we all seem to agree that F1 needs some changes, currently theres little overtaking, too many "parades" etc etc so what would you suggest would be an ideal formula? i say massively reduce the aero - single element and narrower wings. narrower cars no driver aids at all engine - any cylinder configuration from 2 - 16 size limit somewhere between 3000 and 4000cc normally aspirated much lower rev limit - 12000 sounds about right up to 6 valves per cylinder any valve actuation method
I think changes would be nice, but some of the things you proposed seem to have no purpose. Limit the number of valves per cylinder? Why??? Here is what I think for engines: - Any engine configuration they want - forced induction, 1 cylinder, diesel, whatever. - Set a max hp limit (can be varified on a dyno, and maybe in the neighborhood of what today's cars have). This will encourage teams to pursue very efficient engines without them suffering a performance loss against somebody who chose, say a W16. The benefit would be that there is an incentive to develop efficient, high hp engines. If they are more efficient, they can have less fuel on board, or fewer pitstops. The extra benefit would be crossover into our hobby, where we could someday have performance cars that are efficient, rather than a Honda with three D batteries.
when did you see a road car engine that revs to 19000rpm ? when was the last time slick tyres were allowed on the road ? now if you take into account that racing is supposed to improve the breed (and F1 is the pinnacle of racing) then why bother introducing things that have no use on anything bar a specialist racing car. besides there have always been limits and tbh you need them. you need a weight limit you need engine limits you need tyre limits etc etc your idea of limiting power (not engine size/types etc) is impossible to regulate. have you any idea how difficult it would be to keep an engine to a certain defined power, air pressure and temps will make power fluctuate quite a lot. its just impossible to do. you need everyone reading from the same book - otherwise you will never have close or fair racing. and thats what most ppl want to see - close racing with plenty of overtaking opportunities. i dont want to see yet another procession thats won or lost in the pits and i feel changing the rules "could" achieve that
I have to admit, for everyone saying F1 needing changes, this is the best season of recent history. Lots of controversy and some really exciting races. I think F1 wanted anyone but Ferrari the past few years and they are getting it. If BMW gets stronger it could be a three way fight next year and towards the end of this year
oh yeah its a good season. we have several drivers doing well including a rookie we have several teams in contention, and one or two others pushing forwards but the actual action on the track is limited - we still have little overtaking except in the rain, and most races are still won/lost either during qualifying or in pit stops
I like the suggestions to eliminate any aero which results in disturbance to the trailing cars. However, I think the engine configuration suggestions may be just whistling in the dark at this point. While much of the information we receive is focusing on the engine costs, there are also "green" measures and fuel conservation issues that are pushing the talk of 4-cylinder turbo vs the 8-12 cylinder engines we all desire. I wonder sometimes if we're going to see a return to the ground-effects turbo cars from the early-to-mid 80's.
the cars should have unlimited power and aero with v12 NA engines. F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of motorsports I hate how they are constantly trying to slow the cars down. All they need to do is make more tracks that are more conducive to overtaking and get rid of the stupid tracks (like the hungaro-ring) where it's impossible to pass anyone unless they make a mistake. Problem solved.
I am going to be crucified here but think that engine size, rpm's , etc should be free. Limit total fuel quantity for the race. This allows free thinking as to each teams way to produce the most efficient way of getting power. What the world needs is more efficiency, not Horsepower. F1 can lead the way. There are currently fuel tank quantity limits, and we see drivers use fuel efficiency strategies now. Aero packages that reward drafting not penalise it. A point system that rewards ALL teams AND drivers in a race. ( Look to NASCAR ) Teams ( united ) should have a 49% say in the way the sport is conducted. The FIA 49%. That leaves me with 2%
+1 [As usual, the "reports of the death of F1 continue to be greatly exaggerated" IMHO] Also +1 - Except its *always* been that way in F1 - Sure, the "super-efficient aero" nowadays gets 'em a little screwy in "dirty" air, but that's "progress" I guess.... Brings to mind a GV quote: "You want more overtaking? - Then run on F3 tires, that'll increase braking distances, and thence increase overtaking." Cheers, Ian
Its impossible to build a track condusive to overtaking and you dont have to if you limit the amount of aero. Without limiting aero, the track could be 1 mile wide but there will always be a racing line 1 car wide and with no limits to aero then you will always have the same thing as today....Kimi was fast and most times faster than Lewis but could not pass.
pretty much spot on. i do think you could make a track where its easier, but not easy (if u get me) todays aero packages simply dont allow the car to work in dirty air. ah now we arent in agreement. tbh kimi in my mind didnt even get close enough to have much of a look, let alone try a pass. at no point did LH ever look like he was having to drive at 100% and the commentators (and race reviewers) all seemed to think he had a little bit more in the bag should he have needed it
not sure about always, ok its never (in modern times) been as easy as other formats BUT imo its getting worse an worse.
My solution: flat bottom cars, single element wings, slick tires, and reduced engine displacement under 3 litres with fewer cylinders, with the engines based on production blocks with turbos permitted on engines of 1.5 litres. Here is my explanation: in my opinion, I thought it was great in the early 80s when Brabham ran BMW engines that were a near production block design of an inline 4 with turbos. I would allow for 4 or 6 cylinders, and the larger displacement engines could be naturally aspirated and either inline or a V-6. An inline engine would allow for much more compact bodywork around the engine, and I would love to see Honda, Mercedes, Ferrari, etc. sell cars with a basic engine design that would be for homologation purposes. I really belive that enthusiasts like us would be better served if there was more of a link between the cars we drive and what is in F1. Aside from Ferrari and to a lesser extent Mercedes, we really don't see that happening. The biggest problem that I would forsee is the production changes that would be required from a mass-production factory level in order to accomodate those changes, but if Toyota is spending over $300M a year, at least they can hope to get more of the money back than they have been up until now. We will not get rid of wings alltogether because those are the most profitable billboards in the world, but we can change how much aerodynamic effect those billboards have on the performance of the cars.
Slicks No refueling No electronic driver aids No limitations on number of cylinders or maximum RPMs Jack
Vastly decrease the aero package Full slicks This will make for increased mechanical grip and allow for closer racing. Reduce driver aids/TC/diffs etc. This will allow for more driver mistakes and allow those "chance" passes etc. Allow "regenerative" power devices and hybrid systems Imagine going into a corner and having the heat/energy normally wasted from braking, transfered into something that gives a "boost" coming out of the corner, and allow hybrid systems. The reasoning for these two things, for me, would be the trickly down effect. The F1 teams would find out how to make these systems incredibly effecient and powerfull. Much quicker than a traditional car company. The technology would mature quicker and would end up in road car much sooner than otherwise.
