5446 replies to this topic

[7MGTEsup]

I think that F1 needs to shift towards electric. Either pure battery electric or hydrogen fuel cells (HFC).

 

Battery electric can already be done with a battery swap system (maybe 3 stops per race: I think electricboogie raised this possibility already) and HFC can be done with solid state hydrogen storage technologies. I think that any of those routes (combined with the cost cap) would drum up interest from several manufactures and garner some space from regulators and climate change activists. On top of that F1 could use its ridiculously advanced prototyping culture to contribute genuine advancements to the "real world".

 

Just my thoughts.

 

I think this is a non starter (if you wanted to maintain F1 speeds) Formula E takes place on twisty street circuits at a pedestrian pace (compared to an F1 car) and they only just make it to the end of the 45 minutes with a lot of energy saving. If you put a Formula E car on a track like Monza how long would it last at Formula E speeds let alone F1 speeds?

[PayasYouRace]

F1 risks being slower than F2 with 2021 rules, says Racing Point

 

I get annoyed at these headlines because slowing down F2 (which is already ridiculously fast) is not a difficult task, as it's an entirely spec series. Also, whenever F1 gets slowed down it's always clawed back really quickly.

[Clatter]

F1 risks being slower than F2 with 2021 rules, says Racing Point

I get annoyed at these headlines because slowing down F2 (which is already ridiculously fast) is not a difficult task, as it's an entirely spec series. Also, whenever F1 gets slowed down it's always clawed back really quickly.

Slowing down the lower series just to make F1 look better isn't exactly a positive for the sport.

[PayasYouRace]

Slowing down the lower series just to make F1 look better isn't exactly a positive for the sport.

 

That's exactly the sort of spin that does the sport no favours. The ladder is supposed to be progressive, and has often been adjusted to suit the speed of F1.

[pdac]

Why on earth should F1 be the fastest, anyway? F1 should provide good racing opportunities. If that means slower cars, I'm all for it.

[Beri]

Why on earth should F1 be the fastest, anyway? F1 should provide good racing opportunities. If that means slower cars, I'm all for it.

But then F1 isn't F1. It will be seen as F2 if F2 is faster than F1.
In effect, it will never happen that F2 will be faster than F1. So I'm not worried concerning this matter.

[pdac]

But then F1 isn't F1. It will be seen as F2 if F2 is faster than F1.
In effect, it will never happen that F2 will be faster than F1. So I'm not worried concerning this matter.

 

Tosh.

[7MGTEsup]

Has there ever been a time (in recent history) when a lower tier formula has been faster than F1?

[Clatter]

That's exactly the sort of spin that does the sport no favours. The ladder is supposed to be progressive, and has often been adjusted to suit the speed of F1.

Why dump on the lower series because F1 is being ruined?

[PayasYouRace]

Why on earth should F1 be the fastest, anyway? F1 should provide good racing opportunities. If that means slower cars, I'm all for it.

 

Because that's what the 1 in F1 indicates, obviously. At least, when compared to F2 and the other steps on the ladder, which is what I'm on about.

 

Why dump on the lower series because F1 is being ruined?

 

It's not dumping on the lower series. It's keeping them at their proper level. How is this even controversial?

 

Not that F1 is being ruined. The new regulations promise to be excellent. They're just a bit slower than what we have at the moment.

[balage06]

I mean... in worst case scenario, make F2 slower too? The lower tiers usually adopt the main profile of the top category in a year or two anyway.

[Clatter]

Because that's what the 1 in F1 indicates, obviously. At least, when compared to F2 and the other steps on the ladder, which is what I'm on about.

 

 

It's not dumping on the lower series. It's keeping them at their proper level. How is this even controversial?

 

Not that F1 is being ruined. The new regulations promise to be excellent. They're just a bit slower than what we have at the moment.

 

Of course it's dumping on the lower series. By slowing the premier series they are making it look bad in comparison and lowering the speed in a the lower series is merely to hide that rather than for any practical reason. It's not just the about the speed, as it just makes people look again at the costs, and wonder why F1 is do damned expensive when a much cheaper series can be just as quick.

[PayasYouRace]

Of course it's dumping on the lower series. By slowing the premier series they are making it look bad in comparison and lowering the speed in a the lower series is merely to hide that rather than for any practical reason. It's not just the about the speed, as it just makes people look again at the costs, and wonder why F1 is do damned expensive when a much cheaper series can be just as quick.

 

That's easily answered by the fact that F2 and below are spec series so of course they're going to be much cheaper.

[Clatter]

That's easily answered by the fact that F2 and below are spec series so of course they're going to be much cheaper.

 

It may answer why there is a cost difference, but doesn't answer why the performance of the spec series is so close that they need to be hobbled so that F1 doesn't look bad.

[Fastcake]

It may answer why there is a cost difference, but doesn't answer why the performance of the spec series is so close that they need to be hobbled so that F1 doesn't look bad.

Isn't it already hobbled right now? You could easily make the car quicker, but each generation of GP2/F2 car has been designed specifically to be a certain degree slower than F1, and in subsequently a certain degree quicker than GP3/F3.

[PayasYouRace]

It may answer why there is a cost difference, but doesn't answer why the performance of the spec series is so close that they need to be hobbled so that F1 doesn't look bad.

 

It's not about making F1 look bad. It's not about hobbling F2. You can't hobble a spec series which has no car development.

 

Put it this way, it wouldn't be hobbling Moto2 to keep it slower than MotoGP if the latter was slowed for whatever reason. Pick any feeder series system and the same applies. F2 is supposed to be a certain level below F1, and F3 a certain level below F2, and F4 a certain level below F3. If you want to have a ladder system you have to maintain it. Luckily, F2 and the other levels below F1 are spec and can easily be adjusted to maintain that ladder.

 

If you designed an F1 car to current F2 rules, it would utterly dominate the current F1 field, because F2 is already designed to be at the performance it is without the need for development.

[Kalmake]

F1 will still have the same power advantage over F2. This new aero would have to be very weak to make the cars equal.

[pdac]

Because that's what the 1 in F1 indicates, obviously. At least, when compared to F2 and the other steps on the ladder, which is what I'm on about.

 

Well, if you think that, then perhaps the regulations for these series should not operate independently. So if F1 is made slower, all of the other 'steps on the ladder' have to be made slower at the same time.

[ElectricBoogie]

I think this is a non starter (if you wanted to maintain F1 speeds) Formula E takes place on twisty street circuits at a pedestrian pace (compared to an F1 car) and they only just make it to the end of the 45 minutes with a lot of energy saving. If you put a Formula E car on a track like Monza how long would it last at Formula E speeds let alone F1 speeds?

Consider this.
F1 aero is now extremely limited by the strict regulations. Due to the huge power and near unlimited energy, air drag is happily sacrficed for downforce.

Now, with spec hubs and wheels, cars could be limited for a maximum load (mass plus downforce). Let's say, ambient air pressure corrected.
With a modest maximum downforce but more freedom, drag would be vastly reduced. This is vital on long straights.

What lap times would you consider worth watching? As in 1994? Or would you still watch 1985 cars?
With less draggy cars, top speeds would be to anyone's liking. As an example, the iconic McLaren F1 road car from the 90's hit 394 kph or so with maybe 650 hp. And it was way heavier than a BEV F1 would be. Of course, F1 will have shorter straights.
With 3 stops, you get 4 battery discharges for a race. Let's all agree that FE's energy density is decidedly meh. And that FE on the F1 battery would be able to shuffle around for well over an hour. Let alone with more drag focused aero.
FE is also very slow due to the all-weather (good for snow) road tires that barely wear at all. Oh, and downforce seems to be a myth, missing bodywork doesn't cost them pace.
So an F1 car would have 5-6 times the energy of a present dat FE cars, a much more slippery body kit, F1-worthy downforce, wider tires which would be real slicks, etc. This all combined allows for much more power, which leads to good laptimes. With the technology battery company now have in the laboratories, we'd surpass F2 lap times I'm sure. Would you watch our stars in SuperFormala speed cars that are a mix of Group C and F1 in terms of aero looks? On races with some FSCs, some team might risk a pit stop less. Which would be a good half minute on the track. Or, they'd make a late 3rd stop and then stick in a lighter pack with less range. Bang, 3 seconds a lap faster after saving more energy throughout the race, big march to the finish! But in most races, you could use that smaller pack only once, if at all. Apart from Monaco.

BEV F1 cars would basically be better. Move less air around, get downforce from ground effect mostly. A lot of energy regeneration, in part due to slippery aero, resulting high speeds and high-ish weight. Cornering would not be too bad. Today's racing is just insane, no-one ever needed these lateral G's for spectacle.
With heavier, less powerful cars and maximum load per wheel at given speeds, aerodynamicists would have much more play room. FP1 would be for aero setup effectively. Stay under load levels, optimize balance and drag. Cars would probably look very different to come to the same performance level.
Some fear that cars would be too silent, but twice FE would not be whispers.

[Fatgadget]

F1 risks being slower than F2 with 2021 rules, says Racing Point

 

I get annoyed at these headlines because slowing down F2 (which is already ridiculously fast) is not a difficult task, as it's an entirely spec series. Also, whenever F1 gets slowed down it's always clawed back really quickly.

 

I see no reason why F2 should not be faster than F1. Drag racing is faster So?..F1 is nothing but  a portrayed  image these days!.. Manipulation is that what we are talking about?

[kumo7]

If F2 is faster then F2 will be the championships to decide who the best driver is.

F1 is then to become the manufacturer's championship.

 

Media will say sooner than later that actually F2 is more difficult and much more competitive than F1...

[Beri]

Well, if you think that, then perhaps the regulations for these series should not operate independently. So if F1 is made slower, all of the other 'steps on the ladder' have to be made slower at the same time.

That is the case if necessary. Jeez, never thought this would end up being a discussion.

[FPV GTHO]

F1 will still have the same power advantage over F2. This new aero would have to be very weak to make the cars equal.

Add to that, F2 will be similarly slowed down by the low profile tyres as F1 will be, albeit a year earlier.

[Rurouni]

I see no reason why F2 should not be faster than F1. Drag racing is faster So?..F1 is nothing but  a portrayed  image these days!.. Manipulation is that what we are talking about?

The reason is simple. It doesn't make any sense at all. F1 - F2 - F3 series naming is a progression. Since this is racing, you don't progress to a slower car.

What I don't mind happening if Formula E, WEC, etc, is faster than F1 because it is not directly attached to F1. You don't need to limit those other series to make F1 be the fastest car racing series. I don't even mind if Super Formula is faster than F1, just not F2 is faster than F1.

If at some point F2 becomes faster than F1, they should change the name to something else, otherwise it won't make much sense. Call it A1 or something.. heh.

[PayasYouRace]

Well, if you think that, then perhaps the regulations for these series should not operate independently. So if F1 is made slower, all of the other 'steps on the ladder' have to be made slower at the same time.

Yeah that’s exactly what I’m saying should be done.

[PayasYouRace]

I see no reason why F2 should not be faster than F1. Drag racing is faster So?..F1 is nothing but  a portrayed  image these days!.. Manipulation is that what we are talking about?

If F2 was faster than F1 it would be F1 and F1 would become F2. That’s why they’re named as such.

 

Drag racing isn’t part of this ladder, so it doesn’t matter. Neither does Indycar, or Super Formula, or FE, or any of the other series not part of that ladder.

[SenorSjon]

Has there ever been a time (in recent history) when a lower tier formula has been faster than F1?

 

With L&C in iirc 2014, the F2 front runners got quite close to the F1 backmarkers. 

Spain 2014:

GP2 pole 1.29.293 would have been gotten P18 on the 22 car F1 grid in front of Marussia and Caterham.

 

On other tracks the difference was a bit bigger, but only by a few seconds. Especially Ericsson seemed to have a hard time being faster than a F2 car.

[jee]

If F2 being faster than F1 is a concern, scrap F2, rename F3 to F2 and F4 to F3. done

[Pete_f1]

Of course, back in the day IndyCar was the fastest open wheel and somewhat more extreme than F1.

[PayasYouRace]

Of course, back in the day IndyCar was the fastest open wheel and somewhat more extreme than F1.

I don’t think there’s ever been a time when Indycars would be faster than an F1 car round an F1 circuit, but they were absolute monsters on the ovals.

[SenorSjon]

Indycars were heavy beasts fast in a semi-straight line. Today F1 is almost as heavy.

[Henri Greuter]

Indycars were heavy beasts fast in a semi-straight line. Today F1 is almost as heavy.

And today F1's are nowhere near as good looking as those "heavy beasts fast in a semi straight line"
I still have those `dropped nosewing` early Reynards of the mid 90's among my alltime favorite single seaters.

[balage06]

With L&C in iirc 2014, the F2 front runners got quite close to the F1 backmarkers. 

Spain 2014:

GP2 pole 1.29.293 would have been gotten P18 on the 22 car F1 grid in front of Marussia and Caterham.

 

On other tracks the difference was a bit bigger, but only by a few seconds. Especially Ericsson seemed to have a hard time being faster than a F2 car.

 

These things are weird, for example, the current F3 car is just a few seconds per lap slower than a 2014 F1 car. And given the signficant power deficit, its cornering speed must be similar if not greater.

[V8 Fireworks]

Has there ever been a time (in recent history) when a lower tier formula has been faster than F1?

Yes!

In 2014, Super Formula cars were much faster than the lumbering F1 cars in terms of midcorner speeds.

Many drivers were highly critical. Between F1 cars having slowet corner speeds than other series YET still having power steering anyway, the F1 cars were considered far too easy to drive at the time.

Mark Webber said in 2015:

"Formula One itself, it’s not in great shape. We're disappointed with it. We all talk. All the drivers talk and we're disappointed where they’ve gone with the cars… the lap-times. They’re just not stimulating for the drivers."

"They’re tickling it, but they’re talking about trying to make the cars five or six seconds faster. It’s important that it’s in the race, not in qualifying.”

"And for me, five or six seconds is not enough. The reference point they have now is horrendous, in terms of pace. They need to be much, much quicker than that. They need to make heavy changes."
https://www.bangkokp...-at-state-of-f1

In this vein, the wide, fast and aggressive 2017 rules have been a triumph.

The cars dart into bends spectacularly at the last moment carrying seemingly impossible speed, in a way the lumbering 2014-2016 never could. The 2017 onwards cars have truly been a grand spectacle to watch.

[V8 Fireworks]

Indycars were heavy beasts fast in a semi-straight line. Today F1 is almost as heavy.

The "problem" if you can say that with the Reynard, Lola, Panoz and Dallara, was not so much the weight (much of which was just the much stronger tub used in Indy type racing), but the CART rules being very restrictive in terms of maximum diffuser angle and maximum diffuser height.

By allowing bigger underbody tunnels, CART could have always been much faster in corners...

BUT given CART/Indycar mainly races on Grade 2 road courses with limited runoff (and at superspeedways were you don't need the downforce and don't need anywhere near the level of wing angle for given downforce due to the immensely high speeds), there would be no incentive for CART to raise raise cornering speeds.

PS. Apart from some regulation anomalies (thumb nodes, comically wide front tyres, halo which I am used to), I think the current F1 cars look quite good for what they are.

The tightly fitted sidepod packaging around the engine is very impressive.

Edited by V8 Fireworks, 15 January 2020 - 13:58.

[OO7]

And today F1's are nowhere near as good looking as those "heavy beasts fast in a semi straight line"
I still have those `dropped nosewing` early Reynards of the mid 90's among my alltime favorite single seaters.

Henri, mine has got to be the Penske PC-22 and PC-23 from 93 and 94 respectively.

[V8 Fireworks]

If F2 being faster than F1 is a concern, scrap F2, rename F3 to F2 and F4 to F3. done

Lol.

But FIA has no control over Super Formula.

Super Formula is slightly faster than F2 now, and would continue to be so.

For me, the 2014-2016 LOOKED too slow, especially in the race. The 2017 cars were such a welcome improvement, the way they can attack corners so aggressively is just SO MUCH more spectacular.


Stunning!!

I seriously doubt the 2021 cars will be more than 2 to 3 seconds a lap slower, this will be perfectly acceptable given the improvements in racing that the new aero rules will allow for.

Edited by V8 Fireworks, 15 January 2020 - 14:07.

[TheGoldenStoffel]

I've seen some similar comments from Andy Green about the new regulations a while ago. Either they've completely missed the boat on their first 2021 concept or they simply don't like the restrictiveness of these new regulations.

 

Either way it's pretty obvious what they are trying to do, they try to manipulate the public by exaggerating and predicting doom and gloom and by doing so putting pressure on the FIA to make some changes to the regulations. 

 

The new cars will probably be a bit slower but I'm quite certain it's nowhere near as bad for them to be slower than F2 cars. 

Edited by TheGoldenStoffel, 15 January 2020 - 14:40.

[Henri Greuter]

Henri, mine has got to be the Penske PC-22 and PC-23 from 93 and 94 respectively.

Makes sense

[ForzaFormula]

I don’t think there’s ever been a time when Indycars would be faster than an F1 car round an F1 circuit, but they were absolute monsters on the ovals.

 

F1 cars where never pushed to be tuned and developed to ovals, otherwise they would very likely easily be quicker than those Indy cars.

[Beri]

And today F1's are nowhere near as good looking as those "heavy beasts fast in a semi straight line"
I still have those `dropped nosewing` early Reynards of the mid 90's among my alltime favorite single seaters.

I would have never guessed you liking the 94l/95l ;)

A bit of credit tossing to Henri and some propaganda at the following link:
http://8w.forix.com/indy96.html

I do not have a specific single seater chassis that is my absolute favorite. But the 97i of Reynard with the Chip Ganassi livery was stunning.

[PayasYouRace]

F1 cars where never pushed to be tuned and developed to ovals, otherwise they would very likely easily be quicker than those Indy cars.

Well that’s sort of the opposite question.

But I’d say no car built to 1994 F1 regulations would have been quicker at Indy than the Penske with the Mercedes 500I pushrod engine. F1 engines weren’t that powerful back then, and they didn’t have any ground effect to rely on.

[juicy sushi]

Well that’s sort of the opposite question.

But I’d say no car built to 1994 F1 regulations would have been quicker at Indy than the Penske with the Mercedes 500I pushrod engine. F1 engines weren’t that powerful back then, and they didn’t have any ground effect to rely on.

I would be fairly interested in comparing a 1996-era CART machine to the same year's Williams or Ferrari.  The cars were comfortably over 900hp on the road courses, and the tire war meant that those Firestones in particular could provide a hell of a lot of grip.  And downforce levels wouldn't have been too far away from the best that an F1 car would have managed.  Given that in 1997 the McLarens were supposed to be getting 775hp from their Mercedes-Ilmor motors I think the power-weight ratios in 1996 would have been fairly comparable.

[Henri Greuter]

I would have never guessed you liking the 94l/95l ;)

A bit of credit tossing to Henri and some propaganda at the following link:
http://8w.forix.com/indy96.html

I do not have a specific single seater chassis that is my absolute favorite. But the 97i of Reynard with the Chip Ganassi livery was stunning.

 

Thank you.

 

The 94I/95I was at least for me an appealing car, length, width, height, the dimensions, balance, shape, name it all, evererything looked just good on that car. Though the Lola's and Penskes of that ere were also fine looking.

 

I think you will be less surprised to read that I liked the 1990 March-Porsche 90P at least as much because of it being so innovative in an era when innovation was in details.

[Henri Greuter]

Well that’s sort of the opposite question.

But I’d say no car built to 1994 F1 regulations would have been quicker at Indy than the Penske with the Mercedes 500I pushrod engine. F1 engines weren’t that powerful back then, and they didn’t have any ground effect to rely on.

Imagine how fast that engine would have been if it had been built into a dedicated chassis instead of being a temporary replacement engine for a car that was basically designed for 15 other races that year....

[Fatgadget]

If F2 was faster than F1 it would be F1 and F1 would become F2. That’s why they’re named as such.

 

Drag racing isn’t part of this ladder, so it doesn’t matter. Neither does Indycar, or Super Formula, or FE, or any of the other series not part of that ladder.

Okay. I am not particularly bothered one way or the other on this one. (not that it matters!) So just just mandate it then!..No one will notice any different and I very much doubt any one would care!

[Sash1]

New Concorde and regulations meetings are going to be an effin warzone after the Australian GP farce. There is a leadership void and the GP has shown that the teams are backstabbing egoists. The commercial fallout is huge. And first, Liberty F1 and some teams have to survive. Because Liberty could let the F1 entity go bankrupt and leave the FIA and the teams with all the bills, unhappy promotors, unhappy governments and unhappy fans. The bill for Australia alone will be worth 5 years of profit.