F1 Racing

F1 has devolved into a battle of qualifying. The current format is really good and produces lots of cars circulating on the track all of the time. With the lack of overtaking, races are really decided during qualifying and anyone who starts further than the third row has no realistic chance of winning. The 10 spot penalty system is really punitive beause it effectively disqualifies the penalized driver from contending. Give that modern F1 cars are so good and that the difference between the best and the worst is relatively small, races will never become exciting.

I propose that they run qualifying on Sundays, extend the sessions and have more cutoffs to progressively eliminate cars 4 at a time until you have the final two in front. Run the race right after qualifying and limit it to one hour. That way we can get some excitement on a Sunday rather than the boring parade that happens every two weeks, especially at the older narrower tracks in Europe.

 

I propose we dump ALL existing rules and go back to the ruleset that was in place in 1975 (or so) except in the areas of fuel cell safety (keep those), and allowing carbon fibre monococques.
Bring back the Flat-12, the Alfa, the Matra, the DFV.
Put an actual clutch and shifter in the car.
Dump ALL 'telemetry'.
Mandate a higher weight.

(Then Whisky wakes up, realizes it's all a dream....)

 

The only time I'm remotely in favor of reversed grids is in this instance. Flip the grids based on season standings. I know it's completely artificial, but no more so than 2-race engine rules, strict engineering limits and arbitrary penalties.

 

1. No set of fundamental racing rules (qualifying, tire compounds, penalties for engine changes, maximum lap times in qualifying session 3 while burning off your race start fuel level so you can change tires and take 2 fast laps.......gee whiz, etc.) should take more than 60 seconds to explain even for slow talkers like Bernie.

2. The rules shouldn't radically change every damn year. The FIA and Formula 1 talk "reduced cost" but then they change the formula every season forcing teams to design and build new chassis and drive trains (or scramble to sign vendor contracts) to chase the rules and stay competitive.

3. Pick a formula which encourages technology development to ensure F1 remains the premiere open-wheel racing series and keep the cars safe.

Install Eddie Jordan in place of Bernie......now that would be entertaining!

 

1. Yes

2. Yes

3. Yes

I like the EJ suggestion.

 

2 and 3 are not mutually exclusive.

3 - what on earth do you think got f1 into this problem ?

 

well i suppose i like Flav's idea. 2 races, one afternoon. 45 mins per race. winner of 1st race starts, last ala reverse grid. sounds perfect to me.


of cos, go back to basics, and no to V8s or V6s

 

You don't get to see qualifying. "Qualifying" for an F1 race happens in back rooms with Bernie/Max.

Did Ide ever get within 7% of the pole lap time? But you can't drop anybody from the grid, because only the pre-qualified (by money) teams can put a car there.

Get rid of the Concorde Agreement stuff.

Proposed new F1 rules:
1) You have to build your own car
2) You have to run a qualifying lap within 7% of the pole time.
3) The fastest 30 cars get to run.
4) (width, length, weight limits)
5) The driver's environment must withstand an impact at the highest speed gate velocity.
6) If parts fall off your car (other than in a collision), you're disqualified.
7) The first guy across the finish line wins. (Wins the Grand Prize -- or Gran Prix, en francaise)
8) Everyone else loses. (There are no points for second place)

Did I miss anything?

Yes, this means a Jim Hall can come out of nowhere in mid-season with a major innovation and throw the championship into turmoil.

It wouldn't be boring, though, would it?

(Besides, a 2J "vacuum cleaner" would help with all those marbles on the track. )

 

F-1 needs to be more technically innovative.... yes to 12 cyl, 16 cyl.... ceramics, hydrogen fule cells, electric motors, etc... movable aero, fans, ground effects etc.. no minimum weight ... just dictate the minimum survival cell for the driver, and that the driver has to be in control of the vehicle at all times. open it up to any possible technology that works.

Thats how you get ahead... not by sticking to dumbed down formulas like now. GP2 is at least 4 liters 8cyl... so whats so differnet from F-1???

 

Where have you been these last 15 years?

We've been saying the same thing since the early 1990s...

 

I've read many complaints about this year's Monaco race, but I actually enjoyed it! I've accepted the fact that the pole sitter at Monaco has a pretty damn good chance of winning barring any unforseen circumstances. If F1's rocket scientists have reduced the sport to driver vs. track (actuallly car vs. track) instead of driver vs. driver, then why not pit your skill against the only track that hasn't been watered down over the years. (Of course, that will change the minute something unfortunate happens.) We've seen Imola, Hockenheim, and Barcelona castrated, at least Monaco's tradition has saved it, for now...

 

Lots of fun! Fix the passing problem 100% with one rule change.

The only other-way to get a pass in F1 is to hope for a rain day.

F1 isn't a sport... its a TV show (unless you have your own private jet)
... they need to tweak their show! Bring back the passing

 

Get rid of Aero and put in Mechanical Grip and see how much overtaking your going to have.

 

I think the biggest problem on the technical side is that the FIA can't decide if they want to keep the old stuff or get the new one. Aerodynamics, for example, are on the one hand so sophisticated and sensitive that you can't overtake without getting in serious problems, on the other hand, FIA bans the developments making the cars faster (such as flexible wings). Same with the engines. I think what F1 really needs is a deciscion whether a) stick to old-school-driving, but then: please get the clutches, manual gearboxes etc back, reduce aerodynamic drag and increase mechanical grip, or b) open it up for new technologies such as hybrid engines and remove silly restrictions. THAT would really be interesting.

 

Why has F1 now become responsible for global warming? The state of California produces in one day the output generated by all motor sports in one year! Automobile manufacturers (not to mention responsible governments) should be looking for clean energy alternatives that do not depend on Max Mosley's desire to destroy F1...

 

Wouldn't "technically innovative" be smaller engines with more power and fewer emissions? WRC has the right formula IMHO...the new Mitsubishi EVO X road car will have 350hp out of 1.9 liters...

 

turning at 8000+ RPM, producing massive emmissions.

Technically innovative would be a complete non-fosil fuel that can carry the cars for the entire 1 1/2 hours of a race without refuling and without needing new tires.
If the rule would come no more pitstops for fuel, we will see those engines in 2-3 years and I bet at racing speed similar to what we have today.

The banana peel in the flux capacitor becomes more and more a reality that "back to the future".

 

Formula 1 has always claimed to be the motor of automotive engineering. Why should this development stop now? If F1 becomes conservative, it will die. To survive, implementing state-of-the-art technologies like hybrid is imperative. And, imho, it would greatly enhance the sport.

 

The problem with Formula 1 today is that it has become less innovative yet more technologically extreme. F1 has taken the gasoline piston driven engine to an incredibly high level of development, but it lacks relevance to everyday vehicles as a developmental test bed, other than in the electronic realm. They continue to fine-tune an old technology as dictated by the rules.

An interesting interview took place on Autoline Detroit with Johan de Nysschen, Executive Vice President of Audi of America where he indicated that Audi felt that F1 was "extreme engineering".
http://www.autolinedetroit.tv/autoline/archives.php
The Audi focus on high performance diesel in the R-10 has relevance to their model line so they develop it. F1 has become too expensive for what an automotive company can get out of it and without changing the rules to allow more flexibility with fuels, engine types, All wheel drive and other factors, it runs the risk of slowly fading into boutique racing class. The adage of "win on Sunday, sell on Monday" has never applied to F1. The F1 adage should be "win on Sunday while developing the car to sell on Wednesday" and it is not currently doing that.

 

they should go back to the old way of starting a race - have the drivers line up on one side of the road, cars on the other, and have them run across the road and jump in and go

why/when did they do away with that?

 

In Sports Cars they did away with it when they required seatbelts to be done up properly after the John Woolfe crash at LeMans in 69. F1 has always been a standing start.

 

AGREE!!

My take on the present situation between Max and Bernie is that it is Max's job to make shure no one gets killed! As a death may 'compromize the financial potential of F1' Or perhaps worse, a lawsuit over a death could seek to empty Bernie's deepest pocket.