It's no more dangerous than having a battery hooked up to the car. That accident was an engineering flaw, not a fault inherent with KERS.
It's no more dangerous than having a battery hooked up to the car. That accident was an engineering flaw, not a fault inherent with KERS.
Yeah, maybe they are trying to convince the fia it's better looking 
I like the mclaren in this shot also: http://www.mclaren.com/interac ... lpaper/mclaren-3-1280.jpg
It's now set as my desktop
I like the mclaren in this shot also: http://www.mclaren.com/interac ... lpaper/mclaren-3-1280.jpg
It's now set as my desktop
Your judgement is flawed.
At the start of the season Mclaren dominated, mainly int he first race, thn after that it was all Ferrari and bmw till about turkey when mclaren gained it back then BMW let off.
Williams were good at the first race or maybe that was luck but after that they were rubbish, Redbull were really good in the pre season too and for the first half of the season they were the best of the rest, then they started to fall back when the aero dynamics were going past there engines so the ferrari powered Torro Rosso started to make ground, so don't think nothing can be learned here.
Allthough right now we are seeing Ferrari fastest at Bahrian and Mclaren fastest at Jerez so really its nothing new, yet..
I don't know why but I just love those new cars 
I think everyone will slowly come around. I still think the front wing has a bit of an MDF shelving unit appearance, but apart from that I really like them, and when we see them in anger on TV for the first time all will be forgiven.
Where? The the field will be more spread out? It's true, it will be, and there will be less passing because of it. That the last couple of years have, by and large, been quite exciting? True also. That fast cars coming back through the field will be able to pass a bit easier? True. That braking distances have not changed, thus outbraking remains as difficult as ever? True.
The man speaks sense, unlike some of the idiots that seem to think these new regs are going to make passing commonplace.
The man speaks sense, unlike some of the idiots that seem to think these new regs are going to make passing commonplace.
First of all I'm not expecting four wheel MotoGP like some are. And little mistake, I said remarks but I merely meant that IndyCar compare, which was odd. And this:
"...but last year there were some exciting races. The last two years have been absolutely spectacular."
Past two championships were exciting, yes. The races, excluding wet ones, mostly not. Some of dry ones were, but name one race that was exciting because of actual racing on the track and not because of championship deciding factors.
'in 2008 overtaking was overly hard because of too even field'
'in 2009 overtaking will be overly hard because of too scattered field'
Could someone specify the optimal gap?
"...but last year there were some exciting races. The last two years have been absolutely spectacular."
Past two championships were exciting, yes. The races, excluding wet ones, mostly not. Some of dry ones were, but name one race that was exciting because of actual racing on the track and not because of championship deciding factors.
'in 2008 overtaking was overly hard because of too even field'
'in 2009 overtaking will be overly hard because of too scattered field'
Could someone specify the optimal gap?
The optimal gap is when a fast car is behind a slower car. But because most motorsport gifts the fastest driver with the pole, and the second slowest further back the field just spreads.
So, to generate passing you need either unreliability (cars starting near the back, or losing time in longer than intended pitstops), reverse grids or part grids, or regulations that mean that the cars' speeds vary a lot over a race.
Modern cars are reliable, so that's pretty much the first one out. Reverse grids aren't very fair unless you have sprint and feature races (that surely no F1 fan would want), and the cars speed is fairly consistent even when they made them use the same set of tyres, or forced to use 'option' tyres for a stint.
The cars are over regulated and over developed, so even when faced with the crap tyre compound they aren't usually much slower. And besides, they've all worked out to less than a second accuracy which 'strategy' is best, thus ensuring that in all but the rarest of cases the fastest cars finish in that order. Which doesn't promote overtaking.
Slicks (which the teams need to get used to), a testing ban, hopefully a larger difference between compounds, and gimmicks like KERS might mean that the order is shaken up a bit more. But assuming that won't happen (and it'll be rare) the increased field spread will be the dominating factor.
Personally I think that qualifying needs to have some points and be on low fuel, and then a random number generated between 1 and x (where x is the number of cars on the grid) defines where to reverse the grid. This number is drawn 10 minutes before the race, so the teams don't know where they are on the grid, and hence can't optimise everything as much. The fastest qualifier might be on pole, but also might be last. How much fuel should he put in the car, and should he put on more downforce for laptimes or less for straight line passing ability?..
So, to generate passing you need either unreliability (cars starting near the back, or losing time in longer than intended pitstops), reverse grids or part grids, or regulations that mean that the cars' speeds vary a lot over a race.
Modern cars are reliable, so that's pretty much the first one out. Reverse grids aren't very fair unless you have sprint and feature races (that surely no F1 fan would want), and the cars speed is fairly consistent even when they made them use the same set of tyres, or forced to use 'option' tyres for a stint.
The cars are over regulated and over developed, so even when faced with the crap tyre compound they aren't usually much slower. And besides, they've all worked out to less than a second accuracy which 'strategy' is best, thus ensuring that in all but the rarest of cases the fastest cars finish in that order. Which doesn't promote overtaking.
Slicks (which the teams need to get used to), a testing ban, hopefully a larger difference between compounds, and gimmicks like KERS might mean that the order is shaken up a bit more. But assuming that won't happen (and it'll be rare) the increased field spread will be the dominating factor.
Personally I think that qualifying needs to have some points and be on low fuel, and then a random number generated between 1 and x (where x is the number of cars on the grid) defines where to reverse the grid. This number is drawn 10 minutes before the race, so the teams don't know where they are on the grid, and hence can't optimise everything as much. The fastest qualifier might be on pole, but also might be last. How much fuel should he put in the car, and should he put on more downforce for laptimes or less for straight line passing ability?..
That would be terrible. Race results and so championship standings would depend on luck of the draw. A driver truly would be "gifted" pole position with that system and often you'd just be putting larger distances between competitive cars. Unless you had a way to average it all out over a season it would be the biggest farce of a "competition" ever devised. They might as well just draw finishing positions from a hat too.
I think grid order partially influenced by championship standings wouldn't hurt, but completely random would not be good.
Just wait till the season starts first, remember qualifiying pace in certian cases can be be much slower then race pace.
Yes, that last one is what I have been saying F1 needs all along. Fast cars are going to be fast and slow cars are going to be slow, I don't see how the new regulations are going to change that. If they had to pit more often because of smaller fuel tanks and the tires lost grip quicker, it would add some strategy that is missing from F1 right now. Doing things like that is slightly gimmicky, but it would make races more exciting to watch, I have no doubt about that. For the most part it seems to me like you can turn on the first 3 laps of the race, fall asleep, and then watch the last 3 and most of the time there is little change in the top cars. To me there is just nothing going on in the middle of the race, the cars always seem to be going the same speed, and the only time the running order changes is when someone pits, and then it changes right back when everyone cycles through their pit stops.
Now I'm saying all this being a fan of NASCAR so I will probably get flamed for this. I know everyone says you can just turn on the last 20 laps of a stock car race and that's all that really matters, and I can't disagree with them because the only lap that matters is the last one. But going from the start to finish of a NASCAR race is seems like the order gets changed up a ton more than in F1, and that's why its more exciting for me to watch. You see cars moving up through the field and falling back. Track conditions change, cars get better/worse, and good/bad calls are made in the pits. You can only watch the end of the race if you want, but there is entertainment throughout the race if you care to watch it.
As far as I know F1 drivers can adjust their car on the fly(you can correct me if I'm wrong on that one). Get rid of that, and only let them adjust the car in the pits. That way if you make a bad call there are consequences and you're stuck with it until your next pit stop. As I see it now drivers can just keep dialing in their car and it drives perfect all the time. This is great since the cars are spectacular peices of machinery, but its boring to watch because it never seems like they drive badly. I'd rather see the leader screw up an adjustment in the pits and have someone behind him make a great call and have a chance to catch up to him.
Some nice livery concepts here i like the Ferrari and Renault most i think http://images.google.co.uk/img ... B2009%26gbv%3D2%26hl%3Den
And some nice concepts here http://images.google.co.uk/img ... p%3D20%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN
Can a mod please make the links smaller, im a computer nub so dunno how to do it. thanks.
And some nice concepts here http://images.google.co.uk/img ... p%3D20%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN
Can a mod please make the links smaller, im a computer nub so dunno how to do it. thanks.
No! They already have to pit, and consequently the only position changes are when people are pitting.
What F1 needs is a ban on pitstops. Do you drive like hell at the beginning of the race then try to hold your position on failing tyres and an empty tank, or do you drive conservatively then go crazy at the end?
Why do that when you could make them go through that cycle multiple times per race? Like I said, give them tires that don't last as long. I think it would create a ton of different strategy options and really shake the field up. I'd love to be proven wrong, but I think no pit stops would be incredibly boring, pit stops are one of the exciting parts of the upper tier motorsports.
Well two of the most exciting top-tier motorsports I know - CIK Karting and MotoGP - don't have pitstops.
'Forced' pitstops only add an illusion of excitement.
These aren't go-karts or motorcycles though, and they never will be.
You said "pitstops stops are one of the exciting parts of the upper tier motorsports". As far as I know the FIA endorsed CIK Karting Championships, and the FIM sanctioned MotoGP are considered 'top-tier motorsports'. Both are HUGELY exciting, and neither have pitstops. there is no point to argue.
Is that an argument?
The thing with pitstops is that drivers don't even try to pass very hard because they know they can wait and do it when the car in front pits. The more pitstops you have the more that will happen. It would just shuffle the fast cars through the field without them having to make as many passes "on the road".
We were talking about F1 racing, which I said I thought would be boring without pit stops. I did not say a "top tier motorsport" couldn't be exciting without pitstops.
Don't try and twist words around just to start some pointless argument which has nothing to do with this thread.
Well I wouldn't really call cars getting lapped "passes". I mean technically they are, but I am talking about actual passes for position.
So am I, who mentioned lapped cars.
Fastest car in 4th place on the grid with 3 "only a bit slower" cars being driven with no mistakes ahead. Outqualified due to a mistake why not. No pitstops and he has to pass "on the road", a few pitstops and he'll have at least a few laps to go a bit quicker with his lighter car, so instead of having to pass all 3, he may have to only pass 1, or even none, "on the road". More exciting to watch?
OK yeah I see what you're saying there, by slower cars I was thinking lapped.
As for your scenario here, there is also the case where a front runner pits for his new tires and comes out behind slower cars who are planning on staying out for a longer stint, and now he has no choice but to pass them on the track or be slowed down for a long time. So in that case I'd say pitting promoted some on the track passing. Both ideas sound good on paper, maybe F1 should just take a season and change the rules every race to find the best racing and then stick with that.
A very good point(s) sinbad. Can you tell I didn't think my solution through
Back to the drawing board...
You do what the advanced computer simulations (numerical rather than driving simulators like LFS) tell you to do based on known degradation, balance changes as fuel loads change, braking loads as brake discs wear, factoring in driver fatigue (not that it really occurs these days) etc etc. And as all the teams can do that to quite a decent degree of accuracy most people end up on the same 'strategy'. It would tend to be those nearer the back of the grid (now not randomly selected
) that go for the lucky chance option, and passing is often more frequent at the blunt end of the grid anyway, so it doesn't need spicing up.F1 has never been a pass-fest. I'm not sure it ever will be.
Reduce the downforce, reduce the grip. But good racing shouldn't need to be manufacturered. It should just happen.
2009 spec. Formula 1 Cars
(667 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG