86 replies to this topic

[RealRacing]

So when does a car 'deserve' to move up the ranking then? We were at a point where you often had to be some 2.5s a lap faster just to be able to pull out of the slipstream and try an outbraking maneuver. Isn't that ridiculous? We still have tracks that would see no overtaking without DRS - most of them, actually. I always loved how in every single pre-race show before DRS we had experts pointing out that overtaking is pretty much impossible at that particular circuit. 

 

DRS isn't an automatic pass either. You still have to get close enough to your opponent, so you still have to be faster than him. All it does is enable the faster driver to make use of his speed instead of being trapped behind slower cars. Yes, there are better solutions to the aero problem, but no, there is pretty much zero chance we will see any of those being implemented in the near future.

 

 

Yes, let's again blame it on the FIA, who had worked out a comprehensive aerodynamics overhaul which was then scrapped by the teams because it was 'too radical'.

 

 

Also @SenorSjon, yes, DRS is just going to stay because Whiting, grand dictator of F1, 'loves it'. Yup. Poor teams, never getting a say in anything. 

Ok, my mistake then. Can we blame it on the incapability of F1's stakeholders to agree on measures designed to help the "sport"?

 

Regarding FA vs Petrov, it's always used as the "perfect example" of why DRS is needed and IMO it exaggerated the opinions both due to the fact that it was a difficult track for passing anyway, it was an important event with important  consequences and FA /Ferrari did a good job of taking it out of proportion. Granted, passing with the unchanged aero was difficult, but not impossible and there are tracks where passing is difficult to impossible anyway.

 

In any case, people should understand that DRS was the ill result of a political failure and is not, nor should it be, the solution for improving passing; the original idea of reducing aero was.

[Risil]

Yeah Imola had 'suspense' but only if you allowed yourself to believe that a car massively faster, held up in dirty air, would suddenly be able to get by.

 

Hamilton would've made the pass

[OvDrone]

I hate DRS. Proper hate.

[andyF1]

Very boring pre-Trulli train

 

This was at Silverstone, in the days before they butchered the Abbey section with a chicane. Good racing and overtaking can happen with the right kind of circuit design.

I seem to remember in the pre DRS days we generally saw a fair amount of overtaking at Spa, Montreal and Interlagos. Circuit design has a significant role to play in creating good racing and overtaking possibilities. Remember Hungaroring and Catalunya races in the pre DRS era? Or maybe like me, you've tried to erase those races from your memory, and have no wish to recall just how tedious and awful 90% of those races were.

[ANF]

This was at Silverstone, in the days before they butchered the Abbey section with a chicane. Good racing and overtaking can happen with the right kind of circuit design.

I seem to remember in the pre DRS days we generally saw a fair amount of overtaking at Spa, Montreal and Interlagos. Circuit design has a significant role to play in creating good racing and overtaking possibilities. Remember Hungaroring and Catalunya races in the pre DRS era? Or maybe like me, you've tried to erase those races from your memory, and have no wish to recall just how tedious and awful 90% of those races were.

Yes, I try to erase them but I can't.

 

Then again, I remember the races Imola in 2005 and 2006: two tremendous fights between Schumacher and Alonso on a circuit that had been ruined by chicanes and where overtaking was almost impossible. I probably wouldn't have remembered these races had we had DRS back then.

[travbrad]

I disagree. We obviously have different standards, so here is an example of good racing in my book.

Indeed.  It's those on-track battles that make the racing exciting.  Whether they end in a pass or not is almost irrelevant.  Seeing a car with DRS breeze past another one on the straight like they are standing still isn't exciting at all.

[travbrad]

This was at Silverstone, in the days before they butchered the Abbey section with a chicane. Good racing and overtaking can happen with the right kind of circuit design.

I seem to remember in the pre DRS days we generally saw a fair amount of overtaking at Spa, Montreal and Interlagos. Circuit design has a significant role to play in creating good racing and overtaking possibilities. Remember Hungaroring and Catalunya races in the pre DRS era? Or maybe like me, you've tried to erase those races from your memory, and have no wish to recall just how tedious and awful 90% of those races were.

 

Yep, which makes a very good case for not using DRS at all for some circuits, or getting more good circuits on the calendar (unlikely ).  Spa used to be one of the best races of the year on a consistent basis, but DRS has ruined it.  On the other hand DRS has brought some life to a track like the Hungaroring.

[ElDictatore]

Im not totally against DRS. I just think they overdone it. Some circuits like Montreal or Monza can work without and get worse with DRS tbh. However stuff like Bahrain or Hungary are really abismal to watch and got better the last years due to DRS.

So I guess it's not so black and white but rather grey? How it will cope in the new rules is not easy to predict. So let's see how it goes.

Edited by ElDictatore, 23 February 2014 - 23:49.

[Romulan]

I think it is a wasted opportunity not to give these new regs a chance to produce racing, as opposed to DRS one car driving past another.

But too many people only want to see one car drive past another rather than racing skills, so that's what we're going to keep getting. And if anyone doesn't like it they can expect a snarky tweet from Mr Brundle.

As for the stats, how many of those non-DRS passes happened in the first couple of laps when you would expect a lot of shuffling? DRS killed the racing at Spa last year, it isn't just how many times one car gets past another, it's the way the battle unfolds. Or it used to be...

 

Brundle, in my ever so humble opinion, might benefit from an Anti Snark System or ASS if you prefer.

[OvDrone]

Don't you guys think this may be the year to get rid of DRS?

 

 

Any year is good to get rid of DRS.

 

/thread

[fabr68]

Change the unraceable tracks first, then think about removing DRS

[pingu666]

cars will be more twitchy with this bigger slot gap?

in nascar 

 they position there cars cleverly to effect the other guy, with side drafting etc, misjudge it and you might wreck both of you.  In f1 they just press a button

[gold333]

People liked overtaking

Yes but they did not like sailing past, which is what a DRS overtake is.


Outbraking is where the real excitement used to be.

Either that or bring back the Hanford device (slipstreaming gone berserk, requiring 3 different top gears) which was banned in 1998:

64 lead changes at 247mph (more than 400kph) and two crowd decapitations later it was banned.

The passing in this video is insane though.



6-7 minutes into the video features some of the most exciting racing I have ever seen.

The reason the passes are much more exciting than DRS (which considering it is an oval is saying alot) is this:

The vicious closure rate in slipstreaming (due to the Hanford device) is eliminated to 0 as the overtaker pulls alongside the other car.

Then it's either outbrake or outmanouver as the cars are simply side by side, 4 abreast at 250 mph.

DRS is much less exciting as the closure rate continues well past the point the cars are side by side, and one sails by the other like a Porsche passing a lorry on the highway.

Edited by gold333, 24 February 2014 - 05:17.

[PayasYouRace]

As I've said elsewhere, the problem is in imprementation. That it stays open even after the driver pulls out of the slipstream negates the reason it is used in the first place.

 

You'd probably have to use some GPS trickery or something, or even rely on aerodynamic sensors, but it must only open when the attacker is 1s behind on a straight and directly behind the defender. As soon as they pull out from behind it should close. If the pass it made early enough, the defender should have a chance to duck in behind, and open his DRS.

 

DRS should fix the physics, that's all.

[Goron3]

This was at Silverstone, in the days before they butchered the Abbey section with a chicane. Good racing and overtaking can happen with the right kind of circuit design.

I seem to remember in the pre DRS days we generally saw a fair amount of overtaking at Spa, Montreal and Interlagos. Circuit design has a significant role to play in creating good racing and overtaking possibilities. Remember Hungaroring and Catalunya races in the pre DRS era? Or maybe like me, you've tried to erase those races from your memory, and have no wish to recall just how tedious and awful 90% of those races were.

 

Fantastic post. DRS and Pirelli spec tyres was an over reaction to the awful races in 2010 (paritcularly Bahrain) as overtaking was very hard and there were few pitstops, however if you look at the tracks where there was little overtaking it was almost always due to poor circuit design. That's why Abu Dhabi, Hunary, Korea and India will always have few non-DRS overtakes (slow corners before a straight spread the cars out) whilst Spa, Turkey, Monza and Brazil tend to produce close racing.

 

Shame the higher ups didn't realise that.

[tomjol]

cars will be more twitchy with this bigger slot gap?

in nascar 

 they position there cars cleverly to effect the other guy, with side drafting etc, misjudge it and you might wreck both of you.  In f1 they just press a button

 

When was the last time you saw an F1 race that looked anything like a Nascar race?

 

The comparison is irrelevant. F1 is not pack racing on ovals.

 

 

As I've said elsewhere, the problem is in imprementation. That it stays open even after the driver pulls out of the slipstream negates the reason it is used in the first place.

 

You'd probably have to use some GPS trickery or something, or even rely on aerodynamic sensors, but it must only open when the attacker is 1s behind on a straight and directly behind the defender. As soon as they pull out from behind it should close. If the pass it made early enough, the defender should have a chance to duck in behind, and open his DRS.

 

DRS should fix the physics, that's all.

 

I'm no aerodynamicist, but suspect it isn't as clear-cut as "directly behind".

 

When the system was first introduced, there was chatter about how its operation was too simplistic. As I recall, the response from the FIA was that it would be very difficult to have something clever which worked reliably and consistently, and didn't create controversies about wings closing at the wrong moment etc.

Edited by tomjol, 25 February 2014 - 08:24.

[PayasYouRace]

 

I'm no aerodynamicist, but suspect it isn't as clear-cut as "directly behind".

 

When the system was first introduced, there was chatter about how its operation was too simplistic. As I recall, the response from the FIA was that it would be very difficult to have something clever which worked reliably and consistently, and didn't create controversies about wings closing at the wrong moment etc.

 

 

Fortunately I am. The wake (with the slipstreaming zone and turbulence etc.) is directly behind the car. More accurately, it's where the car drove. It doesn't spread out or anything. Only a strong crosswind would have any noticeable effect. We're not talking about slab sided tourers or stock cars where you can start playing with side-drafts and stuff.

 

I firmly believe that the DRS is a good idea in principle, and just needs to be implemented with the right balance of KISS and full on accuracy. That's why I think just having a zone directly behind each car using GPS or some other suitable sensor package would be the ideal situation.

[slideways]

In the space of a few seasons and at the age of 30 I have started to feel like a rose tinted old timer. I am still pissed about the 25 points system let alone DRS, the double points fiasco or the other ways they have ditched 60 odd years of history/DNA. I have been watching a lot of 2003-2010 races this off season and what I've been missing in the Pirelli era is that sensation of ultra speed/grip, and knife edge change of direction that no other series could compare to. The old cars used to be on full rpm and carve every corner of the race like butter.

 

Well, it's nice to see the blown rears gone and a great new engine formula. I would prefer it on a Michelin control tyre and no overtaking aids (except leaving space for what the teams devise themselves in terms of aero/engine modes).

[wingwalker]

I'd rather keep it but lots of the DRS zones need to be shortened and some scrapped (not every track needs to have two).

[Ali_G]

I'd rather keep it but lots of the DRS zones need to be shortened and some scrapped (not every track needs to have two).

 

Not every track should have it at all.  No way should it be implemented at Montreal IMO.

Edited by Ali_G, 25 February 2014 - 11:03.

[HoldenRT]

I don't mind DRS, on some circuits it's overkill (and should be reduced) but on other circuits it's valuable and improves things.

 

edit - I also agree with what a lot of the purists say.. but not all DRS overtakes are drive bys, some are still made by outbraking.  Some of them are too easy and some of them aren't so bad.  I find DRS more neutral in that it helps sometimes, and is bad sometimes.. where as the conserving of so many things with the slow motion racing, bugs me more.. and when I think back to 2004-2007 for example.. if there were DRS with engine and tyre wars going on, I think that'd been perfect.  Not on all tracks, but on the Trulli train tracks.  On Monaco it's pointless and they shouldn't even have it.  On a track like Turkey or Canada it's not needed, but on other tracks it could help.  It shouldn't assure an easy overtake but just help give the guy behind a chance.  Make it a bit easier for him.  Because certain circuits give the slow driver infront a big advantage.. combined with the aero turbulence.

 

The DRS should account for that aero turbulence and balance things out.. but not give the driver behind TOO big of an advantage.  But just enough to give him half a chance if he is good enough.

Edited by HoldenRT, 25 February 2014 - 15:09.

[Alexis*27]

Not every track should have it at all.  No way should it be implemented at Montreal IMO.

 

There have been plenty of tedious Montreal races with little overtaking in the pre-DRS days though.

[Disgrace]

That says very little given you have ~50 races to choose from.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Yes but they did not like sailing past, which is what a DRS overtake is.


Outbraking is where the real excitement used to be.

Either that or bring back the Hanford device (slipstreaming gone berserk, requiring 3 different top gears) which was banned in 1998:

64 lead changes at 247mph (more than 400kph) and two crowd decapitations later it was banned.

The passing in this video is insane though.



6-7 minutes into the video features some of the most exciting racing I have ever seen.

The reason the passes are much more exciting than DRS (which considering it is an oval is saying alot) is this:

The vicious closure rate in slipstreaming (due to the Hanford device) is eliminated to 0 as the overtaker pulls alongside the other car.

Then it's either outbrake or outmanouver as the cars are simply side by side, 4 abreast at 250 mph.

DRS is much less exciting as the closure rate continues well past the point the cars are side by side, and one sails by the other like a Porsche passing a lorry on the highway.

 

This is the highlight of the thread

 

"I hate the way cars sail by with DRS, but I love a more extreme version".

 

And when was the Handford wing banned? A tire went into the stands after Fernandez got into the wall during the first race (1998). Maybe there were 'decapitations' but there weren't a string of Handford related injuries and then a drop of the rule. Guess what, they started using it at more races and even tried a road course version.

[Disgrace]

So you're fine with DRS when it works/is reasonable.

 

Which is basically the position of 99% of people who don't object to DRS.

 

Why is an artificial aerodynamic advantage that everyone has on the offense(DRS) so terrible but an artificial aerodynamic advantage that everyone has on defense(turbulence) praised? Because one was written into the rules and the other is an unwanted accident?

 

I'm not fine DRS period, but I can acknowledge the individual race when it is not poorly implemented. I cannot really give you a satisfying answer to your aero question, as I have never considered my criticism of DRS from that angle.

[Atreiu]

It is definitely not too soon to get rid of DRS. More often than not it results in easy passes for positions while the defending driver is either defenseless or too concerned with tyre management to try to not be overtaken.

[bub]

As good a time as any.

[GlenP]

Haven't read the whole thread, but DRS is a good concept that just needs better tuning. If they get the activation points correct they can get the effect they are looking for - just enough effect to counteract the dirty air, but not so much as to make things too easy.

[GTRacer]

Mercedes 2011 overtaking statistics:

 

804 total overtakes

363 of those DRS assisted

That was 2011, Last year there was a lot more DRS 'overtakes'  than Non DRS 'overtakes'.

I forget the exact figures but something like 75% of all overtakes were DRS generated & over 85% of them were marked down as been very easy. Like your 2011 figures, These were also from Mercedes.

 

Also going back to 2010, The last season without DRS there was a big leap in the amount of on-track overtaking that season mainly thanks to the ban on refueling putting the emphasis back onto the on-track racing. Even the 1st race that year in Bahrain which was described as a boring procession with no overtaking actually featured a reasonable level of overtaking (24 on-track overtakes).

 

Its also interesting how the fans impression of what circuits have more overtaking is often wrong when looking at the stats.

Circuits like Suzuka, Spa & Silverstone are often talked about as been circuits which feature good racing & overtaking opportunities while places like Bahrain are looked at as featuring less overtaking.

However more often than not statistically Bahrain has featured more on-track overtaking than the 'traditional' circuits, The 2006 Bahrain Gp in particular featured way more overtaking than was the norm for the time.

 

 

Getting away from that, Should DRS be banned? I don't think it ever should have been implemented to be honest.

 

Its supporters point to the increase in 'overtaking', But whats the point in talking about how DRS enabled 50 'overtakes' in a race if 49 of those 'overtakes' we so easy that they were boring to watch & added zero excitement to the race? Quantity over quality does not make something better.

The 2011 Turkish Gp featured over 100 DRS 'overtakes' yet who looks back on that as been a great race worth remembering?

 

I also look at it from this point of view. Pre-DRS you could tell who the great racers were because despite all the talk about how overtaking was impossible they actually went out & proved you could overtake. Montoya, Hamilton & Kobayashi for example were 3 drivers who came into F1 & immediately showed overtaking was possible & they stood out above many of the others for that reason.

Now because 'overtaking' has been made so ridiculously easy & everybody can do it easily its hard to spot the real standout racers.

If Montoya & Hamilton were entering F1 now without the need to even try & pull off some super exciting overtake they would not stand oput as much as they did as far as been 'real racers' goes.

 

 

The FIA have played around with the length of the zones, & the zone locations yet long zone/short zone its still proved too much a lot of the time because thats not the only thing which dictates how easy or not a DRS 'overtake' is, There are so many other factors from car setup to weather conditions & wind speed/direction that there will never be any DRS zone that works as its supposed to (Offer an assist & not generate the pass) on a consistent basis.

 

 

The problem F1 is in now with DRS is that once you introduce gimmicks its hard to get rid of them & thus you become dependant on them. Fans have become so used to 'overtaking' been so easy & there been so much of it that any drop will be seen as 'boring'. You see it with the tyres, Everyone is trying to figure them out over the 1st half of the year & you get some unpredictability & everyone raves about how great it is yet as soon as things settle down everyone whines about how boring its got, So for the next year they totally change the tyres again & end up having to go more & more extreme each year to the point where tyre management becomes the most important factor every race as we saw in early 2013.

 

F1 had a chance to make real positive changes when you had the proposed 2014 regs drawn up with big aero reductions & ground effects, Yet thanks to DRS there is now no need to make any changes because the teams believe that DRS is working perfectly, Opportunity lost.

You had circuits such as Abu-Dhabi talking about asking drivers for opinions on changes to improve racing....Again though thanks to DRS 'working' there's now no need to make any changes.

 

 

DRS is nothing but a band-aid, Its the easiest/laziest solution which in the end has solved nothing & will continue to solve nothing & will continue to prevent real changes been made for as long as it remains a part of F1.

Ban DRS, Highlight the real problems & then work on improving things. You can't do that with DRS a part of the 'show'.

Edited by GTRacer, 25 February 2014 - 17:03.

[spacekid]

To anyone that says it was impossible to overtake in modern F1 pre-DRS, may I counter with - Michael Schumacher, Monaco, 2006.

[Gorma]

To anyone that says it was impossible to overtake in modern F1 pre-DRS, may I counter with - Michael Schumacher, Monaco, 2006.

So we have one confirmed pass before DRS or are you talking about this?

Edited by Gorma, 25 February 2014 - 18:31.

[spacekid]

So we have one confirmed pass before DRS or are you talking about this?
http://www.youtube.c...h?v=pWwNU79-tZA

Unnecessarily snarky, especially given Michaels current situation.

You should know full well Michael put in far more than 1 non-DRS pass in during that race, which I thought it would be nice to remind people of.

But no, you can't just let it be and enjoy a great display of overtaking can you, around Monaco of all places. You just have to focus on the bad and be snide about it. Well done.

[Gorma]

Unnecessarily snarky, especially given Michaels current situation.

You should know full well Michael put in far more than 1 non-DRS pass in during that race, which I thought it would be nice to remind people of.

But no, you can't just let it be and enjoy a great display of overtaking can you, around Monaco of all places. You just have to focus on the bad and be snide about it. Well done.

 

First of all Michaels current condition hasn't got anything to do with this. The reason why Michael overtook so many cars was because he had one of the fastest cars and because he started from the pitlane. I would have gladly enjoyed a great display of overtaking in Monaco, but I couldn't find any videos on that. I could only find dozens of videos of Michael parking his Ferrari in the middle of the corner. 

[Atreiu]

Haven't read the whole thread, but DRS is a good concept that just needs better tuning. If they get the activation points correct they can get the effect they are looking for - just enough effect to counteract the dirty air, but not so much as to make things too easy.

 

How much more will it take to get it right? Another 3 years?

[SenorSjon]

First of all Michaels current condition hasn't got anything to do with this. The reason why Michael overtook so many cars was because he had one of the fastest cars and because he started from the pitlane. I would have gladly enjoyed a great display of overtaking in Monaco, but I couldn't find any videos on that. I could only find dozens of videos of Michael parking his Ferrari in the middle of the corner. 

Look for Coulthard vs Bernoldi then.  A McLaren in it's prime vs an Arrows. 

[gold333]

This is the highlight of the thread

"I hate the way cars sail by with DRS, but I love a more extreme version".

.

I think the highlight of the thread may be your reading comprehension.

"The vicious closure rate in slipstreaming (due to the Handford device) is eliminated to 0 as the overtaker pulls alongside the other car.

DRS is much less exciting as the closure rate continues well past the point the cars are side by side".

Edit: And the Handford device was reduced from 10 to 6 inches after those crashes.

Perhaps read a reply next time before putting words in someones mouth?

Edited by gold333, 27 February 2014 - 22:45.

[R Soul]

What about a DIS (drag increase system)? There's no reason to say one straight is a more valid passing place than another, so there could be detection lines ahead of each corner. The driver behind could increase his wing angle through the corner if he is within a fixed time (1 or maybe 2 seconds) of the driver ahead. Its state could be controlled by steering wheel angle*. The problem with turbulent air is that there's not enough downforce in the corners, and a DIS would solve it.

 

Better yet, have it variable. At 5 seconds the driver can get a little more downforce, and at 1 second he can get a lot.

 

*It would be up to the teams to consider how it should react to a moment of opposite lock.

Edited by R Soul, 28 February 2014 - 00:44.