75 replies to this topic

[johnnycomelately1]

The 50's, 60's F1 cars were many seconds off the pace of course but were so entertaining to watch.

No aero, skinny one compound full race distance tyres and highish power to weight ratio.

Why can't we have the fundamental elements of that with today's safety features and engineering, it would be a blast?

 

Take the profit margin away from the dairymaids, make it a mutual sport where the drivers and the engineering are the focus, not the circus.

The entertainment is then a product of exciting and interesting racing, not the other way around.

[Maustinsj]

Great Scott!

[V8 Fireworks]

make it a mutual sport where the drivers and the engineering are the focus, not the circus.

 

 

You can't unlearn 6 decades of engineering advances though...

[Imateria]

You can't unlearn 6 decades of engineering advances though...

Exactly. The only way your going to get the OP wants is by running 60's cars.

[PayasYouRace]

I know we don't have to chase ultimate lap times but 88mph is too slow.

[fargas]

I would like to see fully manual gearbox. Drivers changing gears and steering with one hand. You really had to dance on the pedals. Back in old days missing a gear gave an instant opportunity to overtake.

[Mat13]

Is this not what the Goodwood Revival is for?

[Pingguest]

You can't unlearn 6 decades of engineering advances though...

 

Indeed you cannot make engineers unlearn knowledge they gained over the years, but you ban them from using it.

[Beamer]

The 50's, 60's F1 cars were many seconds off the pace of course but were so entertaining to watch.
No aero, skinny one compound full race distance tyres and highish power to weight ratio.
Why can't we have the fundamental elements of that with today's safety features and engineering, it would be a blast?


Take the profit margin away from the dairymaids, make it a mutual sport where the drivers and the engineering are the focus, not the circus.
The entertainment is then a product of exciting and interesting racing, not the other way around.

Duh... can you just imagine what the 'pinnacle of motorsport' adepts would think of that... and just how would you want to achieve that? Ban every thought and all knowledge from engineers heads? F1 has always been about pushing rhe envelope. Im not saying i agrre with the current route but this is nostalgia forum stuff. Yes i like the late 60s cars best also, cigars on wheels. But that was the ponnacle back then.

[johnnycomelately1]

F1 is about racing that is exciting: Overtaking and seeing how the different attributes of drivers and cars play out.

For many years this has not been the case, except for the odd occasion, which is inconsistent in analysis.

As speeds and certain aspects of engineering and critically the regulations have developed the ability to be able to differentiate the better combinations has diminished.

This is shown by the lap time spread reducing. Generally, as that happens racing gets duller.

When regulations even up the engineering to a ridiculous point combined with overly sticky tyres (that allow slow drivers and slow cars to corner relatively quickly) and extremely finicky aero and then very high speeds (as a factor, not a criticism) it produces dull racing that can only be broken by artificial means such as pit stops and the associated strategy.

Apart from F1, if you look at NASCAR that are regulated even more, it produces a pack of high speed equals that only a butterfly flapping its wings in the amazon can provide a change of winners.

Certain aspects of NASCAR have some helpful characteristics though: their focus on the driver as the main point of interest is very much a better way.

 

Most posts here have missed the point:

"FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTS of that WITH today's safety features and engineering"

By combining the ELEMENTS of what made racing exciting with with the latest engineering racing can be exciting again.

For example, cornering speeds, if the majority can manage to set up the car somewhat right and use sticky tyres the cornering speed is very very similar.

when it comes down to expensive, finicky set up requirements to provide a .001 of a second difference there is something wrong.

This is shown in every GP, where is the big opportunity to pass when even a "slow" car can keep the foot flat and rely on his aero and sticky tyres to go at the maximum that physics allows.

We have to find regulations that take us back to an area of car performance that allows differences to be the excitement.

I would like to see constructive contribution to how that could be achieved.

That would be a worthwhile use of everyone's knowledge and efforts.

 

For instance, how relative is technology transfer? to me, it would be stupid not to and there have been extraordinary advances that we have all benefited from, these last two years very much so.

But with the detrimental affect on racing excitement where does today's degree of aero stand? Additionally it is an area of enormous cost.

Curtailing that to a much more basic influence of overall performance would be worthwhile trying.

[pdac]

You wouldn't need engineers to unlean everything. You would just control what could be used. For example, I would suggest:

 

- Hard, tyres that would last the whole race distance

- Small fuel tanks that will not hold enough for a full race distance

- Low speed fuel rigs

- Manual gear shifting

- No pit to car communication whilst the car is on track (other than a pit board)

- No car to pit communication whilst the car is on track

 

That might be a start

[johnnycomelately1]

The other aspect of my original post is the use of F1 as a cash cow.

Typically private equity look for 25% to 33% or more as their return.

Who the hell gave the sport to anyone for exclusive profit?

"F1 is now understood to be valued at around $12 billion and CVC has got $8.2 billion of cash out and remaining value. It gives the private equity firm a return of 751.3% (over just a few years)"

With this structure it has resulted in our existing mess and some very rich ebenezer scrooges who have no responsibility, allegiance or good faith to our sport past its profit making ability.

The so called authorities that are muddling around the edges have largely failed to provide progress as well. although as unpopular as todays engine regulations are they have been very brave and right in my opinion.

The perfect storm: human natures greed and fools for authorities.

For quite a while we have all relied on someone or a coalition of someones to rectify a failing model, that has not happened.

The solution lies with all those within to make their voices heard with constructive, intelligent and respectful protests.

 

This sport provides engineering excellence to the wider world and spectacle beyond understanding, save it by contributing rationally and passionately.

[garagetinkerer]

Indeed you cannot make engineers unlearn knowledge they gained over the years, but you ban them from using it.

Surely there's a dearth of ingenious lot like Chapman (unbelievable that he's not been knighted yet... would someone bother the Queen?) or Sir Patrick (cheers!), but pretty sure that engineers will all be pouring over everything to see where they would/ could eke out the advantage over others. It's in their sodding DNA, so to speak.

Edited by garagetinkerer, 24 June 2015 - 22:06.

[Otaku]

You wouldn't need engineers to unlean everything. You would just control what could be used. For example, I would suggest:

 

- Hard, tyres that would last the whole race distance

- Small fuel tanks that will not hold enough for a full race distance

- Low speed fuel rigs

- Manual gear shifting

- No pit to car communication whilst the car is on track (other than a pit board)

- No car to pit communication whilst the car is on track

 

That might be a start

 

Can add some more:

 

- When the car pits, only 7 ppl are allowed to work on it (1 for each wheel, front and rear man, and lollipop) / This idea also backs the "cost reduction" crap and would also increase the duration of the pit stop, hence making 3/4 stop races rarer.

- Clutch pedal

- Ground effect (standard if you want, would also be cheaper)

[dbltop]

What pdac said, but I would ban refueling.

[Collombin]

like Chapman (unbelievable that he's not been knighted yet... would someone bother the Queen?).

The dead can't be knighted. And it may not have been an option after all the DeLorean stuff came out anyway.

[RedBaron]

Manual race starts, no starting systems, no computers aiding drivers getting off the line.

 

That way you'd potentially mix the grid up naturally (not with reverse grids) based on how good the driver was at getting away. 

 

The run down to turn 1 is pretty boring now days. 

[johnnycomelately1]

purely a suggestion list to produce exciting racing:

1. minimum power to weight ratio of 1.3:1
2. maximum average ground pressure of x
3. minimum tyre operating temperature band of 50^oC
4. maximum fuel limit as it currently stands
5. maximum rev limit

This is a complex subject, particularly concerning a maximum ground pressure, it would be appreciated for some constructive contributions.

with far less aero and simpler tyres it would go a long way to reducing costs and produce better racing.

[johnnycomelately1]

Manual race starts, no starting systems, no computers aiding drivers getting off the line.

 

That way you'd potentially mix the grid up naturally (not with reverse grids) based on how good the driver was at getting away. 

 

The run down to turn 1 is pretty boring now days. 

i believe rolling starts to be worth trialling.

the carnage at first corners is a lose lose for everyone

[johnnycomelately1]

In regard to the number of effective teams.

if the sport became mutual by taking the profit margin out from the private equity ebenezers, that capital could fund plenty of teams that could have a chance at winning, no more top, middle and bottom teams.

keeping the manufacturers in and also having private teams all on a level playing field would then spotlight the best drivers, engineers etc

[RedBaron]

i believe rolling starts to be worth trialling.

 

 

Rolling starts would dissolve all the tension entirely.

[johnnycomelately1]

Rolling starts would dissolve all the tension entirely.

with respect Red Baron,

maybe, but after yellow flags it seems exciting to me.

and in NASCAR it works.

and tension vs carnage...........

and i want good racing to provide the tension not carnage.

needless

[Pingguest]

Surely there's a dearth of ingenious lot like Chapman (unbelievable that he's not been knighted yet... would someone bother the Queen?) or Sir Patrick (cheers!), but pretty sure that engineers will all be pouring over everything to see where they would/ could eke out the advantage over others. It's in their sodding DNA, so to speak.

 

In the 1950's and 1960's cars had no aerofoils and diffusers. If one want Formula One cars to generate no or very little downforce, the FIA could mandate an entirely flat bottom and ban all aerfoils. In Formula Ford they continue to do just that.

[kraduk]

If we could change one thing, and make it back to the 50/60s ways of doing things I would ban all team to car radio. Safety announcements would be allowed, but pushed via the FIA not the team. It would put masses of stuff back on the driver and allow them to make the difference. Yes the cars are complex now, and it would potentially be a problem, but then thats for the team to manage with the design. 

[Fatgadget]

The pinnacle of motor sport harking for the dark ages! Hilarity ensues!

[Atreiu]

- remove current fuel flow limitations;

- ban radio communication;

- make it so steering wheels clear display fuel levels.

 

There you go. It's all back in the driver's hands, feet and heads. When to push, how much to push, tyre/pit stop strategy.

[Atreiu]

Or abandon puritism and just do reversed grids.

[SealTheDiffuser]

maybe twin tyres at the rear would help (at least Kimi )  :

 

Edited by SealTheDiffuser, 25 June 2015 - 14:13.

[Okyo]

Mind sound odd, but the day the sport decided to be fast, was the day it went the wrong way. The modern aerodynamics, brakes, tires, PU and everything around the car made it go round and round faster and faster, everything's smooth and clean. Making these cars even more faster by lifting the fuel limiter or whatever wont fix a thing.

If you want the times to come back, you got to say no to todays aerodynamics and make the difference between going alone and behind another car smaller, which wont ever happen.

Edited by Okyo, 25 June 2015 - 15:56.

[pdac]

The pinnacle of motor sport harking for the dark ages! Hilarity ensues!

 

If they were pushing toward being that, they would ban drivers - that's the current cutting-edge and the future.

[Beamer]

i believe rolling starts to be worth trialling.
the carnage at first corners is a lose lose for everyone

Really? No... just no. No. No.

[Lee Nicolle]

Manual race starts, no starting systems, no computers aiding drivers getting off the line.

 

That way you'd potentially mix the grid up naturally (not with reverse grids) based on how good the driver was at getting away. 

 

The run down to turn 1 is pretty boring now days. 

Control ECU with none of the traction control ABS etc they all have. A proper manual H pattern box and a clutch pedal. Flat bottom cars with no more than 3 elements in each wing.Wider and harder tyres.

It could be done but will not. They are too busy with their racing Prius's with all the electronic gadgets.

It would be interesting to see who could handle a simple car without the electronics

[johnmhinds]

Sounds like a lot of you would like Formula Ford

 

[johnnycomelately1]

I am saying: take the elements of the older cars that made the racing so exciting and interesting and combine that with the modern attributes of safety and efficiency with certain criteria for power to weight etc

[johnnycomelately1]

of interest only : - https://www.gtplanet...-photos.329019/

[johnnycomelately1]

Sounds like a lot of you would like Formula Ford

 

no, obviously they are not quick enough.

And i dont believe in equalisation at all.

[Rocket73]

I think you are proposing an interesting idea but I don't see how it could ever be called F1. I would love to see a series like this called Formula Retro or something but F1 is different.

[johnnycomelately1]

lets try looking at it this way then:

1. current cars
2. no down force aero except to prevent flying and reduce drag
3. tyres that operate in 50^oC range and do the distance.
4. minimum power to weight ratio of 1.3:1
5. maximum average ground pressure of x
6. maximum fuel limit as it currently stands and free engine design.
7. maximum rev limit which will reduce  engine costs and aid in technology transfer.

[noikeee]

with respect Red Baron,

maybe, but after yellow flags it seems exciting to me.

and in NASCAR it works.

and tension vs carnage...........

and i want good racing to provide the tension not carnage.

needless

 

Have you EVER seen a non-oval race with rolling starts?

 

It's got zero tension and zero carnage. It's just boring. I mean, sometimes things happen too, but in a much more organized and predictable way than in a standing start. Why would you want that?

[V8 Fireworks]

1. tyres that operate in 50^oC range and do the distance.
2. minimum power to weight ratio of 1.3:1

 

1. All racing tyres operate closer to 100 deg C AFAIK.

 

2. 1.3 what to 1 what?   The power output is in W ( J / s ), not a thrust force in N (or kg) like a rocket.

 

The current power to weight is 799 W/kg (compared to quick road car like a BMW M4 at 212 W/kg)

[johnnycomelately1]

1. All racing tyres operate closer to 100 deg C AFAIK.

 

2. 1.3 what to 1 what?   The power output is in W ( J / s ), not a thrust force in N (or kg) like a rocket.

 

The current power to weight is 799 W/kg (compared to quick road car like a BMW M4 at 212 W/kg)

50^oC RANGE-  for tyre operating RANGE

750KW to (say) 577KG = 1.3:1 power to weight ratio - MINIMUM

[johnnycomelately1]

Have you EVER seen a non-oval race with rolling starts?

 

It's got zero tension and zero carnage. It's just boring. I mean, sometimes things happen too, but in a much more organized and predictable way than in a standing start. Why would you want that?

like i said, the yellows (in F1) have rolling starts and its good, imho.

we do not need carnage, thats like saying crashes are good. bad thinking.

we as spectators have to have respect and empathy for the drivers.

being bored will go IF the racing becomes exciting again.

[mzvztag]

The important thing would be, IMHO, to give all rule making power to FIA, FOM to cease to exist, TV rights to be free, technical rules to be open (bar the security features: crash test, roll over bars, etc.).

The sport needs strong decommercialization (not just F1), much less money to be involved.

Race organizers should finance events from tickets and trackside advertising, pay start and prize money and that's it. All the European races, incl. French and German GP should be kept, calendar slimmed down to 16 races.

Then, open the technical rules almost completely, don't restrict tyres or testing in any way. Wing size can be limited in just a few well-worded sentences, limit the cubic capacity but leave the layouts and number of cylinders free to choose....a bit like in 1989.

If there is less money to earn, there will be also less to spend so this balance could self-regulate. Open the grid to all cars (customer cars, 3rd cars) that confirm to regulations, 26 fastest can start the race.

If that makes all the factory teams to leave, so be it, it doesn't matter.

[johnnycomelately1]

because a large part of the problem of a lack of racing each other is high cornering speeds, does anyone have data on ground pressure vs lateral g's?

[Frank Tuesday]

Indeed you cannot make engineers unlearn knowledge they gained over the years, but you ban them from using it.

The bodywork must not have any concavity. That one rule just got rid of wings.

Any variable system on the car, with the exception of spark timing, must be controlled directly, and solely by the driver.

[TheUltimateWorrier]

The 50's, 60's F1 cars were many seconds off the pace of course but were so entertaining to watch.

No aero, skinny one compound full race distance tyres and highish power to weight ratio.

Why can't we have the fundamental elements of that with today's safety features and engineering, it would be a blast?

 

Take the profit margin away from the dairymaids, make it a mutual sport where the drivers and the engineering are the focus, not the circus.

The entertainment is then a product of exciting and interesting racing, not the other way around.

 

You reference an awesome film but fail to recognize the most significant quote as to what Formula 1 should become

 

"Roads? Were we're going, we don't need roads."

 

Edited by TheUltimateWorrier, 27 June 2015 - 00:30.

[PayasYouRace]

The bodywork must not have any concavity. That one rule just got rid of wings.

Welcome to formula blob! I don't think you've thought this through at all.

[Mat13]

no, obviously they are not quick enough.

So from what I can tell you want skinny tyres, no aero, essentially a 60's F1 car but comparable speeds to today? Genuine question.

[Maustinsj]

You reference an awesome film but fail to recognize the most significant quote as to what Formula 1 should become

"Roads? Were we're going, we don't need roads."

Why don't you make like a tree...and get outta here?

[johnnycomelately1]

So from what I can tell you want skinny tyres, no aero, essentially a 60's F1 car but comparable speeds to today? Genuine question.

mat, no.

tyres that have a large operating temperature and produce a certain ground pressure, only safety and low drag aero, etc see my posts above