162 replies to this topic

[Bartonz20let]

4 races in, it's neck and neck and if Nico keeps close to Lewis mathematically it could still go down to the last race.

We don't know anything yet.

[Oriel]

I for one think that the new regs are essential to F1.  The sport was becoming totally irrelevant in terms of real world application - all the R&D money was spent on refining the aero which has basically no benefit to anyone outside of motorsport.  At least now, part of the budgets are being spent on turbo / energy recovery systems which is useful to car manufacturers.  I believe that Honda have basically said that if it wasn't for the new regs they wouldn't have re-entered the sport.  Surely having companies like Honda involved are what F1 is all about

 

I agree the noise of the new power unit is not as evocative as what we had previously, but it certainly isn't a terrible sound and I quite like the turbo whistle.

 

Whenever there are rule changes the liklihood of one team dominating increases; however I doubt that this will last and next year we are likely to have much closer racing at the front. This domination shouldn't, in my opinion, discourage the FIA from changing the rules every once in a while.   At least we can be grateful that the team dominating allows its drivers to race and hopefully we'll see a few more races like Bahrain before the year is out.

 

Perhaps those who think the current F1 is boring would let us know what seasons they thought were interesting?

[SenorSjon]

If that is the case, then come 2019 and Honda will leave again. By then, the PU are all fixed and almost no components can be developed. The engine freeze from 2008(?) onwards chased multiple engine manufacturers away.

[ClubmanGT]

One car miles in front, the runner up is his team mate, the only real duels are for 10-11-12-13-14...sorry what year is this again?

 

People are just less likely to say it because it's an English driver this time, not a German one.

[Oriel]

If that is the case, then come 2019 and Honda will leave again. By then, the PU are all fixed and almost no components can be developed. The engine freeze from 2008(?) onwards chased multiple engine manufacturers away.

 

Think it was the financial crisis more than the engine freeze which chased the big manufacturers away

[SenorSjon]

The economic crisis is a nice scapegoat to escape something you are not really interesting in anymore without losing to much face.

 

And an engine manufacturer needs to build an entire PU-system around the engine. I can't see many engine manufactureres interested in that because it costs several 100m to develop the complete system. We had Yamaha, Hart, Mugen, Mecachrome, etc in the past. Yes, there was some rebadging going on (we still have that with Renault <> Infinity), but it had more variety.

[PayasYouRace]

Not sure how the number of perceived engine manufacturers affects how boring the sport is. That's a question of the sustainability of the sport, and isn't really on topic.

[chipmcdonald]

Lol, what a bonkers statement, nobody is starting with 30% less than required as the new engines don't require the same ammount of fuel as last year.

Some teams are already under fuelling as far as I know simply because it's faster to do so.

 

 

If a car can only use 100kg of fuel an hour, and is only given 100kg of fuel to use, it will not be finishing a race that lasts close to 2 hours without ERS.   Cars are coasting into corners now where they were not before.  That is different.   That some cars are more fuel efficient *relative to others*, which allows them a margin, has nothing to do with whether the new rules are the same as previous years.   Take away coasting, take away ERS, against cars without a flow limit and fuel restriction, they don't finish at that pace.   It's the mild driving, turbo and ERS that gets them to the end on 100kg, relative to last year.  

 

Mild driving, running the engine below max revs, and ERS harvesting COMBINED is a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THING for F1.  

[chipmcdonald]

Except they don't start with 30% less fuel than required to finish and they always had managed fuel flow through various engine settings (difference now is that the maximum limit is set) so it really isn't that much different. It's not the story that most feared it would be, no more so than any other year.

 

 

"Managing" fuel flow for a choice in strategy is not the same as having to conserve energy from the start just to finish, much less not being able to finish without coasting and ERS.  That makes driving in 2014 COMPLETELY DIFFERENT than any time before in F1.   They cannot finish without ERS and coasting.

[PayasYouRace]

If a car can only use 100kg of fuel an hour, and is only given 100kg of fuel to use, it will not be finishing a race that lasts close to 2 hours without ERS.   Cars are coasting into corners now where they were not before.  That is different.   That some cars are more fuel efficient *relative to others*, which allows them a margin, has nothing to do with whether the new rules are the same as previous years.   Take away coasting, take away ERS, against cars without a flow limit and fuel restriction, they don't finish at that pace.   It's the mild driving, turbo and ERS that gets them to the end on 100kg, relative to last year.  

 

Mild driving, running the engine below max revs, and ERS harvesting COMBINED is a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THING for F1.  

 

I'm beginning to wonder if you actually understand much about Formula 1, or racing cars in general.

 

The 100 kg/hr is a maximum "instantaneous" limit. Unless we start racing on ovals, where the cars will be flat out all the way round, there is no way that you'd use 100 kg in an hour on any circuit, simply because the cars aren't at full throttle the whole way round the lap.

 

The ERS is part of the power train, and is there precisely to let that 100 kg of fuel take you further and faster. That's the whole point. We've already heard from some teams (Williams?) that they aren't that limited by the fuel restrictions, and aren't fuel-saving more than in previous years. They're not even using the maximum 100 kg at times.

 

Because here's the thing about racing cars, it's always faster to fill your car lighter and save a bit of fuel than fuel it heavy and burn the fuel at maximum all the way. Mass of car literally and figuratively outweighs mass of fuel over a race distance.

 

ERS isn't going anywhere. We have cars that are completing race distances with a fraction of the fuel load with only a small increase in overall time (and part of that is due to loss of downforce).

 

Oh and a note about the rev limit. Given that most teams aren't generally approaching it, it simply shows that the rev limit is too high or unnecessary, because the teams don't feel they need to rev that high for the best performance.

[Bartonz20let]

If a car can only use 100kg of fuel an hour, and is only given 100kg of fuel to use, it will not be finishing a race that lasts close to 2 hours without ERS. Cars are coasting into corners now where they were not before. That is different. That some cars are more fuel efficient *relative to others*, which allows them a margin, has nothing to do with whether the new rules are the same as previous years. Take away coasting, take away ERS, against cars without a flow limit and fuel restriction, they don't finish at that pace. It's the mild driving, turbo and ERS that gets them to the end on 100kg, relative to last year.

Mild driving, running the engine below max revs, and ERS harvesting COMBINED is a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THING for F1.

You've got your math wrong, the max 100kg/h value is incorrect, to calculate max distance you need the average kg/h across a race, if the race lasts for 2 hours then it's unlikely that that circuit would demand anything close to an avarage of 100kg/h

Edited by Bartonz20let, 08 May 2014 - 14:10.

[chipmcdonald]

The 100 kg/hr is a maximum "instantaneous" limit. Unless we start racing on ovals, where the cars will be flat out all the way round, there is no way that you'd use 100 kg in an hour on any circuit, simply because the cars aren't at full throttle the whole way round the lap.

 

That's nice, but does not have anything to do with your refuting my "this year is completely different" original point.  Last year there was not a limit, this weekend Williams was given the option of "would you like to run as much fuel as you like, and no flow limit?" they would take it.  They would be hitting the rev limiter, and they would be using way more than the alloted 100 kg.

 

 

They are *coasting* into corners where before they were on throttle.  It doesn't matter that they not on the flow limit 100% of the time, they are having to meter their energy use around it - it wouldn't be there otherwise.  Continue the semantical deconstruction Mr. YouRace, but it doesn't negate what the obvious premise of my post is: "it's completely different this year".

 

I am beginning to think you and your "everything is just great in F1!" cohorts must be more interested in legalese than car racing, my friends who are race car drivers and fans are not fond at all of the new quiet, neutered cars and economy racing.  Your mileage obviously varies within the 100 kg./h limit, sorry.

[PayasYouRace]

Chip, it's not completely different this year. It's only slightly different, and I understand it well enough to see that.

 

I wouldn't say everything is just great in F1, but I do tend to talk about what I enjoy more than what I don't. At least going by this poll, current F1 is considered not to be boring by a good number of race fans, so there can't be that much wrong with it.