Comparison of 2006 and 2007 F1 cars

This is exactly the reason. The Speed commentators said the exact same thing as well. The idea of F1 getting slower each year is depressing, and quite frankly pathetic. I mean, what were the specific reasons given for the introduction of things that actually make the racing worse? What was the reason for going down from V12>V10 and now to V8? What was the reason for TC? How about grooved tires? It would seem like the people making these decisions aren't racing fans.

 

I think their main excuse for slowing the cars down is for the safety of the drivers. Which I can agree with, but at the same time the drivers know the risks when they get into the car. I'd love to see the cars have less restrictions, more speed, and more passing. However if it means more drivers getting injured then they're making the right decision.

 

i for one, prefer a 1 tyre supplier to the sport. this way, drivers go against drivers, engines vs engines and teams vs teams, w/out compromising safety ( Indy 2005 ).


but the way things are going, i think we should see slick tyres returning in a few years time. yes, faster speeds means more dangerous for the drivers, but come to think about it, thats what drivers job are for. they're paid millions to do it. of cos, i'm not saying that i'd be happy if a drivers crashes and injure himself because of high speeds.

but my point is, F1 is F1. it's supposed to be fast, challenging, and not for the faint of heart to drive those cars.

But, F1 nowdays are getting more boring. barely any overtaking, the race is decided in the pits, and it's like a parade from the start to finish. nowdays, it's all about being technical, who has the better strategy.

 

I don't see why every year F1 cars should be faster than last year. It's not about a speed race but about competition. I don't care if an F1 car goes 200 or 300 kmh along a straight as long as they can pass eachother. That's far more important IMO than speed. Not to mention the costs and safety aspects of higher speeds.

 

Yes they are getting slower. Slower cars are better than dead drivers.

 

I would prefer cars that were 99% as fast but made for more passing (while still being a constructors series).

 

Oh come on, none of this slippery slope nonsense. What was wrong with the speed of the cars in 2004-05? Did anyone die then?

 

+1

thanks to nowdays hi tech crash tests, drivers can walk away from a 300 km/h ..just shaken..

 

2004 was probably the year that F1 was the fastest. Making F1 slower isnt entertaining. It should always go up, not down.

 

It depends on which year you're talking about. If one tire maker has a bad year, all of their teams will suffer greatly. I'm for one make of tire per year.

 

and not stirred, , ha ha ha i made a funny

 

I hate to be blunt, but these guys are race car drivers. They know what they're getting themselves into when they climb into the car. No one I've ever heard of has thought driving fast was completely safe on any level. Especially when everyone else out there is going after the same goal you are. Racing is dangerous plain and simple. Perhaps instead of spending so much money on slowing the cars down, they should spend it on devising ways of advancing saftey with speed.

 

My previous post was intended for this quote. Sorry didn't catch it 'til it was too late.

 

good post!

 

The faster the cars get, the less passing we will see. It's already quite pathetic, but it could literally turn into ZERO passing, EVER. I would hate to see that.

We don't get the sensation of speed at home - at least not in terms of slight differences between speed in adjoining years. So the speed is just a lap time on the screen, or a max speed through the traps. Who cares, really? Other than just seeing that number?

I would take much slower cars with much more passing any day of the week. Slower cars would be the biggest way of making F1 have more passing.

 

Why can't a tyre supplier be an element of the team just as an engine? It might be an exaggeration, but along this line of thinking - if 1 tyre maker, why not 1 engine maker? And then if 1 engine maker, why not 1 chassis maker? etc. I think the more the better, makes for healthier and more attractive competition. I don't want F1 to head in the direction of A1GP, Formula Renault and the likes, where everything apart from the driver is standardised.

 

while i get your point, why i mentioned tyres should not be a decider, or else u want something like 2005? where the BS tyres teams were totally outclasses by Michelins? or back in 2002-2004, where the Scuderia and BS tyres wrapped up the championship with half the season to go.


look for yourself at the current standings this season. just 3 races in, and everything's so tight for the 1st time in years. plus, i don't want a good team, with good chassis and drivers only to be handicapped by underperforming tyres...