All teams start the season thinking that they have the best car and are going to win races. (at least that should be the assumption I would think).
Realistically though we all know that certain teams will be stuck in the mid-field for the season based on their form from previous years, unless they can do something revolutionary.
I'm interested to know why don't teams like FI, TR and Williams design their can to perform brilliantly on one particular circuit. Obviously a circuit that is unique in nature.
Surely their car would be brilliant around it and maybe just average or below average everywhere else. From a marketing point of view wouldn't this be useful? To see any one of these teams on the podium for at least one race would be something for the team and fans surely.
Or is this too much of a gamble?
Full Version: Mid-field Team suggestion
QUOTE (Rudy @ May 25 2011, 10:52) 
All teams start the season thinking that they have the best car and are going to win races. (at least that should be the assumption I would think).
Realistically though we all know that certain teams will be stuck in the mid-field for the season based on their form from previous years, unless they can do something revolutionary.
I'm interested to know why don't teams like FI, TR and Williams design their can to perform brilliantly on one particular circuit. Obviously a circuit that is unique in nature.
Surely their car would be brilliant around it and maybe just average or below average everywhere else. From a marketing point of view wouldn't this be useful? To see any one of these teams on the podium for at least one race would be something for the team and fans surely.
Or is this too much of a gamble?
Realistically though we all know that certain teams will be stuck in the mid-field for the season based on their form from previous years, unless they can do something revolutionary.
I'm interested to know why don't teams like FI, TR and Williams design their can to perform brilliantly on one particular circuit. Obviously a circuit that is unique in nature.
Surely their car would be brilliant around it and maybe just average or below average everywhere else. From a marketing point of view wouldn't this be useful? To see any one of these teams on the podium for at least one race would be something for the team and fans surely.
Or is this too much of a gamble?
The problem is, what if it rains? And scuppers everything.
You know what though, you could be onto something.
Why not have a strategic bias. Like a very short wheelbase or a very long one. Or even a slight bias for anti-clockwise circuits that doesn't punish you too much on the clockwise ones. Not sure if the latter would work but the former definitely would.
Reminds me of Arrows at Humgary with Damon Hill. The combination of car and tyre that day was incredible. Add an excellent driver and they almost won it. that was simply the most incredible race I have ever watched. Those Arrows sponsors got great value for money, especially the ones on Damon's overalls when he hugged JV after the race. That iconic picture got a lot of exposure.
I don't think it's possible to single out one track and design for that only.
On a more practical level the teams are paid based on the points they get throughout the season so scoring big at one venue and nought elsewhere would be a net loss. Also marketing wise there are 19 races, looking good at one race isn't going to do you much good if you look crap at the others.
On a more practical level the teams are paid based on the points they get throughout the season so scoring big at one venue and nought elsewhere would be a net loss. Also marketing wise there are 19 races, looking good at one race isn't going to do you much good if you look crap at the others.
QUOTE (rolf123 @ May 25 2011, 11:13)
The problem is, what if it rains? And scuppers everything.
You know what though, you could be onto something.
Why not have a strategic bias. Like a very short wheelbase or a very long one. Or even a slight bias for anti-clockwise circuits that doesn't punish you too much on the clockwise ones. Not sure if the latter would work but the former definitely would.
Reminds me of Arrows at Humgary with Damon Hill. The combination of car and tyre that day was incredible. Add an excellent driver and they almost won it. that was simply the most incredible race I have ever watched. Those Arrows sponsors got great value for money, especially the ones on Damon's overalls when he hugged JV after the race. That iconic picture got a lot of exposure.
You know what though, you could be onto something.
Why not have a strategic bias. Like a very short wheelbase or a very long one. Or even a slight bias for anti-clockwise circuits that doesn't punish you too much on the clockwise ones. Not sure if the latter would work but the former definitely would.
Reminds me of Arrows at Humgary with Damon Hill. The combination of car and tyre that day was incredible. Add an excellent driver and they almost won it. that was simply the most incredible race I have ever watched. Those Arrows sponsors got great value for money, especially the ones on Damon's overalls when he hugged JV after the race. That iconic picture got a lot of exposure.
Didn't bring any extra on-board though.
I've always thought about something like this.
You saw in 2009 that Force India had a supreme car at Spa & Monza. Thats where they got all of their points. Its probably a bit hard for the newer teams to do, but Toro Rosso or Williams could try it certainly.
You saw in 2009 that Force India had a supreme car at Spa & Monza. Thats where they got all of their points. Its probably a bit hard for the newer teams to do, but Toro Rosso or Williams could try it certainly.
QUOTE (Clatter @ May 25 2011, 11:16)
On a more practical level the teams are paid based on the points they get throughout the season so scoring big at one venue and nought elsewhere would be a net loss.
That's what I was coming in to point out.
It's a good idea until you realize that for these teams what really matters is the total points score of the season.
First thing is draw a line, what teams are considered midpack? If you put Mercedes and Renault on that group they are clear favourites, but if you start at Sauber then it gets very mixed.
At this point I think only Sauber is capable of getting up there, Williams and FI are too busy with their own problems and the Toro Rossos haven't quite got the speed they should have.
At this point I think only Sauber is capable of getting up there, Williams and FI are too busy with their own problems and the Toro Rossos haven't quite got the speed they should have.
QUOTE (rolf123 @ May 25 2011, 11:13)
The problem is, what if it rains? And scuppers everything.
You know what though, you could be onto something.
Why not have a strategic bias. Like a very short wheelbase or a very long one. Or even a slight bias for anti-clockwise circuits that doesn't punish you too much on the clockwise ones. Not sure if the latter would work but the former definitely would.
Reminds me of Arrows at Humgary with Damon Hill. The combination of car and tyre that day was incredible. Add an excellent driver and they almost won it. that was simply the most incredible race I have ever watched. Those Arrows sponsors got great value for money, especially the ones on Damon's overalls when he hugged JV after the race. That iconic picture got a lot of exposure.
You know what though, you could be onto something.
Why not have a strategic bias. Like a very short wheelbase or a very long one. Or even a slight bias for anti-clockwise circuits that doesn't punish you too much on the clockwise ones. Not sure if the latter would work but the former definitely would.
Reminds me of Arrows at Humgary with Damon Hill. The combination of car and tyre that day was incredible. Add an excellent driver and they almost won it. that was simply the most incredible race I have ever watched. Those Arrows sponsors got great value for money, especially the ones on Damon's overalls when he hugged JV after the race. That iconic picture got a lot of exposure.
Shame ITV went for an ad break when Damon was overtaking for the lead though!
They wouldn't be midfield teams then, they would be backmarker teams. Teams like Lotus, Virgin and HRT should try that. In 2009 Force India were still for the most part a backmarker team, they developed into a midfield team at the end of 2009 and for 2010-onwards.
It's about scoring points consistently, it's always better to have a car with loads of downforce over everything else.
It's about scoring points consistently, it's always better to have a car with loads of downforce over everything else.
QUOTE (Rudy @ May 25 2011, 19:52)
I'm interested to know why don't teams like FI, TR and Williams design their can to perform brilliantly on one particular circuit. Obviously a circuit that is unique in nature.
They're trying to perform well at every track. To design car that has particular characteristics is probably more of a quirk of design than a dedicated focus. The Force India's in the past few seasons have been very slick in a straight line, Williams in the mid 00's had amazing mechanical grip - I'm not sure either car was designed however to be either fast on a straight line only, or very good in traction out of a corner. There's other factors as well - I've read something about Mercedes this year that says that the cars improvements have come through car setup, not design, that is to say they had a fast car, but didn't know how to tap into it for a few races. There's so many variables in what works and what doesn't. Red Bull are very focussed on mechanical grip and downforce - which means when they open the DRS - their straight line speed increases and their lap times change amazingly. So I'd say part of Red Bulls performance revolves very much around a dedicated view of a certain type of setup - perhaps that's a bigger factor in how a car performs at a certain type of track - than design (within reason of course.)
QUOTE (Clatter @ May 25 2011, 12:16)
I don't think it's possible to single out one track and design for that only.
On a more practical level the teams are paid based on the points they get throughout the season so scoring big at one venue and nought elsewhere would be a net loss. Also marketing wise there are 19 races, looking good at one race isn't going to do you much good if you look crap at the others.
On a more practical level the teams are paid based on the points they get throughout the season so scoring big at one venue and nought elsewhere would be a net loss. Also marketing wise there are 19 races, looking good at one race isn't going to do you much good if you look crap at the others.
Depends on what end of the mid-field you are. In days gone by when only the top 6 scored then this strategy would definitely have worked.
For a team like Lotus today, this strategy would definitely work.
QUOTE (Clatter @ May 25 2011, 12:17)
Didn't bring any extra on-board though.
It brought branding value to the sponsors concerned. If you made it clear at season-start that it was your strategy and could prove that it gained you an increase in exposures in media then you could charge more for sponsorship, definitely.
Or you could keep stum and look like a team with a capacity to often "surprise" instead of just being a consistent performer that nobody cares about. F1 always loves that anyway and so do sponsors because it gives them a chance to make claims for performance even though the car/driver combo may have only achieved those heady heights once in the season.
QUOTE (paranoik0 @ May 25 2011, 12:26)
That's what I was coming in to point out.
It's a good idea until you realize that for these teams what really matters is the total points score of the season.
It's a good idea until you realize that for these teams what really matters is the total points score of the season.
Total points could end up higher. Given that points are not awarded all the way down to last place, such a strategy may well yield better results.
QUOTE (Kraken @ May 25 2011, 12:44)
Shame ITV went for an ad break when Damon was overtaking for the lead though!
Tell me about it! Overtake on "bulletproof" arch-rival Schumi at the place where "you can't overtake"!!!! I was fuming!
QUOTE (rolf123 @ May 25 2011, 12:59)
Depends on what end of the mid-field you are. In days gone by when only the top 6 scored then this strategy would definitely have worked.
For a team like Lotus today, this strategy would definitely work.
It brought branding value to the sponsors concerned. If you made it clear at season-start that it was your strategy and could prove that it gained you an increase in exposures in media then you could charge more for sponsorship, definitely.
Or you could keep stum and look like a team with a capacity to often "surprise" instead of just being a consistent performer that nobody cares about. F1 always loves that anyway and so do sponsors because it gives them a chance to make claims for performance even though the car/driver combo may have only achieved those heady heights once in the season.
Total points could end up higher. Given that points are not awarded all the way down to last place, such a strategy may well yield better results.
Tell me about it! Overtake on "bulletproof" arch-rival Schumi at the place where "you can't overtake"!!!! I was fuming!
For a team like Lotus today, this strategy would definitely work.
It brought branding value to the sponsors concerned. If you made it clear at season-start that it was your strategy and could prove that it gained you an increase in exposures in media then you could charge more for sponsorship, definitely.
Or you could keep stum and look like a team with a capacity to often "surprise" instead of just being a consistent performer that nobody cares about. F1 always loves that anyway and so do sponsors because it gives them a chance to make claims for performance even though the car/driver combo may have only achieved those heady heights once in the season.
Total points could end up higher. Given that points are not awarded all the way down to last place, such a strategy may well yield better results.
Tell me about it! Overtake on "bulletproof" arch-rival Schumi at the place where "you can't overtake"!!!! I was fuming!
Did it? I seriously doubt any brand is going to get extra glory for one day when all the other days are so crap.
QUOTE (Clatter @ May 25 2011, 14:06)
Did it? I seriously doubt any brand is going to get extra glory for one day when all the other days are so crap.
You don't know much about branding and global advertising then.
Sponsors love any excuse to celebrate their brand. It's a bonus on top of bottom-tier exposure which would otherwise not change much anyway.
In fact, a short wheel base car would work well. The exposure from coming on the podium in Monaco alone would probably be enough to justify the entire exercise.
QUOTE (rolf123 @ May 25 2011, 13:28)
You don't know much about branding and global advertising then.
Sponsors love any excuse to celebrate their brand. It's a bonus on top of bottom-tier exposure which would otherwise not change much anyway.
In fact, a short wheel base car would work well. The exposure from coming on the podium in Monaco alone would probably be enough to justify the entire exercise.
Sponsors love any excuse to celebrate their brand. It's a bonus on top of bottom-tier exposure which would otherwise not change much anyway.
In fact, a short wheel base car would work well. The exposure from coming on the podium in Monaco alone would probably be enough to justify the entire exercise.
I know about, I'm just not sucked in by it.
Surely one 4th or 5th place will be worth more in terms of exposure than 10 10th place finishes?
I noticed last year when Williams used to do their Q1 run during the dead time when the other teams where sitting in their garages. Isn't those 4 mins of screens around the world filled with only Williams cars worth a lot to them?
Do you think it depends on these team wanting to keep current sponsors happy and attract potential sponsors. In other words, is a new big sponsor worth 5 or 6 championship points?
I noticed last year when Williams used to do their Q1 run during the dead time when the other teams where sitting in their garages. Isn't those 4 mins of screens around the world filled with only Williams cars worth a lot to them?
Do you think it depends on these team wanting to keep current sponsors happy and attract potential sponsors. In other words, is a new big sponsor worth 5 or 6 championship points?
To be fair if a team fully concentrates on one type of track then they'll get huge points from there and pluck a few 8th, 9th and 10th places from other tracks as well increasing their overall points tally. Good for a midfield team with a low budget. Torro Rosso, Force India, Sauber...
teams have the goal of maximizing points/season (most money), i doubt a one-off design could bring more points for the whole season
edit: perhaps it could be a good way for the new teams to get into points for one race
edit: perhaps it could be a good way for the new teams to get into points for one race
QUOTE (rolf123 @ May 25 2011, 10:13)
Why not have a strategic bias. Like a very short wheelbase
Mercedes have got it. Let's see if Rosberg and Schumi can stick to the RBRs at Monaco.
The low drag Force India of '09 was super effective at Spa and Monza.
In 2001 Jaguar had an excellent mechanical grip car and Irvine took the Monaco podium.
In 2002 Jagaur had an excellent low-drag car and Irvine took the Monza podium.
How they managed both of those in consecutive seasons - who knows!?
While one or two podium(s) is nice, perhaps aiming for consistent points over the season is also a valid aim?
QUOTE (rolf123 @ May 25 2011, 13:28)
You don't know much about branding and global advertising then.
Sponsors love any excuse to celebrate their brand. It's a bonus on top of bottom-tier exposure which would otherwise not change much anyway.
In fact, a short wheel base car would work well. The exposure from coming on the podium in Monaco alone would probably be enough to justify the entire exercise.
Sponsors love any excuse to celebrate their brand. It's a bonus on top of bottom-tier exposure which would otherwise not change much anyway.
In fact, a short wheel base car would work well. The exposure from coming on the podium in Monaco alone would probably be enough to justify the entire exercise.
mercedes have the shortest wheel base car lets see how well they do at monaco.. i think mercedes still have crap traction in slow corners though...
QUOTE (rolf123 @ May 25 2011, 12:28)
In fact, a short wheel base car would work well.
I suspect that the car engineers have discussed the short wheelcase thing as a myth. One for Jamie and Adam to test (presumably somehow using high explosives).
Long wheelbase gives the better aerodynamics and more downforce, which is also useful around Monaco. Unless the car is a bus the turning circle thing is a bit of a myth as I recall.
what are the current rules
do both cars have to be exactly the same now
or is that just painted/sticker the same
they must crash test the car pre-season or pre-race
and are limited in motors and trans used
but are there any rules against a short wheel base MC only car
if crash tested and painted the same
in the past there were ideas of MC only motors inc a 2 cyl
but frozen rules outlaw that now
do both cars have to be exactly the same now
or is that just painted/sticker the same
they must crash test the car pre-season or pre-race
and are limited in motors and trans used
but are there any rules against a short wheel base MC only car
if crash tested and painted the same
in the past there were ideas of MC only motors inc a 2 cyl
but frozen rules outlaw that now
The former Mike Coughlan Arrows were pretty slippery and lead to them to have good races at the old Hockenheim and Monza.
QUOTE (ray b @ May 25 2011, 17:44)
but are there any rules against a short wheel base MC only car
I think there's a rule forbidding changes to the chassis, which might get in the way. However teams could change suspension geometry to move the front wheels backwards. Unless the FIA ban that too on cost grounds.
edit: But that would affect aerodynamics, even at Monaco speeds, and the chassis rule might prevent those issues being resolved.
QUOTE (V8 Fireworks @ May 25 2011, 10:34)
Long wheelbase gives the better aerodynamics and more downforce, which is also useful around Monaco. Unless the car is a bus the turning circle thing is a bit of a myth as I recall.
what turning circle thing?
QUOTE (Kubiccia @ May 25 2011, 17:22)
what turning circle thing?
There is no advantage around tight corners in a short wheelbase car in F1.
The ultralong McLaren and RBR (and other aero-priority cars) do not have any disadvantage due to their long wheelbase.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.