Originally posted by Pingguest
Every lap more on the track means lower costs per lap.
Every lap more on the track means lower costs per lap.
Not quite. Parts on the car are changed when they reach their useful safe limit.
Full Version: Do you want shorter races
Not quite. Parts on the car are changed when they reach their useful safe limit.
Originally posted by Lazarus II
Wow that's some kind of logic there.
The more the cars are on the track the more money it costs. Engines, gearboxes, wheels, tires, suspension parts...everything has a usable life. When said part reaches it's usable life it is destroyed and a new one must be installed; new pieces require money. Therefore I can conclude that the more the car is driven around a track the more money it will cost.
Wow that's some kind of logic there.
The more the cars are on the track the more money it costs. Engines, gearboxes, wheels, tires, suspension parts...everything has a usable life. When said part reaches it's usable life it is destroyed and a new one must be installed; new pieces require money. Therefore I can conclude that the more the car is driven around a track the more money it will cost.
how about there more TV time the more money from sponsors?
Originally posted by ZZMS
how about there more TV time the more money from sponsors?
how about there more TV time the more money from sponsors?
They could possibly work the TV companies into that contract....except for that munchkin Bernie
Originally posted by TheHumanPromise
Because the teams would have to completely redesign the cars for next year. Adding in larger fuel tanks isn't just as simple as making a larger fuel tank. It would require a complete overhaul of the entire chassis, aero and suspension. That's just too much to ask at this point, when most teams probably already have close to finalized designs for the 2009 cars.
If this is for 2010 or beyond, then they'd have time to build larger fuel tanks and wouldn't have any need for shortening the races. I dont think anybody at FOTA simply wants shorter races for the sake of shorter races. Its obviously only in conjunction with the ban on refueling and/or two-race weekends.
Because the teams would have to completely redesign the cars for next year. Adding in larger fuel tanks isn't just as simple as making a larger fuel tank. It would require a complete overhaul of the entire chassis, aero and suspension. That's just too much to ask at this point, when most teams probably already have close to finalized designs for the 2009 cars.
If this is for 2010 or beyond, then they'd have time to build larger fuel tanks and wouldn't have any need for shortening the races. I dont think anybody at FOTA simply wants shorter races for the sake of shorter races. Its obviously only in conjunction with the ban on refueling and/or two-race weekends.
You have no idea how big the fuels tanks are now. Most teams build in a fairly large tank...witness when a driver gets a grid penalty and they fuel him up for half way or better. Ferrari were the best at this...they had a tank that could almost go the race distance.
WTF? NO!!
NO, no no no no no no no no no NO! 
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/71451
250 km or 90 minutes, 'sin bin' , qualy point, standard engine - you name a bad idea, the FIA will already have thought of it!
Why not just watch NASCAR, that's at least the original.
250 km or 90 minutes, 'sin bin' , qualy point, standard engine - you name a bad idea, the FIA will already have thought of it!
Why not just watch NASCAR, that's at least the original.
Originally posted by anbeck
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/71451
250 km or 90 minutes, 'sin bin' , qualy point, standard engine - you name a bad idea, the FIA will already have thought of it!
Why not just watch NASCAR, that's at least the original.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/71451
250 km or 90 minutes, 'sin bin' , qualy point, standard engine - you name a bad idea, the FIA will already have thought of it!
Why not just watch NASCAR, that's at least the original.
I don't understand the FIA's logic. The sport I love is being torn to pieces by its own governing body.
For many years now, every single rule and regulation mentioned and introduced has gone against the essence of the sport. More and more regulation and control, and now the ultimate dagger, shorter races. Why on earth would they be wanting them shorter for god sake. These tyrants and raping the sport. No end in sight.
Definitely not, not even with 2 races.
2+ Race series are always completely dull until the last race (and often there after). There is always too much at risk crashing in the first race and potentially putting yourself out of both. If the grid for the second is based on the result of the first it gets even worse - I have no doubt F1 would take this route; 2 qualifying sessions would be far far too much action.
The FIA seems obsessed with making everything shorter. WRC is now a sprint over 2.5 days of repeat stages, the WTCC are pathetically short, they are over before they have got going, and the FIA GT would not know endurance racing if it bit it in the ass.
I'm struggling to find the reason why I still watch F1 now, with all the proposed changes there certainly will not be one.
2+ Race series are always completely dull until the last race (and often there after). There is always too much at risk crashing in the first race and potentially putting yourself out of both. If the grid for the second is based on the result of the first it gets even worse - I have no doubt F1 would take this route; 2 qualifying sessions would be far far too much action.
The FIA seems obsessed with making everything shorter. WRC is now a sprint over 2.5 days of repeat stages, the WTCC are pathetically short, they are over before they have got going, and the FIA GT would not know endurance racing if it bit it in the ass.
I'm struggling to find the reason why I still watch F1 now, with all the proposed changes there certainly will not be one.
These aren't FIA's proposals they are FOTA's.
Anyway, with the exception of testing restrictions (and the spectator stuff) I just don't get any of them. Shorter races and refueling? What the hell?
And a point for the fastest in Q2? If they have to give a point then you'd think it would be given to the driver on pole besides I don't understand why on earth are they still insisting on keeping race fuel qualifying. What's so special about it?
Anyway, with the exception of testing restrictions (and the spectator stuff) I just don't get any of them. Shorter races and refueling? What the hell?
And a point for the fastest in Q2? If they have to give a point then you'd think it would be given to the driver on pole besides I don't understand why on earth are they still insisting on keeping race fuel qualifying. What's so special about it?
Shorter races?
Frankly why bother at all.
Frankly why bother at all.
Originally posted by Rinehart
Do you want shorter races?
No, I want Max Mosley to go and live on Mars.
Do you want shorter races?
No, I want Max Mosley to go and live on Mars.
That's much too close IMO. Only when he is in Andromeda will F1 be safe.
Originally posted by travbrad
That's much too close IMO. Only when he is in Andromeda will F1 be safe.
That's much too close IMO. Only when he is in Andromeda will F1 be safe.
If you say his name backwards, you can send him back to the parallel dimension where he belongs.
I voted no as I don't have a short attention span and can sit and watch a race as they play out today.
If I wanted shorter races then I would watch MotoGP (which I do anyway) or BTCC.......
If I wanted shorter races then I would watch MotoGP (which I do anyway) or BTCC.......
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.