Slowing down F1 cars

In the double diffuser thread I read one of its goals of having it banned is to reduce car speeds. Now this is something I've been reading over and over over the years. Restrictions on aero, bodywork, tyres, diffusers, anything to get speeds down.

Why instead of trying to regulate operational speeds that way, why don't they just say, "well allow a much greater design freedom, however in return the car may not exceed xxx km/h during a race. Maybe even us a limiter like the pitlane one that is limited at whatever the FIA doesn't want cars to breach... it would mean we don't need all those silly rule changes just to get the cars to slow down year over year and we can allow greater freedom engineering wise....

Any reason they're not going this route ?

Edited by Mediansoft, 07 January 2010 - 17:58.

The reason why that won't work is the problem isn't necessarily the top speed - it's the cornering speed. Limiting top speed only will still allow teams to gain more downforce and boost cornering speeds and aero grip.

The regulations need to be overhauled to give more reliance on mechanical grip and less reliance on aero grip IMO. But the point still stands that whilst limiting regulations brings down costs and speed, it tends to even out the playing field, which reduces overtaking anyway since there's no major differentiation in laptimes. It's a tough subject.

Take away the front wings...

In the double diffuser thread I read one of its goals of having it banned is to reduce car speeds. Now this is something I've been reading over and over over the years. Restrictions on aero, bodywork, tyres, diffusers, anything to get speeds down.

Why instead of trying to regulate operational speeds that way, why don't they just say, "well allow a much greater design freedom, however in return the car may not exceed xxx km/h during a race. Maybe even us a limiter like the pitlane one that is limited at whatever the FIA doesn't want cars to breach... it would mean we don't need all those silly rule changes just to get the cars to slow down year over year and we can allow greater freedom engineering wise....

Any reason they're not going this route ?

The aim is to reduce speed in corners, not in straights.

For safety reasons, I believe.

And applying speed limiters would be pretty terrible for everything sporty in F1. Spa would loose 75% instantaneously. And high speed overtaking maneuvers would die. Then we'd IMMEDIATELY see cars reaching top speed in very fast times, because there were no restrictions: they'd have 1500+ bhp engines with dual clutch 12 speed gear boxes, wing cars, huge slick tires, movable body parts (if not adaptive bodywork) and so on and so on and so on.

Disaster.

And we're reminded again why some people rule F1 and others don't

Take away the front wings...

Yeah we all want a bunch of smooth understeering F1 cars running around. Not.

Reduce rear traction via less downforce and they will balance it out by reducing front wing and we will get to see some driving skills.

Take away both front and rear wings. That's F1

I think a possible idea might be to make certain parts as spec-parts. Not the entire chassis, just some things like the diffuser and the floor. Simplified wings is another must-have. Force the designers to find new ways to generate grip, preferably mechanical. Offer them incentives to do it, too. Because right now, the problem is that the designers just keep piling the aerodynamic grip on, and they'll do anything they can to keep their advantage.

I'd also limit the number of aerodynamic upgrades a team can introduce over the course of the season, and I'd have the teams nominate when they want to make those upgrades before the season begins. However, if they find they make a dud upgrade, they'll be permitted to revert back to the previous aero package, at some cost (the upgrade will be considered spent and the team will have to continue running that aero package until their next upgrade is due). I would also push for homologation of parts - if one driver has an upgrade, the other driver has to have it, too. That will stop teams from using races as testing sessions if they're uncompetitive.

The spec tires have already damaged F1 overtaking badly by reducing the gaps.

Now cars that would be embarrassed by GP2s in the corners is gonna push people away even more.

Wings are the biggest killer of motor sport.

1. They increase drag reducing top speed on the straights.
2. They create downforce that increases grip making faster cornering speed.

No wonder there is no overtaking. The cars enter the corners slower plus they can take the corners faster, basically turning corners into flat out curves.

No wings = faster speed at the end of the straight and slower cornering speeds = large braking zones = passing and skill.

Edited by Jazza, 08 January 2010 - 12:25.

If the goal is to reduce cornering speeds it might help if the teams were forced to change brake materials and use rubber compounds that are closer to those developed for the road and at the very least a lot more robust than the current ones. If the drivers have to brake earlier and to a much slower speed, laptimes will increase enormously and still allow big loud multi-cylinder engines...maybe

Wings are the biggest killer of motor sport.

1. They increase drag reducing top speed on the straights.
2. They create downforce that increases grip making faster cornering speed.

No wonder there is no overtaking. The cars enter the corners slower plus they can take the corners faster, basically turning corners into flat out curves.

No wings = faster speed at the end of the straight and slower cornering speeds = large braking zones = passing and skill.

Add to this the power outputs too.
More power allows bigger wings to be installed.

I would like to see what a current F1 car could do with the tires of. say 30 years agao and the power outputs of that time.
And wings like in that time

Henri

Add to this the power outputs too.
More power allows bigger wings to be installed.

I would like to see what a current F1 car could do with the tires of. say 30 years agao and the power outputs of that time.
And wings like in that time

Henri

Wouldn't we be left with IRL cars? More downforce than they know what to do with, resulting in Juan Montoya laughing at you? No one wants a little Colombian with a high-pitched voice laughing at them.

Wouldn't we be left with IRL cars? More downforce than they know what to do with, resulting in Juan Montoya laughing at you? No one wants a little Colombian with a high-pitched voice laughing at them.

that's why I asked for the tires of that era too.
Not everything is aeroy that makes the cars of thday so fast. chassis development, suspension technology and tires contribute too.

But you can't `un-invent` everything....
But mandating tires with rubber compounds that make sense for daily use

I recall I read that one year Jimmy Clark practiced and raced an entire season on a single set of tires al;l season long. ( ! ! ! )
Talks about a manner of cost reduction....

Henri

I cannot rmember how long I have been going on about Indycar style spec wings...leave the rest of the car to the designers...but mass produced wings would actually be a cost saving as well...

either that or simply tie a goat to the back of each car!

Take away both front and rear wings. That's F1

Amen.

that's why I asked for the tires of that era too.
Not everything is aeroy that makes the cars of thday so fast. chassis development, suspension technology and tires contribute too.

But you can't `un-invent` everything....
But mandating tires with rubber compounds that make sense for daily use

Didn't BF Goodrich do something similar with a Camel GT Porsche 962 one year? Could've been 1985, or 1984. They were on about the same pace as the frontrunners, and IIRC they won at least one race. They certainly boasted about their tyres being 'production-derived' or somesuch, unlike the Goodyear and Firestone rubber.

Does production-derived work in a purebred racing series like F1, though? I read your piece in 8w about the Penske '500l' engine with great interest, but from the looks of things the answer is a '...maybe'. Certainly it needs to be handled with extreme care, as Dorna and the FIM are currently discovering in MotoGP.

Seems likes some guys are stuck in the 60s, and era that most contemporary fans know nothing about and the non-british fans even less.

If people would like those 60s go-karts on steroids they'd watch Formula Ford, but they don't.

Edited by DOF_power, 08 January 2010 - 16:43.

either that or simply tie a goat to the back of each car!

Tie Michael Schumacher to the back of each car?

Edited by OfficeLinebacker, 08 January 2010 - 16:22.

Seems likes some guys are stuck in the 60s, and era that most contemporary fans know anything about and the non-british fans even less.

If people would like those 60s go-karts on steroids they'd watch Formula Ford, but they don't.

Exactly.

Whether its ideal or not, part of F1's attraction as the 'pinnacle of motorsports'(or at least open-wheeled motorsports) is the speeds the cars acheive and the great physical requirements necessary to drive the cars.

Its a fine balancing act trying to allow open areas of development, keep safety concerns in check, keep costs in check, ALL while maintaining an acceptable level of speed from the cars. I know some people think there's some magic "Just do 'x'" solution, but there's not.