wider, not for more grip, but so the cars are wider there for more slip stream avaliable.

[Raglanparade]

Ferrari already run a fuel mixture system or something similar. I remember seeing a photo of a Ferrari wheel from 2001 or 2002, and it had that feature on it.

In 2004, they could turn it up, use a heap of fuel, pit 4 times, and still win
or they could leave it turned down, use less fuel, and pit 2 or 3 times.

[Dog Faced Boy]

Not if they limit the fuel!

[Sodemo]

If they cut the aero by 90% they would no doubt get back 20% of the 90% cut out at least...
Combine this with increasing the width of the cars and giving them back 1992 sized slicks and the cars wouldn't be that much slower, just that the grip comes from the tyres rather than the aero.
Rather makes a mockery of the post - tech regs 1997, when all they needed to do after the 1997 season was reduce the aero rather than mess with the tyres / car width.

[Dog Faced Boy]

Yup

[Peter Mallett]

Originally Posted by The Monster

If they cut the aero by 90% they would no doubt get back 20% of the 90% cut out at least...
Combine this with increasing the width of the cars and giving them back 1992 sized slicks and the cars wouldn't be that much slower, just that the grip comes from the tyres rather than the aero.
Rather makes a mockery of the post - tech regs 1997, when all they needed to do after the 1997 season was reduce the aero rather than mess with the tyres / car width.

Ok but let's just ponder that for a moment.

They can go seriously fast through corners but the faster thay go the less grip they have (more slip). The opposite of the current theory which says you have little mechanical grip thus you must increase the aerodynamic grip. Therefore (with less aero grip) it needs more driver input to control it.

[Marbot]

Champ cars are around 8 seconds a lap slower than F1 cars(Montreal comparison)but you wouldn't know it to watch it.They tend to slide around more,less aerodynamic grip,more confidence in mechanical grip,(when the aero grip lets go on an F1 car mechanical grip as already been exceeded).They use the "push to pass" button which seems to be a popular idea,60 seconds of extra power to use at the drivers discression.They also look like "racing cars", the wider track giving them a more aggressive stance.
I'm not saying Champ cars are better but they can be entertaining to watch and F1 could learn from it rather than dismissing it as a lesser series.

IMO the FIA have gone the wrong way with the regs,aero should have been cut down much more and tyres should have had the grooves taken away,but there you go.

[Dodgy Dave]

A fuel limit would be interesting.

I think that there should be no limit on engine capacity or configuration either. With a fuel limit, power for all engines should be aproximately the same.

Obviously the rule should only allow one size and configuration per manufactuer per year(to stop the big teams designing a different engine for every circuit).

Imagine the mixed bag of engines
Do you build a torquey but heavy 4litre that revs to 14300?
or a high reving light weight compact 3 litre at 19000 rpm? or a comprimise 3.5 litre that revs at 16300.

Can you visualise a 4litre Ferrari out accelerating a 3 litre Renault out of a turn, and then watching the lighter Renault out braking the Ferrari at the end of the straight.

Well its just a thought.

[Mr V]

Originally Posted by Super Tourer

however it would also see the cars slow by 15 to 20 secs per lap!

Yep, i read that too, and as the guys (Gary Savage and Willem Toet) pointed out, 15-20 seconds a lap slower wouldn't be what F1's all about, back to the drawing board then!

[Armco Bender]

Name any measure introduced over the last 20 years to slow cars down that has actually slowed cars down?.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Armco Bender

Name any measure introduced over the last 20 years to slow cars down that has actually slowed cars down?.

Pit lane speed limiter.

[Knowlesy]

[Pondo]

Originally Posted by Mr V

Yep, i read that too, and as the guys (Gary Savage and Willem Toet) pointed out, 15-20 seconds a lap slower wouldn't be what F1's all about, back to the drawing board then!

I think F1 needs to think what it's supposed to be about - if it's just about creating the fastest, most advanced car, why not reintroduce slicks and active suspension? IMO, "The Show" has to be considered, and I'd love to see an attempt to reduce dependance on aero, which would hopefully make the racing closer and also make it easier to see the driver driving, so to speak. I've never been particularly excited to see an excellent piece of traction-control software at work.

Also, fuel restraints and open engine choice - why not?

[Sodemo]

Just a question. This 90% cut, what would this equate to in terms of Kg of downforce lost?
Take Monaco for example, would that be an example of running 100% downforce, if so what would Monza dictate - 40%, 30% of the whole potential downforce?

So are we talking about making the cars have less downforce than in Monza setup trim?

[Marbot]

I think that what constitutes a 90% cut in aero would have to be decided by the TWG,i think they do tend to work these things out in terms of actual KG,s of downforce lost rather than just reducing area sizes,remember wings are used as ad hoardings so the teams won't want wings to disappear completely.

And yes, i think the level of downforce would be below that run at Monza,but not for the first time.

[Inigo Montoya]

Here's a novel idea to improve racing in F1: Convince Ferrari's main rivals to wake up and make a competative car...