Jump to content


Photo

Drivers Getting Heated up Over Tyre Blanket Ban


  • Please log in to reply
102 replies to this topic

#51 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 9,842 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 17 April 2008 - 20:04

Originally posted by Jacquesback


Then maybe they'll be less pitstops. That would be a good thing.


As long as refueling and tyre changing are allowed, there will be as many pit stops as possible.

Advertisement

#52 Ogami musashi

Ogami musashi
  • Member

  • 787 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 17 April 2008 - 20:09

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
10 seconds? :lol:


http://en.f1-live.co...416095321.shtml

http://www.autosport...rt.php/id/66122

and i can't find the article of jerez test times were i think heidfeld said that "we speak of several seconds here not just one.."

and from the lap times he laped 1:23 max with the slick and his first times were 1:28..


again the differencial is tyre grip dependent and to that the downforce decrease...

nothing to see with other series.

#53 Torch

Torch
  • Member

  • 254 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 17 April 2008 - 21:23

Originally posted by Ogami musashi


http://en.f1-live.co...416095321.shtml

http://www.autosport...rt.php/id/66122

and i can't find the article of jerez test times were i think heidfeld said that "we speak of several seconds here not just one.."

and from the lap times he laped 1:23 max with the slick and his first times were 1:28..


again the differencial is tyre grip dependent and to that the downforce decrease...

nothing to see with other series.


10 seconds is unacceptable especially considering most of that is probably in the first half of the lap. But from current observations (your links above) the bridgestone tyre gives a lot less than 10secs in warm up phase - it may well be ok by next year.

I remember when arrows failed to make the 107% cut off in qualifying. For a 1m23 lap that would be a cut off of 1m29.

#54 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,220 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 17 April 2008 - 22:00

Originally posted by Atreiu


Level playing field has absolutely nothing to do with it. The issue at hand is driver A coming out of the pits with 50kgs of fuel and stone cold tyres which simply deliver very little grip until they're heated.



Imagine someone trying slicks during a race at a damp Spa. The first corner he faces is nothing less than Eau Rouge. His options are to either crawl through it in order to not crash, or be brave, go at full speed and crash at one of the fastest corners of all. Even if he decides to crawl through it 20km/h slower than he normally would, what will happen to the fool on heated tyres and a lighter car who decides to overtake him on the outside because he's on a hot lap before he pits???? Or do you think he'll sit behind and lose a couple of seconds at least in the name of safety?

If not Spa, it can happen at Montreal or any nice street circuit with close walls and people fighting for postions while others struggle to get their tyres to temperature. 2009 will also have more street circuits beckoning for someone to crash on cold tyres...


OTOH they are paid shitloads of cash to manage all that.

We are not remotely talking about speed differentials like Heidfeld and Alonso encountered recently in that qualifying session. Even 10 seconds it won't be, more like 3 seconds.

This IS manageable. Or how do you think anyone ever survived Le Mans, or, for that matter, the mixed atmo/turbo years in the mid-eighties?

The only thing is, drivers need to engage their brains and get used to it - just as with no TC in the rain (which we'll hopefully see soon enough).

#55 Muz Bee

Muz Bee
  • Member

  • 2,531 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 17 April 2008 - 22:09

Bridgestone (or any tyre supplier) will simply remix the compound/construction if tyre warmers are banned. This will factor in quicker warming or less deficiency when cold so a 5 or 10 second loss of speed is unlikely.

However - and I don't want to be a fence sitter - isn't the general F1 audience supportive of the sport being seen as leading edge? MotoGP, Superbike, IRL, A1GP and just about every form of serious racing uses tyre warmers. Without mainstream motorsport's tyre warmers, F1 could be seen as a "dumbed down motorsport". Probably is by a lot anyway!

Also when we started using tyre warmers on superbikes (15 or so years ago) the immediate benefit was the tyres suffered less "cold graining" and "cold shear" which is damaging to the tyre life and creates unpredicatability from tyre to tyre. I believe we all want the drivers to be more the determining factor in the result and that is why so many support the ban. I just question whether this particular approach is really a great idea, I'm not so sure. Removing the appalling traction control and braking aids, drasticly reducing downforce and so on should do more than enough to liven up F1, why add yet another experimental idea? With these changes in 2009 F1 should be a whole heap more exciting.

#56 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 9,842 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 17 April 2008 - 23:09

Originally posted by Muz Bee
Bridgestone (or any tyre supplier) will simply remix the compound/construction if tyre warmers are banned. This will factor in quicker warming or less deficiency when cold so a 5 or 10 second loss of speed is unlikely.

However - and I don't want to be a fence sitter - isn't the general F1 audience supportive of the sport being seen as leading edge? MotoGP, Superbike, IRL, A1GP and just about every form of serious racing uses tyre warmers. Without mainstream motorsport's tyre warmers, F1 could be seen as a "dumbed down motorsport". Probably is by a lot anyway!

Also when we started using tyre warmers on superbikes (15 or so years ago) the immediate benefit was the tyres suffered less "cold graining" and "cold shear" which is damaging to the tyre life and creates unpredicatability from tyre to tyre. I believe we all want the drivers to be more the determining factor in the result and that is why so many support the ban. I just question whether this particular approach is really a great idea, I'm not so sure. Removing the appalling traction control and braking aids, drasticly reducing downforce and so on should do more than enough to liven up F1, why add yet another experimental idea? With these changes in 2009 F1 should be a whole heap more exciting.


:up: :up: :up:

as65p, I know they are paid unholy ammounts to manage that. I just think the challenge of racing around in cold tyres and the dangers involved are just stupid. If that is the best idea people can come up to make the races better and/or save money, than they should not be in this particular business.

Anyhow, enough going back and forth. I do see how the races can become more exciting, maybe a race leader can screw his outlap and fall back a place or two, maybe one stoppers will become more interesting strategies, so I do acknowledge the point some people have made in this thread. I'll agree to disagree.

#57 bobqzzi

bobqzzi
  • Member

  • 360 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 18 April 2008 - 04:38

I don't see the point in banning them. At this time they are a relatively cheap technology that all the teams exploit equally. If you ban them, then you'll need to put a series of rules in place to regulate what the tire temperature must be when they go on the car. It might have to be within a certain amount of ambient like the fuel. You know that if warmers are banned, the teams will pour resources into getting the tires up to temp in any way they can.
Can they put them in the sun? Can they keep them in the garage? If so, can they heat the inside of the garage 150 degrees and put the crew in cool suits? (you know someone has already thought of that!) If it is a "temperature never to exceed" rule, then not only do you have to have an FIA guy there measuring, but the teams will figure out how to exploit it to the nth degree- which naturally favors the big teams with more resources.

In short, any marginal improvement certainly isn't worth the technical and regulatory can of worms banning them would open.

#58 Oho

Oho
  • Member

  • 7,559 posts
  • Joined: November 98

Posted 18 April 2008 - 05:16

Originally posted by Torch
One other point that makes me in favour of this is that the better drivers will be able to get their temperatures up quicker by pushing harder earlier.


No kidding, piping hot tread and stone cold carcass... pushing harder earlier would see tons of drivers making a meal of their tires on the out lap

#59 Fatgadget

Fatgadget
  • Member

  • 1,935 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 18 April 2008 - 07:54

Originally posted by Atreiu
It would also be an exciting prospect if they could only race with one rear view mirror, wouldn't it?
I even think there was a time in which no rear view mirrors were used, so taking only one off has got to be a good thing. Only the pussies will decline the challenge.

With all due respect that is a very strange analogy. A driver can choose not to use his/her mirrors. ((Andrea de Cesaris was a notable example! :lol: ) Rather different far as tyres are concerned don't you think?

Advertisement

#60 wingwalker

wingwalker
  • Member

  • 6,326 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 18 April 2008 - 09:14

Originally posted by Muz Bee


Also when we started using tyre warmers on superbikes (15 or so years ago) the immediate benefit was the tyres suffered less "cold graining" and "cold shear" which is damaging to the tyre life and creates unpredicatability from tyre to tyre. .



Hopefully 2009 aero will also some close racing, but still: LAST thing F1 need is more predictability. In MotoGP when you see a driver closing another one you can predict they're gonna have a nice fight for their positions, possibly with overtaking and re-gaining of position. In F1 you can predict driver behind is gonna be stuck 0.5 seconds behind the one in front until one of them pits (unless second differential is 3 seconds or so, but that still might be not enough on some tracks). We get so little honest racing now that some of unpredictability might only do good IMO. Remember last Hungarian GP? The tyres were totally unpredictable, but the result was a perfectly predictable procession, so I don't think tyres will be such an issue whatever happens. I think BS is surely capable of manufacturing a tyre which gets up to temperature quicker and is reasonably predictable. That should do. Heating up the tyres is a driver skill, and more drivers are in control of what's going on the better (in terms of of what's going on with their car)

#61 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 9,842 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 18 April 2008 - 11:57

Originally posted by Fatgadget

With all due respect that is a very strange analogy. A driver can choose not to use his/her mirrors. ((Andrea de Cesaris was a notable example! :lol: ) Rather different far as tyres are concerned don't you think?


Yeah, it just popped to my mind as an example "just because it was done once doesn't mean it has to be done again".

#62 SeanValen

SeanValen
  • Member

  • 16,933 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 18 April 2008 - 16:16

Originally posted by Muz Bee
Bridgestone (or any tyre supplier) will simply remix the compound/construction if tyre warmers are banned. This will factor in quicker warming or less deficiency when cold so a 5 or 10 second loss of speed is unlikely.

However - and I don't want to be a fence sitter - isn't the general F1 audience supportive of the sport being seen as leading edge? MotoGP, Superbike, IRL, A1GP and just about every form of serious racing uses tyre warmers. Without mainstream motorsport's tyre warmers, F1 could be seen as a "dumbed down motorsport". Probably is by a lot anyway!

Also when we started using tyre warmers on superbikes (15 or so years ago) the immediate benefit was the tyres suffered less "cold graining" and "cold shear" which is damaging to the tyre life and creates unpredicatability from tyre to tyre. I believe we all want the drivers to be more the determining factor in the result and that is why so many support the ban. I just question whether this particular approach is really a great idea, I'm not so sure. Removing the appalling traction control and braking aids, drasticly reducing downforce and so on should do more than enough to liven up F1, why add yet another experimental idea? With these changes in 2009 F1 should be a whole heap more exciting.



Perhaps now they are going back to the future to improve racing, the problem is perhaps going over the top. But that may not be the case perhaps. Because I think with Bridgestones latest comments about better recent compounds for the colder period of the tyres, perhaps we won't have to worry too much, that it's a tyre matter and it's Bridgestone issue to solve. Perhaps in the real world, people don't have time for tyre warmers every time they go out on the roads, so maybe producing tyres that are better operating on cold conditions straight away, then getting warmer, is perhaps a advantage for road safety around the world. Another view to consider. It is a tyre challenge to produce tyres that are competitive without tyre warmers, but still the drivers will have to drive the colder phase with extreme skill and consideration, somewhere near the level of performance prior to tyre warmers coming into the sport, when Senna, Mansell/Prost had to do without it etc.

#63 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,457 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 18 April 2008 - 16:19

Originally posted by Atreiu


Yeah, it just popped to my mind as an example "just because it was done once doesn't mean it has to be done again".

"Just because they stopped doing it, doesn't mean there was good reason to"

#64 Villes Gilleneuve

Villes Gilleneuve
  • Member

  • 2,248 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 18 April 2008 - 17:46

Originally posted by Atreiu


Level playing field has absolutely nothing to do with it. The issue at hand is driver A coming out of the pits with 50kgs of fuel and stone cold tyres which simply deliver very little grip until they're heated.

Imagine someone trying slicks during a race at a damp Spa. The first corner he faces is nothing less than Eau Rouge. His options are to either crawl through it in order to not crash, or be brave, go at full speed and crash at one of the fastest corners of all. Even if he decides to crawl through it 20km/h slower than he normally would, what will happen to the fool on heated tyres and a lighter car who decides to overtake him on the outside because he's on a hot lap before he pits???? Or do you think he'll sit behind and lose a couple of seconds at least in the name of safety?

If not Spa, it can happen at Montreal or any nice street circuit with close walls and people fighting for postions while others struggle to get their tyres to temperature. 2009 will also have more street circuits beckoning for someone to crash on cold tyres...


meh...this was the case for 30 years in F1. You need better driving. God help Massa without tyre warmers.

#65 Villes Gilleneuve

Villes Gilleneuve
  • Member

  • 2,248 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 18 April 2008 - 17:49

Originally posted by bobqzzi


In short, any marginal improvement certainly isn't worth the technical and regulatory can of worms banning them would open.


F1 uses "spirit of the rule" in regulations and enforcement.

Ambient is ambient.

#66 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 9,842 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 18 April 2008 - 17:56

Originally posted by Villes Gilleneuve


meh...this was the case for 30 years in F1. You need better driving. God help Massa without tyre warmers.


Well then, just get those cars and tyres back from the musem and race them.

#67 mursuka80

mursuka80
  • Member

  • 5,106 posts
  • Joined: March 07

Posted 18 April 2008 - 18:20

i dont know why these drivers whine about everything"without TC rain is dangerous" and "tyrewarmers blaa blaa blaa" they are paid millions of euros so shut up or give some other guy whos not a pussy a chance :up:

#68 noikeee

noikeee
  • Member

  • 9,516 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 18 April 2008 - 18:43

Originally posted by SeanValen



Perhaps now they are going back to the future to improve racing, the problem is perhaps going over the top.


The way I see it:

Slicing aero, bringing slicks, banning tyre warmers = good

Reversed grids, points for overtaking, enforced rotational system of drivers = over the top

It's an alarming sign that we've heard calls for some of these over the top things.

#69 Villes Gilleneuve

Villes Gilleneuve
  • Member

  • 2,248 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 18 April 2008 - 18:56

Originally posted by mursuka80
i dont know why these drivers whine about everything"without TC rain is dangerous" and "tyrewarmers blaa blaa blaa" they are paid millions of euros so shut up or give some other guy whos not a pussy a chance :up:


Here's the problem with that: many (most) drivers in F1 are there because of nepotist connections, not proven talent. If the FIA starts making rule changes that actually put emphasis on driving, they will be embarrassed by the result.

People get used to anything. Modern F1 fans are now accustomed to boring racing, and frankly, if we put all F1 cars on rail tracks and paraded them for 2 hours, most fans would still be happy, as long as the Ferraris are in front.

#70 mursuka80

mursuka80
  • Member

  • 5,106 posts
  • Joined: March 07

Posted 18 April 2008 - 19:00

Originally posted by Villes Gilleneuve


Here's the problem with that: many (most) drivers in F1 are there because of nepotist connections, not proven talent. If the FIA starts making rule changes that actually put emphasis on driving, they will be embarrassed by the result.

People get used to anything. Modern F1 fans are now accustomed to boring racing, and frankly, if we put all F1 cars on tracks and paraded them for 2 hours, most fans would still be happy, as long as the Ferraris are in front.


Im a ferrari fan and its ridicoulus that a faster car cant pass the slower one.Biggest mistake in my opinion was when grooved tyres were introduced and a revlimited engines :down: I cant wait for 2009 :clap:

#71 Muz Bee

Muz Bee
  • Member

  • 2,531 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 18 April 2008 - 22:36

The claim that they raced without tyre warmers 30 years ago has one major error - they didn't schedule pitstops. If they did pit it was to replace a puncture, spark plug etc. Point is there will be desperate manoeuvres if the lead is about to change from a car on an out lap running 5 seconds slow.

Why make a whole raft of changes at the same time? In race setups it is always considered unwise to make wholesale changes as you don't know what change worked/didn't work.

Regards back to the future, I would like something along those lines to take place but sometimes what you want doesn't work out quite the way you imagined. How about changing back to an earlier qualifying system, I know having a televised shootout is a bonus but the cut-throat and in cases luck of the draw nature makes this system pretty sketchy.

I'm of the opinion that aero changes needs to be brought in with slicks together without any other major changes. These two in tandem could be just about all the sport needs without tinkering with all this cost saving fantasy and overcomplication of the rulebook. Hell, it isn't easy and no doubt about it Mosely has had his hands full.

#72 ex Rhodie racer

ex Rhodie racer
  • Member

  • 3,002 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 18 April 2008 - 23:49

Don´t know why, but somehow I´d rather accept Michael´s opinion as to whether tyre warmers should be retained or not. He´s no pussy, something he´s proved on many occasions. His experience in these matters should be respected, and if he says it´s not a good idea, then that´s good enough for me.
The alternative is for Bridgestone to produce a slick that offers reasonable grip when cold.

#73 stevewf1

stevewf1
  • Member

  • 3,259 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 18 April 2008 - 23:56

Originally posted by Buttoneer
Sadly I have to confess that I agree with Ross and that the added risk of falling off the track and having to defend hard for a lap or two is quite an exciting prospect.


I don't think there's any "sadly" to this... Isn't that what racing drivers are paid (lots of money) to do?

#74 StefanV

StefanV
  • Member

  • 1,214 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 19 April 2008 - 00:34

At first I thought removing the tyre warmers was a good idea and that the complaints from the drivers seriously threatened their image as dare devils. But Muz Bee have convinced me that tyre warmers should stay. Not because of safety, but because F1 are F1. I don't want them to go backwards to the good old days because those days are gone. I want real innovations back, I want to be surprised and amused by technical solutions. Maybe someone decides that the best way to heat a tyre is to have a huge mechanical device that beats the shit out the tyre, a guy with a blow torch or a micro wave oven, so be it. I don't want the old times back, I can watch youtube if I want nostalgia. I want to see things I have never seen before. I want a regulations that guides into the future, not rules that kills fantasy. I want the cars to look different again. Six wheels, eight wheels. No wheels. Free use of computers and driver assists.

But then I would like a Formula Drivers also, where the races are run at the same day at the same venue. Maybe it could be called GP1?


But I have not changed my mind about the drivers. Not many of them would step into a Lotus 72 and drive it in anger.

#75 WOOT

WOOT
  • Member

  • 429 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 19 April 2008 - 00:36

Originally posted by StefanV
At first I thought removing the tyre warmers was a good idea and that the complaints from the drivers seriously threatened their image as dare devils. But Muz Bee have convinced me that tyre warmers should stay. Not because of safety, but because F1 are F1. I don't want them to go backwards to the good old days because those days are gone. I want real innovations back, I want to be surprised and amused by technical solutions. Maybe someone decides that the best way to heat a tyre is to have a huge mechanical device that beats the shit out the tyre, a guy with a blow torch or a micro wave oven, so be it. I don't want the old times back, I can watch youtube if I want nostalgia. I want to see things I have never seen before. I want a regulations that guides into the future, not rules that kills fantasy. I want the cars to look different again. Six wheels, eight wheels. No wheels. Free use of computers and driver assists.

But then I would like a Formula Drivers also, where the races are run at the same day at the same venue. Maybe it could be called GP1?


But I have not changed my mind about the drivers. Not many of them would step into a Lotus 72 and drive it in anger.


So I assume you don't agree with the aero cuts and going back to slicks either?

#76 StefanV

StefanV
  • Member

  • 1,214 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 19 April 2008 - 00:45

Originally posted by WOOT


So I assume you don't agree with the aero cuts and going back to slicks either?

The grooved tyres are a joke. They are an attempt to go back to the old days when tyres sucked.
Aero is different, because unrestricted aero will quickly create a car that can no longer be driven to the limit by a human being. Tyre warmers does not limit the performance of the car, they just limit the performance temporarily.
I am not against rules, but I against the current tendency of simply apply bans and freezes. Those kind of rules are destructive. Why is KERS regulated? In the light of the current environmental issues, it is unbelievable that energy recovery must be limited.

#77 Orin

Orin
  • Member

  • 8,444 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 19 April 2008 - 00:55

Originally posted by StefanV

Why is KERS regulated? In the light of the current environmental issues, it is unbelievable that energy recovery must be limited.


I suspect it's because of the worry that some teams will fork out the upfront costs of several hundreds of millions, leading to a spending war. I actually like the 5 year phase-in period, if only the FIA adopted such staged plans for other areas. Bringing in new rules late in the day is likely to result in huge expenditure.

#78 WOOT

WOOT
  • Member

  • 429 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 19 April 2008 - 01:02

I think KERS was regulated because Max was afraid that teams like Honda and Toyota would dominate.

#79 StefanV

StefanV
  • Member

  • 1,214 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 19 April 2008 - 01:02

Originally posted by Orin


I suspect it's because of the worry that some teams will fork out the upfront costs of several hundreds of millions, leading to a spending war. I actually like the 5 year phase-in period, if only the FIA adopted such staged plans for other areas. Bringing in new rules late in the day is likely to result in huge expenditure.

It is already a spending war. I rather see them spend those money on something useful rather than winglets and TC/LC without electronics. The teams will always make a budget of how much they can spend, that budget is related to what they believe they can win, what profit they might make. There is no team, with the possible exception of Super Aguri (soon to be a ex F1 team), that is not a commercial entity.

Advertisement

#80 Orin

Orin
  • Member

  • 8,444 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 19 April 2008 - 01:10

Originally posted by StefanV

It is already a spending war. I rather see them spend those money on something useful rather than winglets and TC/LC without electronics. The teams will always make a budget of how much they can spend, that budget is related to what they believe they can win, what profit they might make. There is no team, with the possible exception of Super Aguri (soon to be a ex F1 team), that is not a commercial entity.


It's strictly capped by the boardrooms at the moment, they're not going to sanction another 100, 200 million to eke an extra few 100ths out of the aero department. Give them unlimited opportunity with KERS and it might be another matter - especially if you convince them to spend say 500 million over 5 years, but weighted heavily towards the first 2 in the hope of a run at the championship for the next 3-4 years while everyone else catches up. Then we'd see the mother of all spending wars. :eek:

#81 Slowinfastout

Slowinfastout
  • Member

  • 9,681 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 19 April 2008 - 01:12

Originally posted by Orin


I suspect it's because of the worry that some teams will fork out the upfront costs of several hundreds of millions, leading to a spending war. I actually like the 5 year phase-in period, if only the FIA adopted such staged plans for other areas. Bringing in new rules late in the day is likely to result in huge expenditure.


KERS could be regulated much like the current spec ECU. Basically having the final word over the thing is keeping costs in check...

To bring this back on topic, I believe the blankets should stay for now, given the current nature of the sport.. (refueling, frequent pitting)
The speed differential between cars would clearly be too dangerous. Its not like when you come up behind a F430 when driving a gt1 or a lm p1... the driver behind with the warmed-up tires doesnt necessarily know he's driving a MUCH faster car.

It really is dangerous.

#82 StefanV

StefanV
  • Member

  • 1,214 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 19 April 2008 - 01:18

Originally posted by Orin


It's strictly capped by the boardrooms at the moment, they're not going to sanction another 100, 200 million to eke an extra few 100ths out of the aero department. Give them unlimited opportunity with KERS and it might be another matter - especially if you convince them to spend say 500 million over 5 years, but weighted heavily towards the first 2 in the hope of a run at the championship for the next 3-4 years while everyone else catches up. Then we'd see the mother of all spending wars. :eek:

And what is the problem with that? That no privateers can enter? They can't now and quite honestly - is it important? This is Formula One, not Formula I Wanna Be a Part of It. In reality though, it might even open the doors for a completely new group of people. Scientists from other areas. Universities. Who knows? But currently there is more people researching new batteries than new petrol engines.

#83 StefanV

StefanV
  • Member

  • 1,214 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 19 April 2008 - 01:22

Originally posted by Slowinfastout
The speed differential between cars would clearly be too dangerous. Its not like when you come up behind a F430 when driving a gt1 or a lm p1... the driver behind with the warmed-up tires doesnt necessarily know he's driving a MUCH faster car.

It really is dangerous.

Come on, he see a car come out of the pits = cold tyres.

After a couple of corners the difference will be minimal, after half a lap the difference is academic.

#84 Orin

Orin
  • Member

  • 8,444 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 19 April 2008 - 01:25

Originally posted by StefanV

And what is the problem with that? That no privateers can enter? They can't now and quite honestly - is it important? This is Formula One, not Formula I Wanna Be a Part of It. In reality though, it might even open the doors for a completely new group of people. Scientists from other areas. Universities. Who knows? But currently there is more people researching new batteries than new petrol engines.


The problem is economic downturn. If the manufacturers hit a rough patch and spending is through the roof they don't cut back, they tend to drop out altogether. Imagine 3 or 4 manufacturers quitting in the same season? Whoever remained would walk it, it would completely devalue the competition.

#85 Slowinfastout

Slowinfastout
  • Member

  • 9,681 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 19 April 2008 - 01:29

Originally posted by StefanV

Come on, he see a car come out of the pits = cold tyres.

After a couple of corners the difference will be minimal, after half a lap the difference is academic.


Nope, sorry. In some occasions you would flatout be relying on communications to know. Its very dangerous mate, and believe me I would love to see the blankets go.

#86 WOOT

WOOT
  • Member

  • 429 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 19 April 2008 - 02:01

Originally posted by Slowinfastout


Nope, sorry. In some occasions you would flatout be relying on communications to know. Its very dangerous mate, and believe me I would love to see the blankets go.



And on what occasions would that be? Like he said, you see a driver coming out of the pits = cold tires.

#87 Jodum5

Jodum5
  • Member

  • 1,247 posts
  • Joined: July 04

Posted 19 April 2008 - 02:52

Originally posted by WOOT
I think KERS was regulated because Max was afraid that teams like Honda and Toyota would dominate.


If they can barely do well today, I find it hard to believe they would dominate with brand new technology in the sport.

#88 WOOT

WOOT
  • Member

  • 429 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 19 April 2008 - 02:58

Originally posted by Jodum5


If they can barely do well today, I find it hard to believe they would dominate with brand new technology in the sport.


Thing is Honda and Toyota have already invested a lot of R&D in KERS for road cars. Apparently the restricted KERS for 2009 is nowhere near as advanced as what Toyota or Honda have. If it was unrestricted then both the teams would have a huge advantage.

#89 Jodum5

Jodum5
  • Member

  • 1,247 posts
  • Joined: July 04

Posted 19 April 2008 - 03:04

Ok, they would have great KERS. But everything else would be mediocre like today and the past few years.

#90 bobqzzi

bobqzzi
  • Member

  • 360 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 19 April 2008 - 04:16

Originally posted by Villes Gilleneuve


F1 uses "spirit of the rule" in regulations and enforcement.

Ambient is ambient.


Uh, no. 1st rule of technical regs in any series is there is no spirit of the rules, only what is written down.

#91 travbrad

travbrad
  • Member

  • 605 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 19 April 2008 - 04:46

Originally posted by paranoik0


The way I see it:

Slicing aero, bringing slicks, banning tyre warmers = good

Reversed grids, points for overtaking, enforced rotational system of drivers = over the top

It's an alarming sign that we've heard calls for some of these over the top things.


I agree, although I do think there should be an increase in the points for winning (12-8 would be the same ratio as the 9-6 days). If they did that the 2009 regulations would be near perfection IMO. :) That being said, I wouldn't be too upset if they kept tyre warmers. The huge reduction in downforce and increase of mechanical grip should be enough to liven things up.

#92 StefanV

StefanV
  • Member

  • 1,214 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 19 April 2008 - 07:54

Originally posted by Orin


The problem is economic downturn. If the manufacturers hit a rough patch and spending is through the roof they don't cut back, they tend to drop out altogether. Imagine 3 or 4 manufacturers quitting in the same season? Whoever remained would walk it, it would completely devalue the competition.

Believe me, the competitors would have that n mind. If competition drops, the interest drops and the profit drops. Simple. They have that in the calculation. You can not prevent anyone to invest if they think they will make money out of it. If we take KERS as an example - they will spend millions on it. Many millions. And they will basically WASTE most of that money since it is all about polishing a turd of yesterday. The KERS will be so ridicoulisly ineffective that, even if it over the years have been made lighter than a matchbox, it is of no use for my next Toyota. They will have to research that separately. Waste of time. Waste of money. Waste of opportunity.

#93 Slowinfastout

Slowinfastout
  • Member

  • 9,681 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 19 April 2008 - 16:06

Originally posted by WOOT



And on what occasions would that be? Like he said, you see a driver coming out of the pits = cold tires.


I think you have answered your own question.;)

#94 Andrew Ford &F1

Andrew Ford &F1
  • Member

  • 246 posts
  • Joined: May 05

Posted 20 April 2008 - 10:23

Originally posted by Villes Gilleneuve
I don't get Schumacher these days, he's making comments that show he was never the sharpest knife in the drawer.
Tire warmers are only needed if everyone else uses them. If no one uses them, level playing field.

MS has also made some weird comments about Massa's ability to drive a non-TC car, which is ironic from Schumi, since most of his car control was steering wheel button-mediated for most of his wins.

God forbid we see some need for driving talent in F1 -where will all the "juniors" and Satos go?


Isn't that unfair? Sato had a great race in Canada last year, overtaking Alonso in the process. And even though I'm not one of his most vehement supporters (no pffence, but I personally think that the least Japanese we have on the grid the better), I strongly urge you to give respect where it is due.

#95 Andrew Ford &F1

Andrew Ford &F1
  • Member

  • 246 posts
  • Joined: May 05

Posted 20 April 2008 - 10:37

Originally posted by Atreiu


Level playing field has absolutely nothing to do with it. The issue at hand is driver A coming out of the pits with 50kgs of fuel and stone cold tyres which simply deliver very little grip until they're heated.



Imagine someone trying slicks during a race at a damp Spa. The first corner he faces is nothing less than Eau Rouge. His options are to either crawl through it in order to not crash, or be brave, go at full speed and crash at one of the fastest corners of all. Even if he decides to crawl through it 20km/h slower than he normally would, what will happen to the fool on heated tyres and a lighter car who decides to overtake him on the outside because he's on a hot lap before he pits???? Or do you think he'll sit behind and lose a couple of seconds at least in the name of safety?

If not Spa, it can happen at Montreal or any nice street circuit with close walls and people fighting for postions while others struggle to get their tyres to temperature. 2009 will also have more street circuits beckoning for someone to crash on cold tyres...


An overtake at Spa would make a highlight of the season. And by the way, remember that some years ago people used to race like that. Remember Lauda, Stewart, Fittipaldi, Clark, Peterson. And they did so in cars that were millions of times more dangerous than the ones of today and on the venues where if one had a huge crash no ambulance would be available and the one that eventually reached the site of the crash got lost on the way to the hospital. That's why the older generation of race fans cherish the memories of the races from the eighties, seventies and sixties (as well as fifties) so much. That's beacause they saw HEROES in action.

#96 Group B

Group B
  • Member

  • 13,971 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 20 April 2008 - 11:02

Originally posted by Villes Gilleneuve


Here's the problem with that: many (most) drivers in F1 are there because of nepotist connections, not proven talent. If the FIA starts making rule changes that actually put emphasis on driving, they will be embarrassed by the result.

I'm curious; could you humour us by listing all these drivers that don't belong in F1 and perhaps provide the names of all those we're missing out on? Thanks :up:

#97 Orin

Orin
  • Member

  • 8,444 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 20 April 2008 - 19:48

Originally posted by Andrew, Ford &F1


Isn't that unfair? Sato had a great race in Canada last year, overtaking Alonso in the process. And even though I'm not one of his most vehement supporters (no pffence, but I personally think that the least Japanese we have on the grid the better), I strongly urge you to give respect where it is due.


I take it this is due to the quality of Japanese drivers? :lol:

Sato may not rank as one of the greats, but his aggression and fairness make him a pleasure to watch - not least because you never know quite what he'll do next. I think Nakajima is going to prove even better, more Japanese drivers please. :smoking:

#98 Andrew Ford &F1

Andrew Ford &F1
  • Member

  • 246 posts
  • Joined: May 05

Posted 21 April 2008 - 08:18

Originally posted by Orin


I take it this is due to the quality of Japanese drivers? :lol:


:up: Exactly. But, just as you said, Nakajima might prove us wrong. Even though the way he crashed into the back of Robert Kubica in Melbourne makes me think that he graduated to F1 way too early. Another year of GP2 would do him no harm at all.

#99 Josta

Josta
  • Member

  • 2,237 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 21 April 2008 - 10:00

Originally posted by Andrew, Ford &F1


:up: Exactly. But, just as you said, Nakajima might prove us wrong. Even though the way he crashed into the back of Robert Kubica in Melbourne makes me think that he graduated to F1 way too early. Another year of GP2 would do him no harm at all.


Japanese drivers are very good at drift championships though. OT. I saw the European Drift Championship yesterday and it looks like loads of fun. One of the drivers was Shane Lynch, one of boyzone. I certainly had more respect for him after seeing him drive.

Maybe this is how Sato will overcome the tyre heating. He will treat the first lap as a drift race. :)

Advertisement

#100 StefanV

StefanV
  • Member

  • 1,214 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 21 April 2008 - 10:07

What is the difference between a Japanese driver and a driver from another country? I do not understand this discussion at all. You are saying that "because there have been no really good Japanese F1 driver, Japanese drivers are bad"? Did you say the same about Polish drivers before Kubica? About Norwegians before Petter Solberg? What about drivers from Uruguay? Surely they should not be in F1?