News

Horner: F1 should be polar opposite of Formula E

Discussion in 'F1' started by Bas Jaski, Aug 9, 2017.

  1. daytona355

    daytona355 F1 World Champ

    Mar 25, 2009
    11,122
    London
    Full Name:
    Sid Korshak
    Why is it that some on here have suddenly decided to award themselves the title of Racing Master-Race? Christ almighty, tif shares an opinion with many - doesn't mean he is wrong if it doesn't happen to be the same as someone else's. He snarked back because a few have been less than friendly to him previously, and I didn't think we could start about calling each other trolls these days, or am I out of date on that one?
     
  2. Bas Jaski

    Bas Jaski Two Time F1 World Champ

    Mar 24, 2008
    28,636
    Portugal
    Full Name:
    Bas
    +1
     
  3. william

    william F1 World Champ

    Jun 3, 2006
    13,021
    England
    Full Name:
    William Denoyelles
    For a long time acting as the self-appointed censor here.
     
  4. TifosiUSA

    TifosiUSA F1 Veteran
    BANNED

    Nov 18, 2007
    8,370
    Kansas City, MO
    Full Name:
    DJ
    Oh Jaclyn, no need to get your panties in a wad now. Besides, I thought we were supposed to ease up on the "snark?"

    :D
     
  5. PSk

    PSk F1 World Champ

    Nov 20, 2002
    17,673
    Tauranga, NZ
    Full Name:
    Pete
    But no actual racing on the track, ie. passing or even challenging for a position ... our point.

    And no they were not always pushing 100% between fuel stops, if stuck behind another car they were cruising, waiting to use the pitstop to gain a position. This is not racing.


    If you actually watched Senna versus Prost, Mansell, Piquet, etc. you would not have posted "cars trundle around on heavy tanks until the fuel burns off" ... as they didn't. It was awesome and they raced all ~70 laps long. Pity you missed it, bloody fantastic it was!
    Pete
     
  6. DF1

    DF1 F1 World Champ
    Rossa Subscribed

    Apr 10, 2007
    15,692
    BaWü
    I like Snark. Swordfish was always a better meal though. With a nice Chianti :)
     
  7. william

    william F1 World Champ

    Jun 3, 2006
    13,021
    England
    Full Name:
    William Denoyelles
    +1
     
  8. TifosiUSA

    TifosiUSA F1 Veteran
    BANNED

    Nov 18, 2007
    8,370
    Kansas City, MO
    Full Name:
    DJ
    They do the same thing now. Cruising, looking after tires, then get by with the undercut and quick in/out laps. Refueling or not hasn't changed any of that. Do you watch races?


    Revisionist history at its best. Besides, you're not even understanding what I am saying. When starting races with full tanks, even if the drivers push 100% (never), they will be exponentially slower than a car from the refueling era that starts on a much lighter fuel load. This is why you will not see any lap records fall this year even though these cars are supposedly faster than the 2004 cars.

    Additionally, why are you stuck on talking about F1 from decades ago?

    We're talking about F1 right now and what could improve the sport right now. And the cars right now are ridiculously heavy and the problem is amplified by starting races on full tanks. Engines running in conservative modes, watching fuel, watching tires. Sounds like a formula for endurance racing.

    I'd prefer cars starting lighter, going full rich and running balls out until the tires are gone and they need to refuel and then do it all over again until the race is over.
     
  9. Beau365

    Beau365 Formula 3

    Feb 27, 2005
    1,036
    Congested London
    Full Name:
    Beau
  10. william

    william F1 World Champ

    Jun 3, 2006
    13,021
    England
    Full Name:
    William Denoyelles
    Well, I hope they never re-introduce refueling in F1, and the perverted strategy of passing cars during pit stops.

    This is F1, not NASCAR. In NASCAR they force the public to watch 3 hours of dog and pony show, and insignificant racing, artificially keeping the suspense until the end. No wonder there is a huge consumption of pop corn and beer at the track; it's dead boring!

    The action really starts after the last pit stop, then, it's mayhem and it never last longer than 15 minutes before the chequered flag.
    Yes, they keep the sprint to the end, and all the time before is just waiting..

    F1 deserves better than this, and the driver and the car that romp away to gain a comfortable gap with his followers don't deserve to have their afternoon ruined by some clever bunching of the pack by artificial means.

    By the look of things, refuelling is out for good; I hope it stays like that.
    Next, we have to work on eliminating the mandatory tyre change ...

    Think about it, Graham Hill, Jim Clark, John Surtees, Jackie Stewart, Jack Brabham, Jochen Rindt, Emerson Fittipaldi and a few more won championships never having to refuel their cars or change tyres!!!
     
  11. william

    william F1 World Champ

    Jun 3, 2006
    13,021
    England
    Full Name:
    William Denoyelles
  12. PSk

    PSk F1 World Champ

    Nov 20, 2002
    17,673
    Tauranga, NZ
    Full Name:
    Pete
    The problem with the current cars is simply their tyres. If they stopped designing the tyres to artificially drop off in performance we would have great racing from the start of the race to the end. Instead we have to conserve tyres, etc.

    You are incorrectly pointing the finger at the lack of refuelling.
    Pete
     
  13. william

    william F1 World Champ

    Jun 3, 2006
    13,021
    England
    Full Name:
    William Denoyelles
    Pirelli provides the tyres the organisers ask for.

    Bernie introduced the mandatory tyre changes, with different tyre gradings, etc...

    All that, to spice the show apparently.

    Any tyre company could supply reliable tyres lasting the whole race.

    If you look at it, the way the officials have perverted F1 is not short of scandalous.

    Could you imagine the World Athletic Federation imposing a change of shoes to the marathon runners? That would be an outcry!!!
     
  14. Beau365

    Beau365 Formula 3

    Feb 27, 2005
    1,036
    Congested London
    Full Name:
    Beau
    I doubt it would be the same engine ! Things change and I remember when a Honda was the engine to have !
     
  15. daytona355

    daytona355 F1 World Champ

    Mar 25, 2009
    11,122
    London
    Full Name:
    Sid Korshak

    You mean the incessant safety cars when a plastic bag lands on the straight or the rain starts getting Mrs Whitings soles wet in the Paddock Club garden, the virtual safety car when someone parks it anywhere at all within a mile of the track limits, what about the ridiculous penalties handed out for racing, while others get no issue at all despite punting drivers into the long grass regularly (yeah I mean elton, so what?, truth hurts)

    There's plenty of artificial bull**** in F1 today, but it starts with stupid tyre rules, ****ing ridiculous limits on parts like engines and turbos, fuel limitations that only people that hate racing and petrol, and therefore have no desire to watch F1 anyway, give two ****s about, and a race director terrified of treating all drivers the same and applying penalties that are well deserved in case he gets blackmailed and called a racist
     
  16. 4rePhill

    4rePhill F1 Veteran

    Oct 18, 2009
    7,733
    Worcester, England
    Full Name:
    Phill J
    And look how badly Honda have been struggling with the new technology, despite all of the engineering talent at their disposal! - So why would Lamborghini do any better?
     
  17. Bas Jaski

    Bas Jaski Two Time F1 World Champ

    Mar 24, 2008
    28,636
    Portugal
    Full Name:
    Bas
    Solved by making the aero regulations so that close racing is possible (like I said earlier in the thread). Together with doing something about braking distances. That way a fast strategy could actually work, and overtaking would be more possible on track. Since overtaking would be possible again, overtaking on track would be necessary to make certain strategies work. Positions wouldn't be gained just by the pitstops anymore.

    I'm no fan of the current tyre regs at all, but if say a race could be one on hard tires and no one would stop anymore, I fear most races would look like the 2017 Melbourne GP where nothing actually happened.

    Since refueling returned we still had pitstops because we always had the rule of using 2 different compounds. Refueling races from around the 90s weren't perfect either because of the aero regulations meant that overtaking became ever harder.

    The true solution lies in sorting out the aerodynamics. Longer wings (not wider) with few elements, cleaning the body and getting rid of all the aero winglets, small venturi tunnels...this will all be a great step forward to sort out the overtaking issue. The wake generated behind these cars (now at over 1.5 seconds!) is killing racing, mistakes can hardly be punished, and fewer mistakes are made because the guys in front aren't pressured as much. With sorting out the aero the cornering speeds remain similar to what we have now, but much less affected by the car in front, meaning close following is possible everywhere and more real attempts at overtaking can be made. DRS can be dropped then also.

    But so long they don't do anything about the aero regs, nothing will change. Brawn started the F1 overtaking group in an attempt to sort out this issue. Unfortunately everything moves at a snails pace, this should have been sorted out in May but so far nothing is done yet, so we'll have at least another season of dreadful races where cars can't get close to others, since 2018 rules have already been finalized.

    It doesn't take a ****ing genius to sort this out. Buy 2 GP2 cars, fit several new concepts of bodywork, get 2 professional GP2 drivers (plenty out there without a ****ing job), rent out a track. Let them do laps and see which aero concepts work to ensure close following is possible. The whole exercise shouldn't have taken more than a couple of weeks.
     
  18. william

    william F1 World Champ

    Jun 3, 2006
    13,021
    England
    Full Name:
    William Denoyelles
    Trying to limit turbulences by giving maximum dimensions to wings, but allowing the constant costly tweaking in aero, still leave the door to abuse, I think.

    There is a very simple way to achieve that by limiting the down force to a maximum figure.
    Maximum down force figures would have to be set by the FIA, as part of the regulations.
    For example 400kg maximum on the front axle and 650kg max. on the rear axle, both at 150mph.

    Just like every year they have to present their chassis for crash testing, all the constructors would have to summit their complete car to have the down force measured in a FIA-calibrated wind tunnel.

    The difference in ground clearance between the stationary car and the same at set speed could be measured, and sensors fitted to the car.

    After that, teams can do whatever they want to the car, it must never go beyond its allowed downforce. Instantly measuring the suspension compression, the sensors would detect immediately any infringement and the team would be penalised.

    That would surely kill the aero development, and reduce many of the artifices we have seen proliferating on the cars in the last 2 decades: large rear wings, origami front wings, winglets, venturi tunnels, vanes, etc... Because most of it would become useless, and endangering the car to go beyond its maximum permitted downforce.

    With most of their aero appendages now redundant, the cars wouldn't create such a wake in their trail, and allow other competitors to come closer to overtake.

    There are other benefits in forcing a reduced down force, IMO: the cars would become less stable in acceleration and braking, therefore the drivers' skill would be more visible, and cornering speed would also be reduced.
    Also, with less down force to heat the tyres, the quality of the compound would also have to be reviewed.

    Maybe we would get better racing out of it?

    Personally, I think its the aero that are slowly killing F1, and not the hybrid technology.
     
  19. Beau365

    Beau365 Formula 3

    Feb 27, 2005
    1,036
    Congested London
    Full Name:
    Beau
    Lamborghini are way ahead of the game in supercars with patented technology including their ALA system. No reason why they couldn't transmute some of their IP across to F1. Renault by contrast make economic shopping trolleys, and I say that as a French shopping trolley owner.
     
  20. william

    william F1 World Champ

    Jun 3, 2006
    13,021
    England
    Full Name:
    William Denoyelles
    Do not underestimate big manufacturers because they make "shopping trolleys", when other small outfits create exotic cars.

    The big manufacturers make "shopping trolleys" because it's where the money is, and they see themselves as industries. The small constructors prefer to operate in a niche market because they see themselves as artists.

    Very often, the "artists" cannot survive on their own, and come under the umbrella of big manufacturers. Lamborghini would not have survived if it wasn't for Chrysler rescuing it years ago; now it is protected by the Volkswagen Group and controlled by its Audi subsidiary. In fact, Lamborghini's intellectual properties are in Volkswagen portfolio now.

    As for technology, it can often be bought, at a price.
     
  21. Bas Jaski

    Bas Jaski Two Time F1 World Champ

    Mar 24, 2008
    28,636
    Portugal
    Full Name:
    Bas
    Can't have patented tech in F1.
     
  22. Isobel

    Isobel F1 Veteran
    Silver Subscribed

    Jun 30, 2007
    8,643
    On a Wave's Chicane
    Full Name:
    Is, Izzy for Australians
    It was fine, no money for development. A Mopar pentagon in F1, who could have guessed.
     
  23. PSk

    PSk F1 World Champ

    Nov 20, 2002
    17,673
    Tauranga, NZ
    Full Name:
    Pete
    Sure but if you force them to have pitstops passing will not happen as it is easier and safer to use the pitstop.

    We have lots of passing at the moment, imagine how much better it would be without the unnecessary pitstops!
    Pete
     
  24. Beau365

    Beau365 Formula 3

    Feb 27, 2005
    1,036
    Congested London
    Full Name:
    Beau
    Sure. But Lamborghini is just as capable of producing a competitive F1 engine as anyone else given right development budget. And I wouldn't banish Honda engines forever just because they're not very good now
     
  25. Bas Jaski

    Bas Jaski Two Time F1 World Champ

    Mar 24, 2008
    28,636
    Portugal
    Full Name:
    Bas
    What? No. Overtaking is much down from last year even. Most of the overtakes are DRS assisted. It's fake overtaking. A DRS overtake is not memorable. That's why people still talk about Kimi on Schumacher or Webber on Alonso, both in Belgium, and both where over 5 years ago.

    Once closer following is possible, we will see more actual overtakes. We won't see that many on track overtakes without refueling IMO, as typically the faster car will qualify in front, and he will stay there. Unless a driver has a penalty, or a bad qualifying, we won't see much overtaking.

    With refueling, alternate strategies make cars faster at different points. Add in close following and it'll make for exiting racing. The aero however is crucial to this; making it too hard to follow and we'll have the situation like from the late 90s till DRS: A stalemate and drivers not willing to take the risk, and try something with pit strategies. Making sure that close following is possible, switching to less efficient brakes will make overtaking attempts possible will make sure drivers can actually execute different strategies AND make it possible to overtake.
     

Share This Page