DRS or the new Active Aero. Good or just okay

The 2026 cars will have active aero.

 

Norris would have had to of been within 0.5s to have any chance of a DRS pass on Max.

Norris would have had to of been within 0.5s to have any chance of a DRS pass on Max.

Already proven on many tracks that DRS is no guarantee of a pass. re your proposal, how much faster, 0.001s/lap or ???? Not a workable idea.

 

So if a trailing car is marginally faster over 3 consecutive laps they get DRS. What if they are 5sec down, but only 0.1s/lap faster?

 

Currently with DRS there is still a modicum of skill involved in passing in many DRS zones, e.g. late braking. The 1 sec requirement to activate DRS does not in any manner suggest a pass can be made. The driver being passed has several options to prevent a pass. So what you just said now is that you have to be faster on 3 consecutive laps and be within 1 sec to get DRS. Seems like you just made it harder. If being faster is the only criteria then why not just have multi-lap time trials and forget about RACING.

 

Suzuka was exactly this, Q1-3.

 

Well, it all depends on the lenght of the DRS zone, too long and it´s too easy to pass. The problem is thar it´s difficult to fine tune this. Also low tyre degradation like in Suzuka reduces the chances of overtaking.

Personally I´m against the whole idea of the DRS, it´s too gimmicky. I think they should rething the aero to make DRS unnecessary, but that would mean a radical change in how a F1 car looks, probably without open wheels and so on.

 

Friggin go back to basic cars. Those damn things have too much of grip and too fat tyres right now.

 

Pre 2017 the racing was so much better. Less grip available under braking, cornering, accelerating = better racing. Apart from the wide cars looking good it really had zero benefit.

 

The current tyre problems is the result of having a single supplier, IMO.
Having a monopoly, Pirelli are not pushed to improve the situation.

 

A couple weeks ago there was a video where a 2004 car and a 2024 car lapped the same track within 0.2 seconds of each other one car overlaying the other.
2004 car was faster out of turns (1000 HP 600 Kg) by about 2½ car lengths
2024 car was faster into turns (1000 HP 800Kg and 25% larger underbody aerodynamics) by the same amount
The 2004 car looked alive
The 2024 car looked like grandma was driving.

Everything wrong with modern F1 is visible in that video.

Oh, and BTW it is not the width of the tires, it is the area under the car.

 

Agree except for the last point. Tyre width absolutely plays a part. More tyre = higher cornering speed, more grip under braking and accelerating. Especially under braking is where it's problematic, as braking zones are shorter thus overtaking is harder.

 

If you take 25% of the aero away (shorter cars) they would loose enough DF ...

It used to be that F1 cars (600 Kg) used around 18 PSI in the tyres (the Lauda era had them down in the 14 PSI range).
It is the weight of the cars that is driving tyre technology--and in my opinion--in the wrong direction.

 

I dunno, i just miss those nimble 2004 cars.

 

There is no simple fix that guarantees passing and good racing. The goal should be to make it better though.

Remember 2009. The cars were 2008 sized and still around 600 kg, slick tires were reintroduced, and the cars had a massive reduction in downforce. Teams would use 2007 cars with Monza wings to simulate the downforce levels of 2009. They even had adjustable front wings that drivers could control in the cockpit. This is the exact recipe that most are talking about and yet it wasn't some mind blowing year full of passing and great racing. The Bridgestone tires were very good that season too. Some cars even had ERS and refueling was still allowed. However those cars had an outwash aero design.

I always wonder we had the 2004 or 2005 cars (probably 05 with their reduced upper body aero) and gave them a good slick tire that could be pushed. Maybe a little more underbody body aero and of course DRS. Would that get close to formula that delivers good racing and is still fast as modern cars?

 

Yes, there is:: it is called "the convex hull"--it eliminates wings, winglettes, spoilers, diplanes, venturies, and other aero tid-bits.
Cars go faster on the straights
Cars go slower in turns
longer acceleration distances
longer braking distances
No silly pit stops to replace the nose

 

The need for DRS is a result of the aero designs. Outlaw them both and go back to big balls and slip streaming...that is what racing is about.

 

torn a bit here - limiting anything just puts you closer to spec series racing...

1- How about instead of more limits we just lift most of the design limits, it'll be chaotic for the first few years but it'll standardize based on outcomes
2- Active aero could actually benefit road going cars, why not allow some development
3- I like anything that would make the cars lighter, shorter and more nimble

As for the DRS change to 3 consecutive laps faster while within 1 second...that's a tall order with the aero effect of being within 1 second. You get wash out on the front and lose time. Maybe allow the trailing car to add aero throughout the lap to prevent tire overheating so they can follow more closely without penalty?

 

So you want a formula that resembles 1960?

1000+ hp in a bathtub with no aero stability. Not sure 400 kph down the Vegas straight would be safe.

You can't erase the knowledge of aerodynamics and the importance of it in motorsports. Even Moto GP are getting loaded with aero.

 

And have zero passes?

 

It was aero design that created the problem. DRS was the bad solution. I used to slip stream in vintage racing...you'd discover where you could make the pass, and where you could not...and it might take a couple of laps to set up the overtake, but you did it. Technology has not created better racing...just the opposite.