79 replies to this topic

[D1rtyHarry]

Mine:

 

1. All tyre manufacturers allowed - Let's see Pirelli, Bridgestone, Michellin all bring their best tyre.
2. Refueling - It brought excellent, exciting and understandable strategy to the table, let's have it!
3. V6/V8/V10/V12's all allowed - All the teams complaining about engine cost can now have at it and compete as they see fit!
4. Open Chassis development - Bring geniuses like Adrian Newey back into the fold - The biggest teams should be able to make gains in this department!
5. No driver PR, drivers should be allowed to say what they think before being briefed - Let's face it, drivers opinions and reactions are becoming duller and duller. This is because they are being told what to say and what not to say.

If F1 was opened up instead of being constantly restricted left right and center it would be a much more interesting series to watch.

Edited by D1rtyHarry, 15 May 2015 - 23:23.

[Atreiu]

Being half realistic.

1 - one tyre manufacturer, 5 dry compounds, teams to chose 2 per weekend. With 5 there is room for supersofts and/or rock solid hards for no stopping races, basically giving a full range of strategic options;
2 - fuel flow restrictions abandonned, nothing but max fuel allowed per race;
3 - customer cars allowed, subsidied engines and/or cars for customer teams;
4 - no DRS, spec near useless front wings, wider and lower cars;
6 - reversed grids with points for original top ten in qualifying (putting the fastest cars first on the grid has inherent problems which have been vastly demonstrated over the last several decades).

Edited by Atreiu, 17 May 2015 - 03:53.

[Gyno]

1. Teams decide what tire to use no mandatory use of both compounds.

2. Refueling.

3. No DRS.

4. Race what ever engine you got, No rev limiter or fuel flow limits.

5. More mechanical grip less aero grip, single plane front and rear wings. no stupid winglets all over the car.

[Wuzak]

1 - one tyre manufacturer, 5 dry compounds, teams to chose 2 per weekend;

Why 5? 4 is plenty. Agree with teams allowed to choose which tyres to use for a specific weekend.

 

2 - fuel flow restrictions abandonned, nothing but max fuel allowed per race;

You have that arse about.

Max fuel per race encourages fuel saving races. As some now. As in most in the last part of the original turbo era (1985-1988)

Fuel flow rate is the best equaliser between engine formats. And it encourages better efficiency - want more power, make it more efficient.

 

3 - customer cars allowed, subsidied engines and/or cars for customer teams;

Customer cars are attractive in the respect that they reduce the costs for the customer and amortize the cost for the constructor. It does mean that, in all likelihood, the customer will get a 1 year old car. Mind you, Force Inida would love to have a 1 year old Mercedes right about now.

Allowing customers to use the same spec cars as the constructor would be asking for trouble among the smller teams that choose to remain a constructor. A 2015 Williams shoudl be close enough to a 2014 Mercedes, but if two teams have the 2015 Mercedes expect a lot of complaining from Williams.

Another option is to allow customer teams only one car, rather than forcing two car teams. Their operations can be smaller and more focussed.

The problem with 1 year old cars is, of course, rules stability. Of which there has been precious little of late.

 

4 - no DRS, spec near useless front wings, wider and lower cars;

Can get rid of DRS when it is shown that cars are less affected by the turbulence of the car in front.

To do this I suggest a flat bottomed car, maybe keep the plank to control ride height a little.

Not in favour of a sepc front wing. A wider chassis and narrower wing should reduce the complexity of the front wing naturally.

Wider cars - yes.

 

6 - reversed grids with points for original top ten in qualifying.

Absolutely not.

You hear a lot about the artificiality of a lot of things in F1 at the moment - tyres, DRS, fuel limits, etc. This proposition, however, is more artificial than anything of those.

[ANF]

Circuits
Cars
Engineers
Marshals
Spectators

[ANF]

I think I forgot something...

[CPR]

I think I forgot something...

 

Fuel

 

(and maybe some monkey behind the wheel...)

[Wuzak]

5 Things I woul dbring to F1:

 

1. Flat bottomed cars. I would remove the 50mm step in the current cars, increase the size of the diffuser and reduce the size of the rear wing. This should give better downforce and be less susceptible to the aero wake of preceding cars.
2. Wider chassis. I would go back to the 1997 rules for width. That was 2000mm. The bodywork itself would remain the same width (1400mm), the extra width would be created by longer suspension arms and:
3. Wider rear tyres. I think this is a no-brainer for F1. Though the rear tyres have been the same width since at least 1994, or at least the maximum width has been!
4. Increased fuel flow rate. Keep the fuel flow rate formula at Q (kg/h) = 0.009 N(rpm)+ 5.5. Make the fuel flow rate constant at and above 13,000rpm. This would be 122.5kg/h, giving approximately 850hp from the ICE alone. This gives the desired 1000hp and also forces the engines to higher operating rpm. Dump the rev limit, as this will remain a irrelelvence. In any case, the engine manufacturers will cap the rpm of their engines to protect them. With extra power and extra downforce the lap times will be faster, some either more fuel will be needed for a race distance or they will have to save more often. I favour dropping the race fuel limit. Also, I would change the power unit allocation to have 4 of each component per season, except the ICE, whch will have 8.
5. Better tyres. I think that so long as the tyres can be pushed had for their expected life that is fine. Nursing tyres woudl still be an option, as would multiple stops. My idea is that the tyres should allow lap times to improve for most of their life (be it 15 laps or 30), then level off and become worse.

[Wuzak]

1994 Technical Regulations

 

http://www.jomenviss...Regulations.htm

 

Overall width: 2000mm (1800mm)

Body width ahead of front wheels (ie front wing): 1400mm (1650mm)

Body width between front and rear wheel centrelines: 1400mm (1400mm)

Width of rear wing: 1000mm (750mm)

 

Figures in parentheses are for the current rules.

[Jimisgod]

Tyre wars & no compound restrictions, customer cars but not eligible for WCC points, wide track & wider tyres, mild ground effects, reduced wings.

[RealRacing]

A trash can to put all the "fans" that want refueling back. Ignorance is courageous.

[Atreiu]

Why 5? 4 is plenty. Agree with teams allowed to choose which tyres to use for a specific weekend.

 

You have that arse about.

Max fuel per race encourages fuel saving races. As some now. As in most in the last part of the original turbo era (1985-1988)

Fuel flow rate is the best equaliser between engine formats. And it encourages better efficiency - want more power, make it more efficient.

 

Customer cars are attractive in the respect that they reduce the costs for the customer and amortize the cost for the constructor. It does mean that, in all likelihood, the customer will get a 1 year old car. Mind you, Force Inida would love to have a 1 year old Mercedes right about now.

Allowing customers to use the same spec cars as the constructor would be asking for trouble among the smller teams that choose to remain a constructor. A 2015 Williams shoudl be close enough to a 2014 Mercedes, but if two teams have the 2015 Mercedes expect a lot of complaining from Williams.

Another option is to allow customer teams only one car, rather than forcing two car teams. Their operations can be smaller and more focussed.

The problem with 1 year old cars is, of course, rules stability. Of which there has been precious little of late.

 

Can get rid of DRS when it is shown that cars are less affected by the turbulence of the car in front.

To do this I suggest a flat bottomed car, maybe keep the plank to control ride height a little.

Not in favour of a sepc front wing. A wider chassis and narrower wing should reduce the complexity of the front wing naturally.

Wider cars - yes.

 

Absolutely not.

You hear a lot about the artificiality of a lot of things in F1 at the moment - tyres, DRS, fuel limits, etc. This proposition, however, is more artificial than anything of those.

 

The post is mostly half serious building on what could be make more quickly possible.

 

Still, even if Force India had W05, it is a winning proven car which was fast everywhere. Think of how much FI could learn in a single season if they had it and some junior Mercedes engineers working hard for a promotion to the A team. I do assume a W05 would not be the dominant car but perhaps a solid and viable foundation for a single stop gap season in which FI would save some cash and build know how. Maybe I'm naive, but I stink FI would benefit more from applying 25 million bucks to race a built and designed W05 than spending that same ammount to design, manufacture, build and develop a car based on a VJM07 which in itself was never ever a top car.

 

Or Haas, who at least have the option of starting from scrap or with any other car which already was the effort of an investment of thousands of man hours and millions of dollaras.

 

Customer cars can work, but it depends on stability, I agree.

 

Reversed grids might be an aberration, but ultimately we'd get used to and come to admire it.

[Proto402]

1994 Technical Regulations

 

http://www.jomenviss...Regulations.htm

 

Overall width: 2000mm (1800mm)

Body width ahead of front wheels (ie front wing): 1400mm (1650mm)

Body width between front and rear wheel centrelines: 1400mm (1400mm)

Width of rear wing: 1000mm (750mm)

 

Figures in parentheses are for the current rules.

 

Other than having updates for safety, this SHOULD be the ruleboook.

[ViMaMo]

Here is my wild idea:

 

All teams start off the season with the same spec car. 10 races into the season, after the break, teams are allowed to bring in their modified car. Sort of like half season on spec cars and half season on F1 team specific cars. Spec chassis cannot be modified. Engine mod allowed to certain degree. Suspension changes allowed. Teams can bring in new front and rear wings. All within the current formula regulations. 

[wj_gibson]

1. Bernie Ecclestone's head on a plate.

That is all.

[quaint]

~4 litre V12s revving up to around 20 kRPM. They will be loud, powerful, and superb – limit the ultimate speed in other ways. I wouldn't even mind an engine freeze!

Edited by quaint, 16 May 2015 - 08:27.

[Lazy]

Wide track

18" wheels

Single plane fw

Bernie out

John Woo in to run TV coverage.

[V8 Fireworks]

1. Equal distribution of revenue to all 13 teams; having a good pitlane position is prize enough for WCC champion.
2. Revise calendar - consolidate traditional European markets like France, Germany, Britain.
3. Adopt Indycar engine regulations, no hybrid.  $1,000,000 per engine lease per car per season cap price; engines randomly distributed between works and customer teams to ensure they are all the same spec.
4. Improve fan access and reduce ticket prices - same paddock access for fans in F1 as in WEC, touring cars and any other motorsport.  Any punter can turn up and walk through the paddock with their children.      Improve fan access by only selling the racing to free to air television networks.
5. Revise technical regulations.  Return to wide track, wider tyres circa 1992, simplified wings, low noses, increased underbody aero.  Have an independent contractor like TMG to evaluate the aero changes and setup the aerodynamic regulations. - STOP the teams from having a say in the rules as that does not work.  Let, for example, John Judd design the engine rules and let  TMG or other aerodynamicists design the aero rules.

How hard can it be?

 

Basically start afresh and get rid of all the Bernie and political crap that damages the sport.

Edited by V8 Fireworks, 16 May 2015 - 08:42.

[TheRacingElf]

1. Wider maximum width, lets say go back to 2000mm for more simple mechanical grip

2. Smaller, inbound front wings. That way wings don't have to be so complicated to get the air around the front tire and get less sensitive to turbulent air.

3. Bigger diffuser for more rear downforce with a wider rear wing with much less angle. More rear downforce but less dependant on the wing

4. Wider rear AND front tires, cars get more dependant on mechanical grip and therefore can get closer to each other. Also you have to widen the front tires as well because with the smaller front wings and with only wider rear tires you will get loads of understeer

5. Active suspension. F1 needs to trade as much aero grip for mechanical grip as possible, that way they can stay close to each other without losing grip and this will help overtaking.

 

As you can see I have only technical things on my list because I think the most obvious thing to change for a new F1 is that it needs a different leadership structure

[V8 Fireworks]

1. Wider maximum width, lets say go back to 2000mm 

 

In 92 it was 2150mm and I think that looks better IMO. I would choose that width.

 

 

5. Active suspension. F1 needs to trade as much aero grip for mechanical grip as possible, that way they can stay close to each other without losing grip and this will help overtaking.

 

 

Noooo     Active suspension is silly and largely irrelevant to most road cars. Less complexity, not more IMO. 

[RekF1]

1-Refuelling 

2- More durable tyres

3- Freedom to choose which compound

4- Maximum and minimum amount of laps per tyre. to avoid situations like Russia 2014 and India 2013.

5- Slow the pit crews down (for safety reasons). minimum 5 secs for tyre change, 10 secs for fuel.

Edited by RekF1, 16 May 2015 - 09:42.

[Jamiednm]

Some of these are more realistic than others, but it gives a sense of how I would envisage F1 ideally:

 

1. Absolute fairness in prize money allocation:

- All teams who complete an F1 season (appearing in all events for that year) are awarded participation money. This is 75% of the prize money pot.

- Teams are then awarded further monies based on championship position. These are relatively small incremental sums, making up the remaining 25% of the prize money pot.

- This means that back marker teams and new entrants have the ability to run sustainable F1 teams and have more of a chance of being able to climb the competitive ladder.

- Bigger teams at the front of the grid are likely to have much stronger private technical and sponsorship deals based on their name and success, so limited prize money isn’t a handicap for them.

- All prize/participation money is based on one season, not an aggregate of recent seasons. No Ferrari bungs, absolute fairness.

 

2. Relatively open engine formula:

- Constructors are permitted to run any configuration of 6 or 8 cylinder, turbo charging and energy recovery systems are allowed, but not compulsory.

- No mandated limit on fuel, but engines are restricted to 1000 BHP. This will force teams to solve the equation of creating the most power and most fuel efficient engine as possible. This will add technical interest for fans, as you could have a 1000BHP gas-guzzling Ferrari racing a 700BHP fuel-efficient Mercedes for example.

- With this formula, engine designs are bound to converge over time, but I see that as a positive because it will create competitively-conceived powerful but fuel efficient power units that would do more to further the cause of road-relevant engine technologies than the current over-complex V6T marketing engines do.

 

3. Simplified aero and increased mechanical grip:

- Front wings are mandated to be more simple and narrower. Rear wings must be lower and smaller. Bodywork development is permitted, but only in certain areas. Larger diffusers and flat bottomed cars. Wider rear tyres.

- This is designed primarily to drastically reduce downforce, making the cars harder to control.

- It is also designed to make the cars look and behave meaner and to reduce the affect of turbulent air on trailing cars.

- This will also lead to the redundancy of DRS.

- While a lot of aero development is restricted, front & rear wing development and bodywork appendages in certain areas are still permitted so that F1 retains and builds on its expertise in this area. This is designed to ensure F1 remains at the cutting edge of engine, mechanical and aero development.

 

4. FOM commercial activities:

- Complete pie in the sky stuff this, but it would take place if F1’s commercial ownership was intent on increasing the financial strength of the sport rather than bleeding it dry for their own profits…

- Title sponsorship of the Formula 1 World Championship itself, much like how the Premier League is sponsored by Barclays.

- Measures to improve TV viewership, circuit attendance and general public engagement. This would include reduced entrance to circuit costs and the sale of TV rights to free to air broadcasters only, at least in major traditional motorsport markets. The cost of this would be offset by the title sponsorship, as would improved merchandising at the circuits.

- This (in conjunction with the more exciting cars and racing outlined above) is a strategy to increase the interest and fan engagement of F1, to attract more sponsors for the teams and to enable the circuits to sell out and make hosting a GP commercially attractive and financially beneficial.

 

5. Circuits:

- Replace large tarmac run offs with something that can punish driver error, but retain safety standards . This could be a combination of gravel traps, progressively-sticky surfaces and other, previously not considered solutions.

- Circuit location suitability needs oversight, to prevent races taking place in places that will not attract fans, won’t provide great racing and/or won’t add to the historic and prestigious image that F1 aims to portray. Locations such as Abu Dhabi, Sochi, South Korea and Azerbaijan would be under threat from this arrangement. In addition, there is a set maximum price that circuits have to pay to get an F1 licence, this means that rich emirates in the middle of nowhere can’t buy a race just by throwing more money at FOM and this would also protect classic circuits such as Monza and Spa.

[SCUDmissile]

1. Ground Effects

2. Fair prize money allocation

3. Budget Caps

4. Free up the rule book

5. Complete overhaul of the way FOM broadcasts and manages the rights to F1.

[Dick Dastardly]

1. Remove a lot of restrictions on what can / cannot be done on car design ie make it more open [70s / 80s style] so designers can have a ball day...

2. Similarly, open up the engine restrictions, so heading towards modern endurance type...

3. Ban electronics for the most part......manual gearchanges, manual starts using clutch etc. Keep electronic pit-lane limiter in 

4. Ban radios traffic

5. Teams to choose which tyres to use, none of this having to use 2 compounds.

 

Basically, I want to revert to 1970s / 80s style of car and racing.... 

[WOT]

Rant #1 - Formula One:

I am hearing so much bullshit from Toto Wolf regarding Formula One being a "MANUFACTURER'S Championship"!!

Formula One originated, and was designed as, and continued for many years as, a DRIVER'S Championship. It was only in later years that they decided to incorporate a "CONSTRUCTOR'S Championship" - to date, it is still called that --- NOT a f#cking MANUFACTURER'S Championship!!!

 

Where has this ever changed!!!  And since when has this ever been a Technology Championship!!  --  FFS!!!  ---  Let's get it very straight and clear - it's a DRIVER'S Championship!!

 

Rant #2 - Design:

 

GREEN!!!  ---  BULLSHIT!!!  ---  This is FORMULA ONE!!!

 

Piss off the dependance on AERO

 

Bring back Mechanical Grip

 

Piss off fuel restriction (and refuelling)

 

Bring back (low cost) reliable (light-weight) high torque engines

 

Piss off seamless shift gearboxes

 

Bring back manual 5 speed gearbox (with foot clutch and gearlever)

 

Piss off cheese tyres (and pit stops for "MANDATORY" tyre changes)

 

Bring back (low cost) hard tyres that will last AT LEAST one/two race/s (--- less marbles, more race space)

 

Piss off Pits to Car radio

 

Bring back the capacity for the driver to drive as fast as he can and to manage his own resources and work it out for himself in the best way possible to win the race!!

 

The Car:

Create a 3 dimensional box created by lines drawn from the inside line longitudinally, outside line latitudinally and the height of the tyres and you have your cube in which you can have your "car" - a minimun bottom plane of particular design to be specified to avoid turbulence. Any extrusion outside of this 3 dimensional box is to be specified by the FIA. ie. roll bar, front wing (single plane of specified height and surface area), rear wing (single plane of specified height and surface area).

 

KISS!!

Edited by Fontainebleau, 16 May 2015 - 22:48.
Edited by mod

[OO7]

Introduce the red Koopa shell.

[Jackmancer]

Less Tilke

More teams

Less paydrivers

More talent

[Spillage]

1) Evenly distribute F1's enormous pool of money. Customer cars will ruin the series.
2) The return of gravel traps. It's too hard to make a race-ending mistake nowadays.
3) Open aerodynamic regs as much as possible without compromising racing. I want the cars to look as different as possible.
4) Combine this with a return of ground effects. Would serve to make cars faster - also a good thing.
5) Actually race in the rain! Drives like Schumacher's at Spain in 1996 would be impossible nowadays. It's in such conditions that we see the greatest drivers perform.

[BobbyRicky]

No fans over the age of 50.

[anneomoly]

Here is my wild idea:

 

All teams start off the season with the same spec car. 10 races into the season, after the break, teams are allowed to bring in their modified car. Sort of like half season on spec cars and half season on F1 team specific cars. Spec chassis cannot be modified. Engine mod allowed to certain degree. Suspension changes allowed. Teams can bring in new front and rear wings. All within the current formula regulations. 

 

I think if you added in a budget cap that would be a good F2 starting ground. Make it a training ground for not only drivers, but also designers, etc.

 

 

My five:

 

1. Fair distribution of money, with a baseline TV/track fee that everyone gets that's theoretically enough to run a team on, then prize money. Prize money calculated as % of total pot with biggest % to 1st place and lowest % to last. And fair distribution includes the track fees too, they oughtn't be driven to bankruptcy for the prestige of a GP.

2. Mechanical over aero grip

3. Redistribute some money to the medicine in motorsport safety group and make sure engineers, track designers, ex-drivers etc are included so safety can be accurately proactive not needlessly reactive. F1 makes a huge amount of money and it ought to benefit all racers, not just them. It shouldn't take comas to lead to change, but at the same time it ought to be possible to make it safer in a controlled way that doesn't increase sterility and lets circuits keep their personality. More money = more data, better analysed = better decisions.

4. Open engine development, but a cap on how much they can sell to other teams for (to be decided as a % of the baseline funding). If developers want to spend more money on engines, they can't cripple other teams to pass that cost on. But at the same time the engines need to be road relevant so that manufacturers always get something back for their money.

5. Change the marketing strategy...

 

On track there's not an awful lot wrong with the sport that a good decade of stable rules wouldn't fix. But the noise coming from the off the track issues is enormous, and at the same time they're throttling their viewership to pay-per-view and those who can spend the cost of a holiday on a day's racing. Screw kids being able to aspire to be Lewis Hamilton, at the minute they can just about watch him on TV if they're lucky.

[maximilian]

2) The return of gravel traps. It's too hard to make a race-ending mistake nowadays.
 

 

This would make a HUGE difference.  Part of why there is little thrill these days is that cars just run off left and right over paved areas, and rejoin the track as if nothing ever happened.  Incredibly dull.

[Paco]

Being half realistic.

1 - one tyre manufacturer, 5 dry compounds, teams to chose 2 per weekend;
2 - fuel flow restrictions abandonned, nothing but max fuel allowed per race;
3 - customer cars allowed, subsidied engines and/or cars for customer teams;
4 - no DRS, spec near useless front wings, wider and lower cars;
6 - reversed grids with points for original top ten in qualifying.

1. Ridiculous, will instigate qualifying spec cars and race spec cars again and cost a fortune to develop 2 cars for each gp. Teams shouldn't be locked in prior to what to use. Plus, do wet and monsoon spec tires count in the count. Simpler rule unlimited choice of 5 but whatever compounds used in qualifying must also be used in the race. Wet tires allowed unlimited.

3. Customer car bs. If you can't even make your chassis, you no reason for being in pinnacle of racing.

4. No wings, unibody is just odd. Wings are ok, just need to control them, maybe limit number of elements etc and rear design that doesn't cause huge wakes,

6. Reverse grid. Stupidity, why bother with qualifying and taking away a key part of racing and excitement. Why punish the good teams. No motivation for teams to push at the back as they get a tone of coverage and noise without putting in the work,

Why not just bring back Bernie's idea of random sprinkles to shake up a race.

Racing has no place for artificial gimmicks..

[dreamer]

1. No DRS.

2. No fuel flow restrictions.

3. Each driver has to choose which tyre to use for the race.

4. The return of some classic circuits.

5. Gravel traps.

[Wuzak]

Rant #1 - Formula One:
I am hearing so much bullshit from Toto Wolf regarding Formula One being a "MANUFACTURER'S Championship"!!
 
Formula One originated, and was designed as, and continued for many years as, a DRIVER'S Championship. It was only in later years that they decided to incorporate a "CONSTRUCTOR'S Championship" - to date, it is still called that --- NOT a f#cking MANUFACTURER'S Championship!!!

Yep, they waited a whole 8 years to introduce a Constructor's championship.

So what if Wolff used the wrong terminology.

It is the constructors standings which determine the payouts to the teams.

 

And since when has this ever been a Technology Championship!!  --  FFS!!!  ---  Let's get it very straight and clear - it's a DRIVER'S Championship!!

When? How about forever?

For most of F1's life the rules have been quite open.

The only thing restricting technology has been the rules, particularly over the last 20 years.

 

Rant #2 - Design:
 
GREEN!!!  ---  BULLSHIT!!!  ---  This is FORMULA ONE!!!
 
Piss off the dependance on AERO
 
Bring back Mechanical Grip
 
Piss off fuel restriction (and refuelling)
 
Bring back (low cost) reliable (light-weight) high torque engines
 
Piss off seamless shift gearboxes
 
Bring back manual 5 speed gearbox (with foot clutch and gearlever)
 
Piss off cheese tyres (and pit stops for "MANDATORY" tyre changes)
 
Bring back (low cost) hard tyres that will last AT LEAST one/two race/s (--- less marbles, more race space)
 
Piss off Pits to Car radio
 
Bring back the capacity for the driver to drive as fast as he can and to manage his own resources and work it out for himself in the best way possible to win the race!!
 
The Car:
Create a 3 dimensional box created by lines drawn from the inside line longitudinally, outside line latitudinally and the height of the tyres and you have your cube in which you can have your "car" - a minimun bottom plane of particular design to be specified to avoid turbulence. Any extrusion outside of this 3 dimensional box is to be specified by the FIA. ie. roll bar, front wing (single plane of specified height and surface area), rear wing (single plane of specified height and surface area).
 
KISS!!

I think you need to watch historic racing.

Edited by Fontainebleau, 16 May 2015 - 22:48.
Edited by mod

[SealTheDiffuser]

a can of worms

[SealTheDiffuser]

No fans over the age of 50.

 

no fans younger than 21

[Wuzak]

Also, when was the last time F1 had low cost, high torque engines.

 

Maybe never.

 

And teh current engines are, quite possibly, the torquiest they have ever had.

[SealTheDiffuser]

a can of worms

 

now serious :

 

1. fat wide ballon tyres

2. big wings front and rear

3. H gate shifter

4. 1000HP

5. No DRS

[HeadFirst]

A coffin. With some of these BS ideas, that's all you would need.

[thegforcemaybewithyou]

Every new track has to include at least one straight that is longer than 1500m! I'm happy to see that Tilke already followed this rule for the new Baku track.

[ninetyzero]

1. Pre-1993 car/tyre/wing width regulations reinstated.

 

2. Free up engine regulations so teams can run any cylinder/engine capacity, thought they must still run hybrid/energy recovery systems and fuel flow limit remains. Refuelling stays banned. Forever.

 

3. Front wing must have flat end-plates and number of elements restricted.

 

4. 6 speed gearbox with H pattern manual shifter (should make Monaco interesting again)

 

5. No more 'special' bonuses/Bernie bribe money for favoured teams. Ferrari should not get an extra 164 million for finishing fourth!

Edited by ninetyzero, 16 May 2015 - 18:17.

[Henri Greuter]

First: start all over again and make sure Bernie and CVC can't top off the earnings for their own benefits and that money is divided honest over all teams and the engine builders and other suppliers of important universally used components like tires etc.

 

As for cars, I know the racing that year was horrible but I like to look at the 1988 turbocars of McLaren and Ferrari so as for dimensions, shape etc (as well as tires) they could be the inspiration for the new cars.

No raised nose, reduce aero efficiency, limited wing dimensions and numbers of components of the wings.

Engines: 1.2 liter turbo V6, twinturbos, KERS (flywheel kinetics) for hybrid assistance. Personally I hate it to let all the extra energy the turbo can provide to be wasted but for the sake of a better sound character and a bit higher noise levels than the current engines, forget all the turbo related energy recovery stuff. The more because with some 650 to 675 hp the cars are powerful enough to my liking. A 1.2 liter V6 at 2.5 atm boost with KERS must be capable of such outputs.

NO refuelling, fuel blend prescribed in components as well as contents and percentages in order to equalize the field in that respect as well.

Power outputs capped off with maximum boost control like in 1988, limit engine revs to 15000 max. With boost controlled there is no need for fuel flow restrictions but I would include it so in case of too high power outputs and cheating with turbos, there is another manner to keep power under control.

I would also make it mandatory to make the engines more longstoke to make ultrafast revving even more difficult. Also I would like to introduce all kind of rules to prevent the use of extremely expensive alloys, maybe even prescribe certain sub optimal materials and/or components to reduce the prize of the engines.

But also, because of the use of less optimal technology, allow more engines during the season so it is less of a risk to let the engines perform at the limit of their capacities and reduce the current `save the engine for other races`

To further reduce costs: select only a single manufacturer for the hybrid components on each PU so that only the combustion engine is different for each manufacturer.

 

Two tire components each event but no obligation to use both anymore. But to help the tire manufacturer, only those two tire options available for every race in the season, no 4 different specs for the entire season.

 

 

There is probably more I could wish for and dream about.....

 

 

Henri

[alfa1]

Yay!

Another "what would you do if you were in charge of F1" thread.

Must be simply ages since we had the last one.

[emmanuelrubi]

Do we really need another topic on how to improve Formula 1 ?

[turssi]

They should look like dragsters, have rocket boost, turn like a dj's table, have roll hoops and be bullet proof.

[Atreiu]

1. Bernie Ecclestone's head on a plate.
That is all.

And leave Todt to do whatever it is he does? No way.

[MattPete]

diffusers...phhht!  I want underbodies that look like this:

 

Edited by MattPete, 17 May 2015 - 00:55.

[chipmcdonald]

1) 215 mph x 5G safety limit.

2) anything that can fit inside a dimensional box

3) spec mass produced FIA safety tub

4) no software between driver inputs and car

5) my plan is so good I don't need a 5th choice....

[chipmcdonald]

CHIP'S ROAD CAR RELEVANT "Race on Sunday, buy on monday" FORMULA 1

 

 

1) production line engine 4 cylinder blocks, up to 3 liters, homologated to production cars that get at least 95% the MPG as the lowest competitor.

2) front wheel drive discretely separate ERS/electric system.  No limitations.

3) race on 87 octane pump fuel - literally.

4) 1982 wheelbase/track/tire size: tire compound must be of tire manufacturer's biggest selling formulation

5) no wings, only ground effects

[aguri]

1. Wider and larger wheels and tyres for more mech grip.

2. Total removal of front wings and Deregulation of other aero.

3. Remove ban on active suspension. 

4. Larger minimum weight to allow bigger drivers to compete

5. Slight changes to engine formula (Removal of RPM and fuel flow limits, removal of the token system in favour of open development, cost and quality controls on customer engines)