103 replies to this topic

[sterlingfan2000]

So the whole point of the Rule was to make overtaking easier right ?

According to Helmut Marko u needed to be 1,5 Second faster in Spa with DRS to even have a chance of overtaking. I guess on Street Circuits it's normal but when this happens in a Track like SPA , then it's horrible. 1,5 Second is too much

There's too much Dirty Air, Hybrid Engine ERS gets abused to stop overtaking and we need artificial DRS Zone to even stand a chance of overtaking.

2026 doesn't look any better. What's the Solution to this ?

Edited by sterlingfan2000, 22 September 2024 - 14:52.

[SenorSjon]

2022 till 2022,5 was fine. TD39 and more rules made them unraceable.

[Ste678]

The botched floor change for 2023 was never planned but someone wanted it desperately, as it was fine in 2022...

Edited by Ste678, 22 September 2024 - 14:56.

[ARTGP]

This is an overreaction to a race at a circuit designed to prevent overtaking. 

[Ali_G]

The floor change destroyed the rule set. Seemed to completely alter the outwash of the cars.

[TomNokoe]

It's the tyres!!!!! At Spa we had massive inflated pressures (26/24.5) which kills the tyre completely. They only work in clean air and even then need to be managed.

Today, at a street track with low pressures, drivers could actually push, and we had way more overtakes.

Edited by TomNokoe, 22 September 2024 - 18:02.

[Wuzak]

So the whole point of the Rule was to make overtaking easier right ?

According to Helmut Marko u needed to be 1,5 Second faster in Spa with DRS to even have a chance of overtaking. I guess on Street Circuits it's normal but when this happens in a Track like SPA , then it's horrible. 1,5 Second is too much

There's too much Dirty Air, Hybrid Engine ERS gets abused to stop overtaking and we need artificial DRS Zone to even stand a chance of overtaking.

2026 doesn't look any better. What's the Solution to this ?

 

ERS can also be used to help overtaking.

 

2026 the ERS rules will allow up to 237.5kW power advantage for following car (that seems to be the direction they are heading), depending on speed.

 

Won't help Monaco, because the gains are at speeds above what is normally reached there.

[prty]

Not a big surprise, too much mechanical grip (and therefore concertina effect) was always a bigger problem than aerodynamics. A lot of people said during many years that ground effect will solve everything. Ground effect is there and it didn't bring anything.

[w1Y]

To big, too heavy, tyres too sensitive, too much data and too many street circuits

[Ali_G]

To big, too heavy, tyres too sensitive, too much data and too many street circuits

Lighter cars would only increase the concertina effect and reduce braking zones. I can’t see how that would help.

[Ali_G]

Not a big surprise, too much mechanical grip (and therefore concertina effect) was always a bigger problem than aerodynamics. A lot of people said during many years that ground effect will solve everything. Ground effect is there and it didn't bring anything.

It certainly seemed to work in the first half of 2022. The racing was very close.

[Sleepflower]

The racing can be good sometimes but they are horrible, lazy, heavy looking things. Wish they looked more alive.

[PayasYouRace]

They really aren’t horrible racing cars. Has the OP been living under a rock this season?

[PayasYouRace]

Lighter cars would only increase the concertina effect and reduce braking zones. I can’t see how that would help.

Lighter cars don’t necessarily mean shorter braking zones. Braking force is dependent on the force normal to the road, so more weight means better braking. Scotracer explained this very well once.

[NotAPineapple]

Lighter cars don’t necessarily mean shorter braking zones. Braking force is dependent on the force normal to the road, so more weight means better braking. Scotracer explained this very well once.

 

I'd like to put forward a counter claim. Braking force in F1  has been, for some years now, actually system-limited (as opposed to traction limited) in the early braking phase. This means the driver cant physically exert enough force to lock the wheels until the car slows down and the downforce reduces. In this phase then a lighter car will slow down signifiantly faster than a lighter one until you cross over into the traction limited operating region. 

 

Once you are in that region, also, a lighter car will be able to brake better due to the combinatino of tire-load-sensitivity and aeroynamic effects. The grip that a car has is directly related to it's downforce to weight ratio which means that the lighter you are, the more 'aero-grip' you have. 

[PayasYouRace]

I'd like to put forward a counter claim. Braking force in F1 has been, for some years now, actually system-limited (as opposed to traction limited) in the early braking phase. This means the driver cant physically exert enough force to lock the wheels until the car slows down and the downforce reduces. In this phase then a lighter car will slow down signifiantly faster than a lighter one until you cross over into the traction limited operating region.

Once you are in that region, also, a lighter car will be able to brake better due to the combinatino of tire-load-sensitivity and aeroynamic effects. The grip that a car has is directly related to it's downforce to weight ratio which means that the lighter you are, the more 'aero-grip' you have.

Not sure where Scotracer has been lately because he actually works in vehicle dynamics and understands it all better.

But I understand that at high speeds, the limit is becuase the downforce allows a much greater braking force. Making the car lighter wouldn’t affect the high speed initial braking phase because the downforce is doing most of the work of pressing the tyres into the track. As the speed comes off, then the weight takes over.

Anyway, heavier cars can exert high brake forces, so it makes little difference.

More importantly, we have some of the best racing F1 cars since the 70s right now. The thread is based on a false premise.

[Ali_G]

Lighter cars don’t necessarily mean shorter braking zones. Braking force is dependent on the force normal to the road, so more weight means better braking. Scotracer explained this very well once.

It’s an interesting point. Assume weight vs grip is a linear relationship. (If you remember the block of wood / pulley experiment from school, the surface area doesn’t affect the Co-efficient of friction hence I don’t believe it is a squared relationship). The inertial resistance to braking of the car should also be linear given Energy = 1/2mv^2

It doesn’t seem intuitively correct to me for some reason though. I can think of small things like a lighter car running softer rubber, therefore still improving braking distances but not a whole lot.

Edited by Ali_G, 22 September 2024 - 16:47.

[noikeee]

I wish cars didn't behave any differently or hurt their tyres in dirty air, but I think this season has been fine? You sometimes see people unable to pass and track position being king, others overtaking is fairly easy with a small pace advantage or top speed advantage. That's right about the correct balance I think.

[SenorSjon]

Spa was a race overtaking was very hard, unlike the years before that.

[PayasYouRace]

It’s an interesting point. Assume weight vs grip is a linear relationship. (If you remember the block of wood / pulley experiment from school, the surface area doesn’t affect the Co-efficient of friction hence I don’t believe it is a squared relationship). The inertial resistance to braking of the car should also be linear given Energy = 1/2mv^2

It doesn’t seem intuitively correct to me for some reason though. I can think of small things like a lighter car running softer rubber, therefore still improving braking distances but not a whole lot.

 

I'm at my limit here. I failed my vehicle dynamics module in my MEng year. My specialisation was aerodynamics and jet propulsion.

[Ali623]

Overtaking under these regulations definetly has been easier, unless you literally want a situation where a faster car can breeze past a slower one with zero effort regardless of delta? 

 

Leclerc getting past Hamilton today, or Piastri getting past the Mercedes' would have been basically impossible under the previous regs.

[NotAPineapple]

It’s an interesting point. Assume weight vs grip is a linear relationship. (If you remember the block of wood / pulley experiment from school, the surface area doesn’t affect the Co-efficient of friction hence I don’t believe it is a squared relationship). The inertial resistance to braking of the car should also be linear given Energy = 1/2mv^2

It doesn’t seem intuitively correct to me for some reason though. I can think of small things like a lighter car running softer rubber, therefore still improving braking distances but not a whole lot.

 

That's the thing, it's not a linear relationship. It's actually regressive. This is known as tire load sensitivity. More normal force = lower friction coefficient. 

[Ali_G]

That's the thing, it's not a linear relationship. It's actually regressive. This is known as tire load sensitivity. More normal force = lower friction coefficient.

Is this a materials engineering issue, in that extra weight doesn’t linearly continue to add additional grip?


For a given material, is there a weight / downward force which maximises the grip / weight ratio?

[NotAPineapple]

Is this a materials engineering issue, in that extra weight doesn’t linearly continue to add additional grip?


For a given material, is there a weight / downward force which maximises the grip / weight ratio?

 

It's a characteristic of all tires. It's due to the grip mechanisms being a mix of adhesive, columb and visco-elasic effects. Some of them are more sensitive to normal load than others and the result is a linearly digressive corefficient of friction over load.

[STRFerrari4Ever]

The issue is that the initial cars were providing better racing but then the TD came and then the floor changes for 2023 and ever increasing aero flick ups being allowed on the floors has meant that on some tracks it feels like we’re back in the era of turbulent air killing any racing.

Another issue like Tom mentioned are the Pirelli’s which are so temperature sensitive that their performance or feel for the driver goes away when following another car closely.

[Baddoer]

Ban ground effect, ban hybrid engines. DId work just fine in the past.

[Clatter]

As others have said the rule changes midway through 2022 basically scotched much of the good work, but the main aim was to allow cars to follow closer, and that has been achieved. At Monza the cars spent almost the whole race within DRS of another, prior to 2022 they were lucky if they could stay within 3-4 seconds of the car in front.

[Boing Ball]

Ban ground effect, ban hybrid engines. DId work just fine in the past.

It didn't.

[ClubmanGT]

It didn't.

 

Yea I think people need to be kind of reasonable here. I loved the noise, I loved the drama of nimble cars, but the racing was frequently not good in the screaming V10 era. 

 

The real debate is whether the spectacle was better or worse than it is now, if you normalise for things like DRS. 

 

I would suggest that it was probably a more entertaining watch, even if the racing was effectively the same. Those clips with a screaming engine and no commentary from the 2000s have a quality that the modern V6s and bigger cars just dont. 

[PayasYouRace]

Ban ground effect, ban hybrid engines. DId work just fine in the past.

 

Has there ever been a ban on hybrid engines?

[NotAPineapple]

Has there ever been a ban on hybrid engines?

I can vaguely recall this happening end of 90s, start of 2000s when it was suspected that one team were using their alternator or something similar for a power boost. 

[Boing Ball]

I can vaguely recall this happening end of 90s, start of 2000s when it was suspected that one team were using their alternator or something similar for a power boost. 

McLaren, 1998. As far as I remember, the system harvested energy like a KERS system but used the harvested energy to run the cars electric systems rather than as a direct power boost. So hybrids were banned from 1998 to 2013.

Edited by Boing Ball, 22 September 2024 - 18:45.

[TauriJ]

Cant really tell whats wrong with these cars. Right before ground effect era began, tow was enormous at low drag circuits. Remember Monza shenanigans lol? Baku and Spa had a crazy strong DRS effect

 

Now tow is worth a LOT less...reminding me of V10 era 

[TomNokoe]

Cant really tell whats wrong with these cars. Right before ground effect era began, tow was enormous at low drag circuits. Remember Monza shenanigans lol? Baku and Spa had a crazy strong DRS effect

 

Now tow is worth a LOT less...reminding me of V10 era 

I think this is a bit of a myth, the tow today is still worth more, way more, than any other era apart from 2017-21 (arguably 2018-21 due to Halo).

Edited by TomNokoe, 22 September 2024 - 18:58.

[917k]

This thread is anecdotal without comparative overtaking statistics, season to season. Anyone got them?

[George Costanza]

The OP would like to go back to 2004 with V10s and refueling, am I on the mark?

Edited by George Costanza, 22 September 2024 - 23:42.

[George Costanza]

McLaren, 1998. As far as I remember, the system harvested energy like a KERS system but used the harvested energy to run the cars electric systems rather than as a direct power boost. So hybrids were banned from 1998 to 2013.

That was not it at all.. McLaren had brake steer. The pedal allowed the drivers to operate either of the rear brakes independently of the others. This gave them two additional means of controlling the car and improving the performance – by reducing either understeer or wheelspin depending on which wheel was braked and when.

It was very very effective indeed.

Two brake pedals and of course Ferrari was complaining then it was banned after Brazilian GP of 1998.



https://www.autoevol...als-207645.html

This has nothing to do with hybrids.

Hybrids in F1 didn't quite exist in 1998.

Edited by George Costanza, 23 September 2024 - 00:00.

[George Costanza]

I always wondered how much quicker F1 cars would be if they had CVT gearboxes. I would think 2-3 seconds quicker easy.

[Dan333SP]

That was not it at all.. McLaren had brake steer. The pedal allowed the drivers to operate either of the rear brakes independently of the others. This gave them two additional means of controlling the car and improving the performance – by reducing either understeer or wheelspin depending on which wheel was braked and when.

It was very very effective indeed.

Two brake pedals and of course Ferrari was complaining then it was banned after Brazilian GP of 1998.



https://www.autoevol...als-207645.html

This has nothing to do with hybrids.

Hybrids in F1 didn't quite exist in 1998.

No, it did indeed have some sort of energy recovery system that drove ancillary pumps to save power bleed from the motor in addition to the dual braking system, it’s all still relatively secret but Newey has referenced it on occasion, including a blurb in his book if I recall. See this thread-

https://forums.autos...3-hybrid-power/

Way ahead of the game.

Edited by Dan333SP, 23 September 2024 - 04:33.

[Peter3hg]

That was not it at all.. McLaren had brake steer. The pedal allowed the drivers to operate either of the rear brakes independently of the others. This gave them two additional means of controlling the car and improving the performance – by reducing either understeer or wheelspin depending on which wheel was braked and when.

It was very very effective indeed.

Two brake pedals and of course Ferrari was complaining then it was banned after Brazilian GP of 1998.



https://www.autoevol...als-207645.html

This has nothing to do with hybrids.

Hybrids in F1 didn't quite exist in 1998.

There is a whole thread here discussing the rumoured hybrid system McLaren supposedly had in late 1997/early 1998, including contemporary articles discussing it.

https://forums.autos...3-hybrid-power/

The FIA explicitly banned regenerative motors in early 1998.

https://www.grandpri...-in-brazil.html

In the days before the meeting began the FIA formalized a ban on regenerative electrical motors, thus closing a loophole which McLaren was rumored to have exploited in Australia with the electrical motors running the auxiliary pumps of the engine at certain places on each lap, giving the drivers what amounted to a boost button

[sterlingfan2000]

The OP would like to go back to 2004 with V10s and refueling, am I on the mark?

No but I would try to change something drastic Aero restrictions and PU limitations.

[Ali623]

This thread is anecdotal without comparative overtaking statistics, season to season. Anyone got them?

 

Full overtaking data going back to 1984: https://docs.google....dit?gid=0#gid=0

 

Season averages breakdown: https://docs.google....dit?gid=0#gid=0

 

In summary: Better than it was between 2017-2021, similar to 2014/2016 (2015 was very low for some reason). 2011-2013 has the highest average overtakes per race.

Edited by Ali623, 23 September 2024 - 09:47.

[Disgrace]

And yet 2011 and 2013 were two of the worst seasons in living memory.

[kumo7]

The current car is built to one of the best set of rule that formula one has ever produced. the rule set made a series of events, including the move of Newey to Aston Martin, dominant season like 2023, when Aston Martin’s performance was remarkable. the car took a lot of performances from different drivers, we saw Alonso in his age nearing the win, Norris spring of this showed, Max dominating in a true king like performances, Colapinto showing up and proving his witness, Some fading away earlier than usual, yes i do think it all thanx to the current car.

[pdac]

The OP would like to go back to 2004 with V10s and refueling, am I on the mark?

 

But, even if they returned, I doubt people would like them. Apart from anything else, safety standards are stronger now and so those car designs would have to change and my guess is that the result would probably lead to disappointment from those who wear the rose-tinted glasses.

[Goron3]

Despite the obvious problems (weight, size), there are two other issues we're seeing a lot this year:

 

- The Hard tyre at most venues is extremely durable and very low deg.  

- The cars are closer together pace wise than ever before. 

 

Due to the above, the delta's are quite small.

 

If you want overtaking in F1, you need to find a way of increasing delta's between the teams during a race.

 

I mentioned this in the other tyres thread but to me the solution is for Pirelli to make the Hard tyre much harder / slower at most venues. It needs to be significantly slower than the M, at the expense of durability. This would encourage more strategic options, a bit like Hungary 2022 where a one stop was possible (S/M -> H) but tyre warm up took about 20 laps, so a two or three stop was preferred.

 

At Singapore, the Hard tyre should have been the C2 or even C1. C5, C4 and C2/1 would have made for a more exciting race as the Hard would have been excrutiatingly slow. At other street tracks we have the same problem. I often see people clamour for softer tyres but as we've seen in Australia (2024) and Hungary (23, 24), making the tyres a step softer just makes everyone do a M-H-H strategy as nothing else is viable.

[JHSingo]

And yet 2011 and 2013 were two of the worst seasons in living memory.

 

2011 wasn't that bad. There were plenty of great races that year. I'd argue it was better than most seasons from 2013-2020. 

[Ali_G]

Despite the obvious problems (weight, size), there are two other issues we're seeing a lot this year:

- The Hard tyre at most venues is extremely durable and very low deg.
- The cars are closer together pace wise than ever before.

Due to the above, the delta's are quite small.

If you want overtaking in F1, you need to find a way of increasing delta's between the teams during a race.

I mentioned this in the other tyres thread but to me the solution is for Pirelli to make the Hard tyre much harder / slower at most venues. It needs to be significantly slower than the M, at the expense of durability. This would encourage more strategic options, a bit like Hungary 2022 where a one stop was possible (S/M -> H) but tyre warm up took about 20 laps, so a two or three stop was preferred.

At Singapore, the Hard tyre should have been the C2 or even C1. C5, C4 and C2/1 would have made for a more exciting race as the Hard would have been excrutiatingly slow. At other street tracks we have the same problem. I often see people clamour for softer tyres but as we've seen in Australia (2024) and Hungary (23, 24), making the tyres a step softer just makes everyone do a M-H-H strategy as nothing else is viable.

Those deltas between drivers is a big thing. Go back before 2000 and the deltas between cars on the grid were enormous. Even in the late 80s you still need a significant speed difference to overtake another car.


Recentism and DRS makes people today believe that all overtaking should be easy when it’s never been easy.

[PayasYouRace]

But, even if they returned, I doubt people would like them. Apart from anything else, safety standards are stronger now and so those car designs would have to change and my guess is that the result would probably lead to disappointment from those who wear the rose-tinted glasses.

I hated grooved tyres and narrow cars.

[Ali_G]

I hated grooved tyres and narrow cars.

I didn’t mind the McLarens between 98 and 2000. Some if the cars in the narrow body era were hideous though. The Ferraris especially so. 1995 to 2021. Each and every car hideous.