Very good article/preview on 2008 season

http://www.itv-f1.com/Feature.aspx?Type=Martin_Brundle&PO_ID=41892

The 2008 Formula 1 season sees a host of changes – headlined by the welcome removal of driver aids, a street circuit revival, and the first ever floodlit night grand prix.

In the first part of his exclusive preview feature for itv.com/f1, ITV Sport commentator Martin Brundle examines everything that's new for 2008.


Farewell to the gizmos


The major regulation change for 2008 is the outlawing of traction control and launch control and the introduction of a standard ECU. It’s interesting to speak to different drivers because you get quite a variety of responses as to how much difference it has made and whether they enjoy and approve of the changes or not. Watching the cars on track, they definitely move around a lot more. That will lessen to an extent – it’s like anything in Formula 1, the engineers find solutions and ways of adapting – and the cars will become steadily more driveable. I think on a qualifying lap, with new rubber and a good track surface, there will be very little difference. But we are unquestionably going to see more mistakes, particularly on worn tyres or a wet track, more overtaking, and more spins. Early wet races could be especially interesting.

We’re also going to see more variable starts, because the difference between a good start and a great start – getting just the right amount of clutch slip and wheelspin – is going to be dramatic. So we’re going to see a lot more movement off the start and down into turn one.

I think all that is great. I firmly believe that knowing when to apply the throttle and by how much is a core skill that a racing driver should demonstrate corner by corner.

Some people complain about curbing the technology but in that case why hasn’t an F1 car got airbags and ABS brakes? Or an iPod connector! I really applaud these changes. The drivers are going to have to work harder, and if it’s pouring with rain in Fuji they will have to drive accordingly.

No more safety nets


The loss of electronically assisted engine braking will also make a difference. During testing we’ve seen a number of drivers going off under braking. When you’re braking hard all the weight transfers towards to the front tyres, the rear wheels go light at the same time as you’re downshifting, and it’s very easy to lock the rears. Previously they had a number of systems to control this using the differential and opening the throttle barrels. Now the drivers haven’t got that safety net or the toys to calm the car down on the way into a corner. They’re going to need a bit more feel for the track conditions, and again we are going to see more errors. Interestingly, I’m told that 70% of any difficulties arising from the loss of technical gizmos are on the way into the corner and 30% coming out of the corner in terms of wheelspin. It’s going to require more finesse, and those drivers who are more precise and consistent in their brake and throttle applications will benefit. If they can still attack with some finesse then they’ll get payback; if they are brutal with the car they will be burning out their rear tyres too fast, or spinning into the gravel trap. Which of course we used to do a lot more – all those systems have been helping the drivers massively.

Where I do feel a bit sorry for them all is that due to the engine freeze, many of the things that we used to do to improve driveability – with camshaft profiles, variable inlet and trumpet lengths, general engine architecture – are closed off. The characteristics of the current engine and tyres have been evolved around traction control. So I do sympathise that the cars must be difficult to drive, because they’re bound to be a bit knife-edgy. The teams will address that as the season develops.


Long-life gearboxes


The new requirement for gearboxes to last four races will be like engine longevity or parc ferme rules – the teams will just adapt to it and in a few races’ time forget that it hasn’t always been that way. I think the engine and gearbox regs are fundamentally commonsense rules for getting away from the disposable culture of designing parts to last 100 metres longer than the grand prix distance. If a car fails to finish a race, mind you, then they can change the engine and gearbox without penalty. A championship could be decided by a gearbox gremlin and a five-place grid penalty, but then it can be decided by a gearbox failure on race day or a freak situation with a backmarker or in the pit lane
– you can go on ad infinitum.





It keeps going, the full article is on ITV in the link i posted above!

 

Well you just contradicted yourself. If it is in fact possible to go faster than the human limit, why have drivers? And if F1 is to be the pinnicle of technology at the expense of motorsport, as you've alluded to, then what's so good about that? NASA is the pinnicle of Technology. CalTech. MIT.

F1 is still the premier MOTORSPORT. They are restricting technology in teh name of motorsport... more driver input, more reliability, more passing, more grip, hell, the lap times are STILL coming down. What's wrong with that? Especially a return to slicks...

 

All open wheel series have been similar forever. Formula is simple, unlike Endurance racing. I don't understand how F1 is losing ground as a premier motorsport.

Like all sports, certain measures need to curtail the advantages gained through ongoing developments. I don't see anything wrong with that, its nothing new, and it keeps ideas and solutions fresh. If someone mounted an electro-hydraulic aparatus to their arm and therefore was able to throw 300 mph fastballs, do you think baseball would be better? And if not, should the banning of said device be instituted in the interest of the sport, and the attention on the athelete's skills? At what point do we replace all atheletes with robots?


You know what makes the NBA the NBA? The talent pool. They move the 3 point line further and further back, to make the sport more challenging for those top atheletes. I think that is amazing.

You know what? I think that F1 should make their cars even HARDER to drive. The harder your car is to drive, the less weight you should be allowed to run, and allowed things like turbos, etc. Make the drivers really show their skill and be the BEST DRIVERS in the world. If your car drove like a Ferrari 312 T5 with an attitude problem, you could have 1,300 hp and 500kg. If it drove like an F2002... 700 hp and 1200kg!

 

Exactly agree with Andreas.

All the points that are being brought up by Carol and ferraridude are not false, but in what way is any other series better/more technologically advanced than F1? I mean... the only thing I can think of that I don't like is the engine freeze. More choice and development of engines would be nice, again. Like when Renault were running a 111* Vee back in late 90s/early00's. At least allowing the teams different Vee angles will provide interesting solutions to their specific cars.


One thing I do have a problem with was when someone said if the floodgates are opened, the back markers will have more chance of being competitive. Err... how so? The top teams would just crush everyone even worse with their limitless budgets and resources. Love it or hate it, the current restriction DO promote better racing.