Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 2 votes

Racing artificiality


  • Please log in to reply
84 replies to this topic

Poll: ? (118 member(s) have cast votes)

What takes the bite as the WORST FORM of racing artificiality

  1. Reversed, random grids (18 votes [15.25%])

    Percentage of vote: 15.25%

  2. Push-to-pass, DRS (24 votes [20.34%])

    Percentage of vote: 20.34%

  3. Success ballast, success time (during pitstops etc) (21 votes [17.80%])

    Percentage of vote: 17.80%

  4. Performance balancing inside and/or outside the classes, in GENERAL (1 votes [0.85%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.85%

  5. Performance balancing when it's the primary concept of the series, FIA GT3 style (5 votes [4.24%])

    Percentage of vote: 4.24%

  6. Performance balancing between different technologies, drivetrains, fuels (diesel, petrol etc) ie not directly car related necessarily (3 votes [2.54%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.54%

  7. Waiver granting for specific cars (even when there's no real reason) (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  8. Usage of fuel is limited to certain amount (1 votes [0.85%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.85%

  9. Mandatory use of multiple tyre compounds (10 votes [8.47%])

    Percentage of vote: 8.47%

  10. Mandatory pit stops in shorter races, pit stop in specific time frame (3 votes [2.54%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.54%

  11. Drivers are allowed to cut through (tarmac) run-offs or partially go past the white line without penalty (10 votes [8.47%])

    Percentage of vote: 8.47%

  12. "You can zig but you cant zag" (2 votes [1.69%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.69%

  13. Joker laps, reference lap times (Dubai 24h, Bathurst 12h) (3 votes [2.54%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.54%

  14. Joker laps in rallycross (2 votes [1.69%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.69%

  15. Disallowing new car-related inventions as they might prove to be too advantageous (3 votes [2.54%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.54%

  16. Spec tires, spec ECUs, spec bodywork etc in order to close up the competition (3 votes [2.54%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.54%

  17. Superspeedway restrictor plate racing, tandems, packs (1 votes [0.85%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.85%

  18. Competition cautions (7 votes [5.93%])

    Percentage of vote: 5.93%

  19. Green-white checkered (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  20. Aaron's Lucky Dog (1 votes [0.85%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.85%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#51 flatlander48

flatlander48
  • Member

  • 320 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 17 January 2013 - 14:12

No I'm certainly not... I was the one who put it on the poll

Competition caution / pre-defined caution that happens during lap X and everybody knows about in advance
"'Normal caution" // visible crash, debris, coke can, whatever
"Mystery caution" // invisible debris

Just because competition caution often claims to have a "safety reason" doesn't mean it's true... it's just there to bunch up the field again


There's no point for what you say in the first 20-30 laps of a 200 lap event. It effect it is the first pit stop. Why would you want to close up the field that early? Makes no sense. Further, when there is a Competition Caution, it is always stated what the reason is. If it's tires, it would have been an issue for the whole weekend. They just don't arbitrarily drop out of thin air. If it's a pavement problem, that would also be obvious. If you've ever seen a badly blistered tire that has delaminated, this wouldn't seem so nebulous.

Anyway, what you said applies to the last of the three items, but not the first.

Advertisement

#52 flatlander48

flatlander48
  • Member

  • 320 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 17 January 2013 - 14:23

Yep, you said they throw Competition Cautions due to tyre wear/chances of blow-outs. What I'm saying is that maybe they should make the pit-stop earlier/drive slightly slower in the tyres are that on the limit.


Actually the Competition Caution is early. They want to run long enough to stress the tires, but not long enough to get to a regular pit stop. That way it is easier to compare. Everyone would have exactly the same number of laps on the first set of tires. Driving slower might not stress the tires enough if there is a problem. The idea is to run long enough to know what the tire is or isn't doing, but not long enough that a tire is likely to fail if there is a problem.

Goodyear and NASCAR don't want a mass of wrecks due to tire problems. Aside from possibly causing physical injury, it makes them look REALLY bad. Think Michelin at the USGP in 2005

#53 SonnyViceR

SonnyViceR
  • Member

  • 1,387 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 17 January 2013 - 14:29

Competition caution doesn't always come up at the beginning of the races, for example I've seen quite a few ARCA events where they throw it in when almost half of the race is gone, and miraculously the pit window always happens to fall on that period. It is my observation that yeams do no not like green flag pitstops in stock cars, to put it mildly...

#54 SonnyViceR

SonnyViceR
  • Member

  • 1,387 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 17 January 2013 - 14:31

Anyway, I'm no NASCAR expert so that's it for my part on cautions.

#55 flatlander48

flatlander48
  • Member

  • 320 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 17 January 2013 - 15:16

Competition caution doesn't always come up at the beginning of the races, for example I've seen quite a few ARCA events where they throw it in when almost half of the race is gone, and miraculously the pit window always happens to fall on that period. It is my observation that yeams do no not like green flag pitstops in stock cars, to put it mildly...


ARCA is a different animal. While I have seen some of their races, it wouldn't be enough for a real sampling. Actually, ARCA was founded in my home town as the MARC (Midwest Auto Racing Club) by John Marcum. So much for trivia. Green flag stops may be tougher for the ARCA folks as you're more likely to have part-time or pick up crews. It may be more of a safety issue for them. Even the NASCAR folks that work 30+ races a year make mistakes, so you might not want to put green flag pit stop pressure on part-timers or a pick up crew. Pit road can also be a problem. They run a lot of short tracks where pit space is VERY tight. It can be hard to get the car in the pit box, let alone service it. Note also, just as another difference, they are on Hoosier Tires and not Goodyear.

I'm not sure about other series doing Competition Cautions. Seems like CART or the IRL might have done that at MIS some years back due to some track repairs for water seepage, but I'm not entirely sure about that.

Edited by flatlander48, 17 January 2013 - 15:22.


#56 7MGTEsup

7MGTEsup
  • Member

  • 385 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 17 January 2013 - 15:23

I don't watch NASCAR but isn't that what practice days are for? To asses tyre ware and optimise your car to make best use of the tyres? Seems strange to have a mandated pitstop on lap X to check the tyres.

#57 flatlander48

flatlander48
  • Member

  • 320 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 17 January 2013 - 18:35

I don't watch NASCAR but isn't that what practice days are for? To asses tyre ware and optimise your car to make best use of the tyres? Seems strange to have a mandated pitstop on lap X to check the tyres.


It's not just checking the tires. The tires are actually replaced as they would be on any pit stop. The difference is I think Goodyear reviews the temp data for everybody and inspects any tire that looks like it might be close to failure. What they know is that all of the tires have been run in the same time frame and under the same ambient and track temperature conditions. Any differences in the tires would be due to set up differences and what the drivers did.

I think their practice sessions are too short to do the set up work they need to do AND do long runs. I'd have to look at one of their schedules to be sure, but the one or two sessions after qualifying would be the only time where you would be assured that everyone would be on their race set up and not a qualifying one. Even if you did a long run on the day before as a final tire check, you would need for the weather conditions to be essentially the same on race day for that check to be accurate. I think it would be for confirmation that things will be OK under racing conditions. Unless there is a problem, teams would not be doing much (or hardly anything at all) regarding set up. It's mainly for Goodyear; not the teams.

Just found a weekend schedule from 2011 for MIS...

Friday, August 19, 2011


8:00 a.m. Parking Lots Open

10:00 a.m. Gates Open to the Public

11:00 a.m. - 11:50 a.m. NASCAR Camping World Truck Series Practice

12:00 a.m. - 1:30 p.m. NASCAR Sprint Cup Series Practice

1:40 p.m. - 2:50 p.m. NASCAR Camping World Truck Series Final Practice

3:40 p.m NASCAR Sprint Cup Series Qualifying



Saturday, August 20, 2011


7:00 a.m. Parking Lots Open

9:00 a.m. Gates Open to the Public

9:10 a.m NASCAR Camping World Truck Series Qualifying

10:10 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. NASCAR Sprint Cup Series Final Practice

12:00 p.m. Pre-Race Activities & Driver Introductions

12:30 p.m. Start of VFW 200 NASCAR Camping World Truck Series


Sunday, August 21, 2011



6:00 a.m. Parking Lots Open

8:00 a.m. Gates Open to the Public

12:30 p.m. Pre-Race Activities & Driver Introductions

1:00 p.m. Start of Pure Michigan 400 NASCAR Sprint Cup Series


There's one session after qualifying, but it's time doesn't match with the race. Even if weather conditions were exactly the same for both days, it should be hotter at 1pm than it would be at end of Saturday practice at 12pm. Also, assuming it didn't rain, on Sunday you would have all the rubber put down on the track from the 200 mile Truck Series race as that happens after the last Cup practice session.

Edited by flatlander48, 17 January 2013 - 19:26.


#58 Myrvold

Myrvold
  • Member

  • 2,836 posts
  • Joined: December 10

Posted 18 January 2013 - 03:06

Oh, I freaking hate the Joker Lap in Rallycross!!

#59 wewantourdarbyback

wewantourdarbyback
  • Member

  • 6,358 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 18 January 2013 - 09:36

Has to be the joker and reference lap times at Dubai.

Advertisement

#60 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 9,162 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 18 January 2013 - 09:43

Things like fake cautions, success ballast, SC's allowing lapped cars back on the lead lap and reverse grids directly penalise success and reward failure, so no I don't like them at all.

However things like DRS, Push to Pass are not in my opinion artificial at all. They reward a driver who has caught up with a car in front on merit. Its not the FIA's fault that aero science is so advanced that cars are designed to disturb air to stop cars following closely and overtake. Its sensible to counter-balance science in my option.





#61 SonnyViceR

SonnyViceR
  • Member

  • 1,387 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 18 January 2013 - 10:22

Has to be the joker and reference lap times at Dubai.


:up:

Surprising that no votes yet for waivers, plate tracks, green white checkered (!) and Lucky Dog.

Edited by SonnyViceR, 18 January 2013 - 10:22.


#62 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 14,163 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 18 January 2013 - 11:44

:up:

Surprising that no votes yet for waivers, plate tracks, green white checkered (!) and Lucky Dog.


We can only vote once!

For those of us who don't follow every pro-am sportscar race on the planet, can someone explain what they do at the Dubai 24 Hours?

Apart from fuel limits, all these other artificialities at least have the defence that they're trying to put a better show on for the fans, and let the drivers compete a little more closely. Total fuel restrictions are purely designed to win favour in board rooms, selling racing as an R&D exercise. I know many racing fans like to hate themselves for having actually been entertained by their sport once in a while, but that really is another level of Evil. :)

Edited by Risil, 18 January 2013 - 11:47.


#63 Victor_RO

Victor_RO
  • RC Forum Host

  • 2,823 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 18 January 2013 - 11:48

For those of us who don't follow every pro-am sportscar race on the planet, can someone explain what they do at the Dubai 24 Hours?


The rule used to apply to all cars, but now no longer applies to selected A6(GT3) cars (basically the fastest cars in the class in qualifying). Each class in the race is given a reference lap time based on the average performance of the cars in the class, and depending on the class, drivers are allowed to go only as fast as that reference lap time, or are allowed to go faster than it for a set number of times. If you go faster than your reference lap time and you are either in a class that doesn't allow you to, or you have used up your "joker" lap time allocation (i.e. 10-20 laps faster than the reference lap time in a race that lasts around 600 laps), you get a drive-through penalty.

And to put it mildly, if you have a problem that means the car needs to spend time in the garage, you are f*cked, because you cannot drive flat-out to catch up, you have to keep driving to a reference time and pray the ones in front of you break down too.

#64 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 14,163 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 18 January 2013 - 11:59

:D That's hall-of-fame-level bonkers.

Thanks Victor and Sonny. :up:

Edited by Risil, 18 January 2013 - 12:03.


#65 flatlander48

flatlander48
  • Member

  • 320 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 18 January 2013 - 11:59

:up:

Surprising that no votes yet for waivers, plate tracks, green white checkered (!) and Lucky Dog.


G-W-C is B/S in my opinion as it can kill fuel milage strategy. It's not good to see someone lose because they ran out of gas.

Lucky Dog, while the idea is a bit lame, does have a safety purpose. It was part of the ruling to not allow drivers to race back to the S/F line to get a lap back when a Yellow came out. Dale Jarrett spun at one race and this brought out a Yellow. However, he was sitting sideways on the track (driver's side up track), and several cars went whizzing by in an effort to get a lap back. Very Unsafe. Basically now when a Yellow comes out, you slow down regardless of where you are on the track.

Edited by flatlander48, 18 January 2013 - 11:59.


#66 SonnyViceR

SonnyViceR
  • Member

  • 1,387 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 18 January 2013 - 11:59

Basically this is the entire process Risil

Dubai 2012
1) All cars in GT3 have been performance balanced prior to event, of course
2) After qualifying the qualifiers that were "too fast" receive weight, fuel tank and ride height BoP penalties for the race (severity of adjustments is higher the faster you were)
3) What Victor explained above BUT every A6 entry must follow the rule

Dubai 2013
1) All cars in GT3 have been performance balanced prior to event, of course
2) After qualifying "PRO" cars receive weight, fuel tank and ride height BoP penalties for the race, "AM" cars nothing
3) What Victor explained above

It's absolutely ridiculous

Edited by SonnyViceR, 18 January 2013 - 12:03.


#67 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 14,163 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 18 January 2013 - 12:14

G-W-C is B/S in my opinion as it can kill fuel milage strategy. It's not good to see someone lose because they ran out of gas.


Indeed. I can appreciate the thinking behind it but it meshes badly with top-level NASCAR races. Fuel mileage is naturally going to be a big thing in such loooong races, and that part of the race story is essentially dissolved into luck.

One artificiality that hasn't been mentioned is the F1 rule that backmarkers have to move out the way when they're being lapped. A regulation preventing active blocking should be enough. There's no reason why lapping traffic should be removed from the skillsets of top drivers, and it would make those situations when second is following first by 5s or so but is unable to make a pass a lot more interesting to watch.

#68 noikeee

noikeee
  • Member

  • 9,757 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 18 January 2013 - 12:14

The rule used to apply to all cars, but now no longer applies to selected A6(GT3) cars (basically the fastest cars in the class in qualifying). Each class in the race is given a reference lap time based on the average performance of the cars in the class, and depending on the class, drivers are allowed to go only as fast as that reference lap time, or are allowed to go faster than it for a set number of times. If you go faster than your reference lap time and you are either in a class that doesn't allow you to, or you have used up your "joker" lap time allocation (i.e. 10-20 laps faster than the reference lap time in a race that lasts around 600 laps), you get a drive-through penalty.

And to put it mildly, if you have a problem that means the car needs to spend time in the garage, you are f*cked, because you cannot drive flat-out to catch up, you have to keep driving to a reference time and pray the ones in front of you break down too.


Wow. :eek: I'd never heard of that but that's certainly up there with the worst rules ever.

#69 SonnyViceR

SonnyViceR
  • Member

  • 1,387 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 18 January 2013 - 12:40

Specific thread for joker laps and other stuff here
http://forums.autosp...howtopic=179939

#70 billm99uk

billm99uk
  • Member

  • 2,956 posts
  • Joined: February 05

Posted 18 January 2013 - 16:57

Push-to-pass, DRS

Strangely enough I find push to pass a lot more annoying than DRS. At least with DRS you can develop or set up the car to make better use of it and it's there to erase a specific problem (i.e. "dirty air") rather than purely as an "add-on". P2P is just there as a gimmick and makes things a bit silly, like the Joker lap.

The other thing I never understood was why fuel restrictions are so critical in Indycar than half the races end up as "fuel mileage" and in F1 we hardly notice them (Hamilton/Vettel low fuel qualifying laps apart!)

Edited by billm99uk, 18 January 2013 - 16:57.


#71 ryan86

ryan86
  • Member

  • 1,100 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 19 January 2013 - 00:22

I think with the larger number of cautions on ovals/street circuits, a premium is placed at trying to pit at the earliest opportunity at which it can be possible to make the end of the race. So if the fuel limit flat-out is 50 laps. And there's a caution with 60 laps to go, driving at 95%, maybe a caution or two and it's worth risking it.

#72 flatlander48

flatlander48
  • Member

  • 320 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 19 January 2013 - 02:50

Indeed. I can appreciate the thinking behind it but it meshes badly with top-level NASCAR races. Fuel mileage is naturally going to be a big thing in such loooong races, and that part of the race story is essentially dissolved into luck.


The original idea was to not have a race end under caution. Thing is, you could still end under caution the way the rule is written. You get 2 (or 3?) shots at finishing with a G-W-C. If it doesn't get done, the race ends under a caution.

#73 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 4,831 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 19 January 2013 - 09:37

Push-to-pass, DRS

Strangely enough I find push to pass a lot more annoying than DRS. At least with DRS you can develop or set up the car to make better use of it and it's there to erase a specific problem (i.e. "dirty air") rather than purely as an "add-on".



If I understand itright, Push to Pass can also be used to defend your position because both cars can use it at the same time. DRS howver is only functional on the car behind the other thus levanig the car in front less possibility to defend against the car behind because of being denied an advantage because of its position! Now how equal is that?

And let's not forget, if the rules finally do something against aero n F1 cars and the current brake systems, then DRS would not be neccesary to make racing entertaining again.....

Henri


#74 flatlander48

flatlander48
  • Member

  • 320 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 19 January 2013 - 12:29

If I understand itright, Push to Pass can also be used to defend your position because both cars can use it at the same time.

Yes. PTP is self-contained. It doesn't depend upon having another car around; ahead of or behind. And, it can be activated anywhere on the course.

DRS howver is only functional on the car behind the other thus levanig the car in front less possibility to defend against the car behind because of being denied an advantage because of its position! Now how equal is that?

And let's not forget, if the rules finally do something against aero n F1 cars and the current brake systems, then DRS would not be neccesary to make racing entertaining again.....

Henri


To me, what's fascinating is how the drivers learn to use the systems. With PTP, there is some way (I forget exactly) that you can activate the system and get 1 or 2 extra uses over the theoretical number of uses. With DRS, Kimi used the DRS offensively and defensively at Spa against MSC. Any system can be gamed and thats what makes it interesting.

#75 billm99uk

billm99uk
  • Member

  • 2,956 posts
  • Joined: February 05

Posted 19 January 2013 - 14:08

If I understand itright, Push to Pass can also be used to defend your position because both cars can use it at the same time. DRS howver is only functional on the car behind the other thus levanig the car in front less possibility to defend against the car behind because of being denied an advantage because of its position! Now how equal is that?


Yes, but that's exactly the problem for me. DRS just negates a systematic aerodynamic disadvantage for the car behind. P2P is something artificial added on. The only problem I have with DRS is when they get the zone lengths wrong and it's either ineffective, or the car behind can cruise past without fighting for the next corner. I'm hoping they'll get better at that ( though I may well be disappointed!)

And let's not forget, if the rules finally do something against aero n F1 cars and the current brake systems, then DRS would not be neccesary to make racing entertaining again.....


Fine, if they can do that. But people have been trying for years and consistently failing. Aerodynamics is so critical to the speed of modern GP cars it may be something we simply cannot eliminate. We'd have to actually"un-learn" something, which we just can't do.

#76 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,563 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 19 January 2013 - 14:18

Push-to-pass, DRS

Strangely enough I find push to pass a lot more annoying than DRS. At least with DRS you can develop or set up the car to make better use of it and it's there to erase a specific problem (i.e. "dirty air") rather than purely as an "add-on". P2P is just there as a gimmick and makes things a bit silly, like the Joker lap.

The other thing I never understood was why fuel restrictions are so critical in Indycar than half the races end up as "fuel mileage" and in F1 we hardly notice them (Hamilton/Vettel low fuel qualifying laps apart!)


More safety car periods, so they try to stretch the fuel. F1 teams are always stretching the fuel too, but we just hear about it less.

#77 flatlander48

flatlander48
  • Member

  • 320 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 19 January 2013 - 15:57

One interesting point about DRS:

The last passing statistics that I remembered (from 2011) showed a significant number of regular passes compared to DRS passes. I'm thinking it was 2 or 3 times as many over the entire season.

#78 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 4,831 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 20 January 2013 - 09:20

Yes, but that's exactly the problem for me. DRS just negates a systematic aerodynamic disadvantage for the car behind. P2P is something artificial added on. The only problem I have with DRS is when they get the zone lengths wrong and it's either ineffective, or the car behind can cruise past without fighting for the next corner. I'm hoping they'll get better at that ( though I may well be disappointed!)



Fine, if they can do that. But people have been trying for years and consistently failing. Aerodynamics is so critical to the speed of modern GP cars it may be something we simply cannot eliminate. We'd have to actually"un-learn" something, which we just can't do.



And is DRS not something artificially added to the car? If not: Tell me why!

As for unlearning aerodynamics, that is really not so difficult at all
For starters: ban the raised nosed and prescribe the maximim hight of the lowest part of the car not being higher than a given height.
Lots of all that air junk finds its origin in that raised nose and the air flows that it enables
Front wings: allow only two elemerts on each side of the nose: a prescribed size end plate and a single wing element, also with the limits of size, angle of attac etc. described
It really isn't that difficult if the ruke makers really, really want it.
To lengthen brake zones: Ban carbon brakes.
But it would result in a number of younger fans screaming out loud that cars have become slower and are no longer the fastest cars in the world anymore.
It can be done, really. But no-one wants it because it is seen as a step back in time. Which is indeed the case to some extend, but doesn't has to be so bad at all.
Had rule makers not intervented at Indianapolis after for 1997 and allow the kind f developments which had lead to the 239+ speeds of Luyendijk in 1996, they would have gone to 250 if not more nowadays.
Fortunately, something was done for the sake of common sense and safety

Henri


#79 phoenix101

phoenix101
  • Member

  • 262 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 20 January 2013 - 10:59

Well, I guess now we know why racing sucks in the modern era. Only about 5% of people see that BoP is taking over the world--FIA GT3, FIA GT1 (RIP), LMP2, ACO GTE, Grand Am Daytona Prototype, Grand Am GT, V8 Superstars, etc. The FIA even equalize the engines in F1 these days. But fans are more worried about DRS, which is just a way to compensate drivers in the aero wash (hence the 1 second rule), and success ballast, which is often more equitable than BoP adjustments.

At least with spec car racing, like NASCAR, DTM, and V8 Supercars, they tell everyone that the cars are the same. FIA GT3 wants people believe that a McLaren MP4-12C is about as capable as a BMW Z4. Why do McLaren and Ferrari put up with such nonsense? B/c they want to sell GT3 cars. Racing? Let's hope ACO and the FIA get some chassis rules hammered out, and GT3 (as we know it now) is vanquished from professional racing.

The sanctioning bodies need to quit obsessing about the 'entertainment value' of BoP (never seems to materialize). If two competitive drivers are in the same car, the racing will be close. Quit using BoP to get manufacturers involved, and create a better business model.

Thankfully F1 and LMP1 are moving to fuel-flow-limiting for 2014. F1 will continue its obsession with mostly-spec engine dimensions, but LMP1 will apparently allow more freedom. A glimmer of hope.

Advertisement

#80 Victor_RO

Victor_RO
  • RC Forum Host

  • 2,823 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 20 January 2013 - 11:16

but LMP1 will apparently allow more freedom. A glimmer of hope.


The only limitations on the 2014 LMP1 powertrain rules are fuel flow and the number and capacity of the energy recovery systems allowed... except for the fact that the engine must be a reciprocating piston engine (therefore no rotaries or gas turbines).

#81 SonnyViceR

SonnyViceR
  • Member

  • 1,387 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 20 January 2013 - 11:55

The lack of air restrictors on those new P1s is great as well, but unfortunately I don't see the brightest of futures for the class... exiled from other series and teams are forced to go into the uncertainty that is WEC, with privateers standing no chance agains the factories. Too much hybrid crap too, not every make wants to take that route

It's a pity that ACO has elected to transfer LMP2 into BoP class as well (even though I don't really care about it). GTE is sort of screwed but IMO it is still the most fair GT category out there

As for F1's everlasting move into spec direction - yes that's exactly what's happening, but unlike NASCAR and alikes they don't really wanna admit it. And every time someone comes up with something radical within the rules, FIA immediately bans it

Edited by SonnyViceR, 20 January 2013 - 12:01.


#82 aditya-now

aditya-now
  • Member

  • 7,119 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 20 January 2013 - 13:57

You should have left multiple choices possible in the poll - in that way we would get a more coherent picture, as to me there is at least five forms of artificiality that stand out (reverse grids, success ballast, yellow flag in certain moments, performance balancing, mandatory pit stops) and I can't rate one above the other.

Otherwise, very good topic.

#83 phoenix101

phoenix101
  • Member

  • 262 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 20 January 2013 - 21:59

The lack of air restrictors on those new P1s is great as well, but unfortunately I don't see the brightest of futures for the class... exiled from other series and teams are forced to go into the uncertainty that is WEC, with privateers standing no chance agains the factories. Too much hybrid crap too, not every make wants to take that route

It's a pity that ACO has elected to transfer LMP2 into BoP class as well (even though I don't really care about it). GTE is sort of screwed but IMO it is still the most fair GT category out there

As for F1's everlasting move into spec direction - yes that's exactly what's happening, but unlike NASCAR and alikes they don't really wanna admit it. And every time someone comes up with something radical within the rules, FIA immediately bans it


LMP1 could be bright. It looks like ACO will aero balance downforce, which is nice b/c downforce isn't a terribly useful technology, and it has a tendency to prohibit close racing on the rare occasions when close racing occurs in prototypes. F1 has suffered from this problem for decades, and DRS was the only solution they could muster, since the aerodynamicists seem to be all powerful (prompting the withdrawal of BMW, Honda, and Toyota).

Imo, downforce should be balanced in all forms of racing b/c downforce is borderline useless. Wings and other aero elements were only really allowed into racing as an attempt to control top speeds in the era of Group 7 sportscars and 3.0L F1 machines. Create some kind of simplified downforce equation, and let the aero people develop the winglets, gills, and whatever else they want, just no moveable ducts or active bodywork. The sport is fuel flow limited so the teams can no longer throw a huge wake off the rear of the car. Let them do what they want by working on efficiency. Maintain turbo formulas so exhaust blowing isn't as big a deal.

If the aero and bodywork become significantly more efficient, the teams may not have incentives to build a different aero package for each track, though the RRA prohibits such tactics in F1 these days.

#84 Afterburner

Afterburner
  • In the running for best OP of 2014

  • 3,456 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 21 January 2013 - 04:15

Did it really damage this class?

Posted Image

And LMP1 of 2014?

:p

That Sauber is so beautiful... <3

Edited by Afterburner, 21 January 2013 - 04:16.


#85 svalgis

svalgis
  • Member

  • 56 posts
  • Joined: January 13

Posted 27 January 2013 - 16:33

i wouldn't mind any of those options in f1. the sport needs to move forward and embrace a new audience, and that is not "purists" on the forums. the vast majority want to be entertained so thats what has to happen if we are to begin filling up the tracks and turn around the viewing figures. personally i look forward to the first track with artificial rain, god know some of the tracks need it.