Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 4 votes

2021 engine formula: political wrangling, technical details, aesthetics...


  • Please log in to reply
5263 replies to this topic

Poll: Pick and choose! (505 member(s) have cast votes)

Extra 3000rpm?

  1. Yay (455 votes [90.10%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 90.10%

  2. Nay (50 votes [9.90%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 9.90%

More prescriptive engine design, standard energy store etc

  1. Yay (257 votes [50.89%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 50.89%

  2. Nay (248 votes [49.11%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 49.11%

Removing MGU-H, more tactical use of MGU-K

  1. Yay (370 votes [73.27%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 73.27%

  2. Nay (135 votes [26.73%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 26.73%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#5251 Marklar

Marklar
  • Member

  • 33,481 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 12 October 2019 - 19:39

You are speaking for yourself and not the masses. It is absolutely a big problem but we set the bar so low that we talk about great races if something happens during a race.

The dirty air issue is a massive problem, not being able to follow a car is everything that can be wrong with a sport.

The die hards accept it now, the bigger public won't in the future.

It's the other way around IMO.

Once you get more involved into a sport you set certain standards that said sport should achieve. Somebody who is new to the sport doesnt have those standards. For them the current Ferrari fallout could be enough to get them hooked up, and after a couple of years when they are in the bubble they also create different standards.

Why do you think has the Netflix documentary worked so well? Because it sold narratives. It's plain simple. Of course that narrative could also be action-packed races, I'm not denying that, but it isnt a necessity. As again, the refuelling era showed: I too thought it was amazing back then, because I lacked knowledge, but upon re-watching races I realized that they were extremely dull.

Unless somebody has already background it isnt the action on the track that will get them interested into a sport. That's rarely the case.



Advertisement

#5252 Neno

Neno
  • Member

  • 1,775 posts
  • Joined: May 16

Posted 12 October 2019 - 19:39

It's fairly obvious that you just want to spout off and not have your ideas challenged, even if people have good arguments.

If rules are staying same means there is no improvement of F1 as sport which means those arent good arguments, my friend. 



#5253 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 3,520 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 12 October 2019 - 19:47

It's the other way around IMO.

Once you get more involved into a sport you set certain standards that said sport should achieve. Somebody who is new to the sport doesnt have those standards. For them the current Ferrari fallout could be enough to get them hooked up, and after a couple of years when they are in the bubble they also create different standards.

Why do you think has the Netflix documentary worked so well? Because it sold narratives. It's plain simple. Of course that narrative could also be action-packed races, I'm not denying that, but it isnt a necessity. As again, the refuelling era showed: I too thought it was amazing back then, because I lacked knowledge, but upon re-watching races I realized that they were extremely dull.

Unless somebody has already background it isnt the action on the track that will get them interested into a sport. That's rarely the case.

I agree that understanding and appreciating the narrative of the sport is a huge factor. I distinctly remember loving F1 for years and having peers tell me that it was dull and boring...only for those same peers to join the bandwagon when Lewis Hamilton arrived on the scene. His arrival was a tangible story that they could hook into and follow to become a fan. 

 

In my case though, F1 has become like a long running TV series that has lost some of the characters that made me fall in love with it, and to compound issues there's been change in the writing team and I do not like the direction they've take things. 

 

The perceived narrative is very important, but depending on how it evolves it can lead to loosing people as much as it can to gaining them in my opinion. 


Edited by Ben1445, 12 October 2019 - 19:47.


#5254 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 20,175 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 12 October 2019 - 19:47

If rules are staying same means there is no improvement of F1 as sport which means those arent good arguments, my friend. 

 

I think the new rules will be an improvement. However, I'm interested if people have other ideas. I'd welcome any well reasoned arguments from those who think the new rules might not be said improvement.

 

After all, things could be a lot worse, we could still have grooved tyres and cars that can't get within two seconds of each other. The current rules are not the worst they could possibly be, and this season have produced a string of great races.



#5255 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 35,824 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 12 October 2019 - 21:15

If you make the electrical side more significant, the amount of fuel saving will be less significant as the actual burning of fuel becomes less important to performance.

Not if the fuel allowance is also reduced.

#5256 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 35,824 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 12 October 2019 - 21:18

I think the new rules will be an improvement. However, I'm interested if people have other ideas. I'd welcome any well reasoned arguments from those who think the new rules might not be said improvement.

After all, things could be a lot worse, we could still have grooved tyres and cars that can't get within two seconds of each other. The current rules are not the worst they could possibly be, and this season have produced a string of great races.


Other than asthetics were the grooved tyres that bad? We have slicks now, but are we any better off?

#5257 Scotracer

Scotracer
  • RC Forum Host

  • 3,877 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 12 October 2019 - 21:30

Other than asthetics were the grooved tyres that bad? We have slicks now, but are we any better off?


Impossible to say with Pirelli but the reason we went back to slicks was that the grooved tyres had a tendency to grain badly when following others/abusing them. Slicks were to he less sensitive. Obviously we only got two years of that.

#5258 THEWALL

THEWALL
  • Member

  • 2,080 posts
  • Joined: November 15

Posted 12 October 2019 - 21:53

I think the new rules will be an improvement. However, I'm interested if people have other ideas. I'd welcome any well reasoned arguments from those who think the new rules might not be said improvement.

 

After all, things could be a lot worse, we could still have grooved tyres and cars that can't get within two seconds of each other. The current rules are not the worst they could possibly be, and this season have produced a string of great races.

"cars that can't get within two seconds of each other" I just watched the 2005 Japanese GP and it looks like they haven't been able to solve that till today.

 

Hamilton just made some comments about DRS probably staying. If they don't manage to get rid of it for 2021, the new rules will be considered by many to be a failure. It will mean that they were not able to fix following closely.

 

They renewed Pirelli till 2023. If that's a sign of improvement, I don't want to see the rest, unless Pirelli really come up with the best tyre they have ever produced for F1. 

 

I haven't seen any discussions about such easy and obvious things to change as the current park ferme and mandatory tyre use rules, so that's a bad precedent.

 

Ferrari have already given a hint that they may be forced to use their veto and no one has responded. Mercedes and the rest of the top teams don't seem to be in a very changy mood, so that's worrying. 

 

They are talking about trying reverse grids, which tells us that they are really pretty desperate and hints at an inability or unwillingness to discuss the really important issues.  

 

The halo was supposed to be temporary and a better (looking) solution to be implemented soon, but have we seen any advancement in this front?

 

Has there even been talk about making the cars smaller and lighter? 

 

I could go on.



#5259 Fastcake

Fastcake
  • Member

  • 9,466 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 12 October 2019 - 22:03

I haven't watched an F1 race since I think the Austrian GP this year. I also used to be inseparable from the sport.

 

There's a whole host of reasons why, from Mercedes being largely unbeatable to dull races to a lack of enthusiasm for the characters at the sharp end of the grid to the lack of respect in wheel to wheel racing that seems to have emerged... the list goes on and on. 

 

What F1 is today is not the sport I fell in love with. I complained about it in this forum and took it to heart when it was pointed out that I don't have to watch it if I don't like it. Well, as it is evident that I don't enjoy it anymore, now I do not watch it. 

 

I'm interested in what they will do in 2021 and beyond, that's why I'm here in this thread. But if its more of the same then I doubt I will be tempted back. 

 

You picked a bad time to stop watching, as this season has been superb since Austria. The races have been good and unpredictable, grid order has rarely decided race order, Mercedes have fallen behind Ferrari, there's been interesting inter and intra team narratives, etc.

 

2009 new rules and the whole field was within a second, this whole converging is a myth reduce downforce will help as that is where the big teams gain the most.

 

A freak occurrence. By 2010 that close field had spread itself back into the usual several seconds gap between big and small teams, and that's excluding the season's new entries. 



Advertisement

#5260 Fastcake

Fastcake
  • Member

  • 9,466 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 12 October 2019 - 22:03

I was watching the 2003 and 2005 season reviews yesterday and surprised just how many drivers made mistakes. Not sure if it was overall standards or the difficulty of finding the limits. It was crazy.

 

Maybe it was watching edited highlights of a season..?



#5261 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 3,520 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 12 October 2019 - 22:26

You picked a bad time to stop watching, as this season has been superb since Austria. The races have been good and unpredictable, grid order has rarely decided race order, Mercedes have fallen behind Ferrari, there's been interesting inter and intra team narratives, etc.

So I hear, but I am not convinced it would have made a difference. My issues with F1 apparently run deeper than anything a string of half decent-ish races can solve. I think it will take a big shift in the status quo to bring me back, with new names and faces being front and centre, not the same old teams and drivers with the same old champion year after year. I need another 2005. 


Edited by Ben1445, 12 October 2019 - 22:28.


#5262 ArrowsLivery

ArrowsLivery
  • Member

  • 3,166 posts
  • Joined: March 17

Posted 13 October 2019 - 00:07

If you make the electrical side more significant, the amount of fuel saving will be less significant as the actual burning of fuel becomes less important to performance.


That is fallacy. Even everybody's favorite hybrid class, the LMP1s, do a ridiculous amount of lift and coast. What does “make the electric side more significant” even mean? The rules around the H are quite free, and its harvesting is directly proportional to the power output of the ICE. The K depends on the amount of braking zones on a track. Making it “more significant” would only have a very limited effect at most tracks, unless they add it to the front wheels as well.

At that point they’ll be so far away from the spirit of F1, that I really don’t see a point in the series.

#5263 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 20,175 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 13 October 2019 - 01:12

That is fallacy. Even everybody's favorite hybrid class, the LMP1s, do a ridiculous amount of lift and coast. What does “make the electric side more significant” even mean? The rules around the H are quite free, and its harvesting is directly proportional to the power output of the ICE. The K depends on the amount of braking zones on a track. Making it “more significant” would only have a very limited effect at most tracks, unless they add it to the front wheels as well.
At that point they’ll be so far away from the spirit of F1, that I really don’t see a point in the series.


The total harvested energy is limited quite strictly right now, as are the power of some of the energy transfers. There’s a lot to be found.

LMP1 go endurance racing. It’s not a fair comparison. In a relative sprint like a Grand Prix, if you kept the same amount of fuel but improved the energy recovery, you’d have to do less fuel saving.

#5264 FPV GTHO

FPV GTHO
  • Member

  • 2,329 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted Yesterday, 05:26

2009 new rules and the whole field was within a second, this whole converging is a myth reduce downforce will help as that is where the big teams gain the most.


I think 2009 had some special circumstances. Ferrari and McLaren were fighting right through 2007-2008 and missed the boat on the initial 2009 designs. The manufacturers over committed to KERS and some couldn't even do it without being overweight. The aero philosophies were flipped on their head as well.

But we also saw in 2007-2008 how Renault fell away and couldn't get back, BMW couldn't close down the gap despite spending big, and Red Bull didn't even try as they were waiting for the new regulations.

For 2021 who knows whether the midfield will catch up, if there will be new winners or just the status quo. Even the budget cap won't save the small teams, as those with money are just upgrading their infrastructures now whilst their spending is still uncapped.