23 replies to this topic

[shaggy]

In all the threads of the past week dealing with the time comparison b/w CART and F1, I did not read (or I missed it if it was pointed out) any comments about the F3 and F3000 series.

Before, during and after the race, numerous individual continued to ridicule and humiliate CART b/c its times were slower than those of F1. Even after CART proved to be much closer that the vast majority of people thought, it was still not enough.

Well ... that got me thinking. How do F3 and F3000 compare to F1 and CART ?
I checked the records at autosport.com and, for the F3000 series, which shares many of the same tracks F1 uses, it turns out that the F3000 cars are about 15 seconds slower that F1. I checked 3 tracks (Hungaroring, Silverstone, Magny Cours) - sadly, F3000 did not race in Montreal.

I could only check Silverstone for the British F3 times and, if they do run on the same track, although it is not at the same time, it turns out that the F3 series is about 23 seconds slower than F1 ( 5 seconds slower than F3000).

Please, do correct me if I am wrong since obtaining some of this information was not very forthcoming.

Now, does that mean that F3/F3k are "junk" and even worse than CART ? Does that mean that their drivers are as bad as CART's ? Obviously, any racing series will be slower than F1, but, if European F1 fans do not ridicule the F3000 series, which is 15 seconds slower than F1, why do they ridicule CART which is only 6 seconds slower than F1 ? This behavior from European fans is even more strange when you consider that, according to what Dan Gurney stated earlier this year, CART is the most demanding racing series in the world.

So ... how do the F3 and F3000 series compare to CART ? If they are slower than CART, are they the best path to F1 ? Since Kimi did not even race in either series, how does speed prepare you for F1 - how fast do you have to be able to drive before you can race in F1 ? If speed is not such a big factor, then, why ridicule CART for being slower than F1 ?

shaggy

[Lateralus42]

I used to be one of those people that thought CART was a pile of crap, that is until I saw them at Long Beach in 1995. I couldnt beleive how fast they were, in my mind they were no different from F1. I dont think TV does justice for CART, people have to see them for themselves. It is a jump from f3000 to CART, I have even run into some people who claimed that f3000 was faster, which is ridiculous. Just look at a guy like Bruno Junqueira, it took him a whole year to get used to CART. And lastly the gap between CART and F1 is closer to 4 seconds (something i posted on antother thread) :


Some interesting stats:


Fastest speed for the F1 race at Montreal: Montoya at 1:15.96
Fastest speed for CART race at Montreal: Franchitti at 1:20.24


Only a 4.28 difference in speeds.



Da Matta and his Toyota was only 2.76 seconds away from the Toyota F1's team fastest lap ( 1:20.3 vs 1:17.54)

[Ross Stonefeld]

All times taken from Spa-Francorchamps qualifying (except for the F1 time as it was set in the wet, so I went to that morning's fastest practice time)

2:32.825 - Formula Ford
2:21.438 - Formula Renault Sport
2:13.302 - Formula 3
2:05.914 - Formula 3000 test August 7th 2002
1:47.494 - Formula 1



Formula Ford
485kgs (estimated) 150-160hp
The first step out of karts. Everyone uses a 1.8 litre 4 cylinder Ford Zetec, but they are prepared by third party tuners. The most prestigious championship is the British, and the majority of the field uses either the British Van Diemen or French Mygale, with both having works teams. There are the occasional barn-based private entrant, but they have difficulty fighting the resources of the bigger mfgs. The aerodynamics of a torpedo, skinny tires, and some half-decent power make this a bullet on the straight bits. Season in the UK: 120,000+ Sterling. 13 races, unlimited testing.



Formula Renault Sport
485kgs (estimtaed) 185-190hp
New regulations started in 2000. One make series. Everyone runs Italian Tattuus chassis with a 2 litre 4 cylinder Renault prepped engine. No car modifications allowed, engines are sealed, heavy testing restrictions. Makes it a very even series and the spec aspect keeps cost down. A season with a top team costs the same as British FFord, and combined with Kimi Raikkonen graduating directly to F1, the 2002 British season has 36 entrants while Formula Ford looks weaker.


Formula 3
540kgs (FIA mandate) 230-250hp
The first 'proper' race car a driver will encounter. Massive massive aerodynamics and relatively low power make them easy to drive but difficult to master. It takes F1 level perfection in your driving and engineering to get the final tenths out. This is your final year of University so to speak. Dallara is the most common chassis, though it has an open format. Ralt and Lola hope to return if they can find buyers. A 2litre 4 cylinder production based engine. Engines used depend on the region. Among them: TOMS Toyota, Mitsubishi, Mugen-Honda, Opel, Renault, and Mercedes are now starting work on an engine. British F3 budget: 400,000 sterling for a top team with a deal 13 doubleheader weekends plus unlimted testing, though there are regulations that you cant test within X days of the next round and etc.


Formula 3000
540kg excluding fuel and driver
3 litre V8 450hp (though ive heard up to 480)
High power low grip. An absolute spec seres. Everyone gets a Lola chassis, avon tyres, and a Zytek motor. You cant so much as mount the fire extinguisher horizontally instead of vertically, or drill holes in your pedals without consulting the FIA. If they approve they will send a copy of your design to every other team in the series. Engines have timers on them, Zytek can check how much the engine has been used to see if you are testing outside the regulations. Very little in-season testing allowed. Incredibly tight grid humbles a lot of 'young stars' Budget: 800,000-1.2mil sterling. 10-12 races, all supporting F1

[baddog]

who called cart 'junk'? its just a lower tech series than f1 is all, and no worse for that

Shaun

[molive]

Nice breakdown Ross.

I wonder how would CART´s feeder series (Atlantics, Barber Dodge and the defunct Lights) compare to the European counterparts.

Also, we have a very competitive, full grid, Formula Renault here in Brazil (brought by Diniz last year). It has been a huge success, they just had the first street course race last weekend in Vitoria, with some great battles. The young drivers (average age of 19yo) are really giving it all since the winner gets a trip to Europe and a racing seat.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Atlantics is pretty much F3, and Indylights was comparable to F3000.

[karlth]

Thanks for the info Ross.

I guess that Formula Palmer Audi should follow F3000 then on your list.

One point though. The F1 time is probably done in qualifying spec while the F3000 mentioned is fastest race lap, right?

[Ross Stonefeld]

Yeah, the ratio of power to grip is probably even lower

[ebin]

BTW, the Atlantic cars are supposed to be moving up in hp in the next couple years to around 300-350. Since Indy Lights isn't around anymore the jump from Atlantics to CART is pretty steep at the moment.

[shaggy]

Thanks, Ross.

So ... F3 is slower than F3000. I only follow CART and F1 and, even then, I do not get into the details as mush as some of you do. I am just trying to figure out why some people seem to be so set on the fact that F3 is "the way to go."

I once read that J. Stewart was totally opposed to CART and he thought only F3 could prepare a driver for F1 (he even said that JV was not really good and that he and MA had proven that CART did not prepare drivers for F1. He wasn't even interested in F3000). I read similar comments from N. Haug (sp ?) from Mercedes. Then, of course, you get totally different comments from Gurney, P. Head and Sir F. Williams.

The one thing J. Stewart mentioned that has always 'bothered' me is that he thinks CART does not teach a driver about car setup, while F3 is the best teaching ground for that. This is the complete opposite of what Gurney said since he actually believes that CART, due to its different tracks, is the best place to learn how to set up a car. I would imagine that since CART teaches you about race strategy, car setup and it has almost the same speeds as F1, it would be the natural springboard for F1. And yet, outside of the Williams team, no one else in F1 seems to even know much of what is going on in CART.

shaggy

[Ross Stonefeld]

F3 is a little closer in feel and 'theory' than F3000. Looking at the times the F3 isnt really that much slower than an F3000, and at really only half the HP. Its the sensational aerodynamics and detail of the technology of F3 that makes it a good F1 training ground.

[AndersF1]

What is interesting is the difference in % and not in seconds and if you look at the differences between F1 and F3000 it is usually somewhere around 18-19% with Monaco 15.1%, Interlagos 17.7%, Hockenheim 18.0% and so on. As the difference between CART and F1 at Montreal was 8.4% you could say that the difference between F1 and CART is the same as between CART and F3000 (1.084^2=1.175, which is close to the average difference between F1 and F3000). This is of course when comparing qual. times and not fastest laps, as fastest laps are not that interesting. If they have to push really hard when the car is as fast as possible, then you will have low times, otherwise not - look at Hungaroring.

If you only look at the regulations I think F1 should be much closer to CART than F3000 is to CART, as CART has almost twice the number of hp compared to F3000 while F1 and CART is quite close. F1 is lighter, but CART has venturis and slicks. When it comes to money I guess F3000 is around 10% of CART, which in turn is around 10% of F1. It is also much more difficult to increase the speed the higher the speed is, as for example the power is proportional to the cube of the speed. If F1 should increase its average speed in Montreal by 10% it should have top speeds around 370 kph and the lateral g-forces should increase by 21%, which is a lot when they are around 2-3g or even more at some tracks.

I don't know if I am disappointed at CART's performance but maybe I am even more impressed by F1:s than I were before. I think it is very impressive to be so much faster than CART given the different regulations. Money, better engineers and a more high tech approach matters.

Anyway, there are more things to motorsport than engineering, so I will continue to watch CART, F3000, ETCC, etc. and I will also continue to enjoy driving my Rotax 125 Max around the local go-kart tracks (if my ribs wouldn't hurt so much ).

[jetsetjim]

2:32.825 - Formula Ford
2:21.438 - Formula Renault Sport
2:13.302 - Formula 3
2:08.871 - Formula 3000
1:47.494 - Formula 1

Sorry Ross, but the times for the F3000 are way out.. When we test at Spa in the dry, quick times are around the 2:01 - 2:02 times.. 2:08 was set on a damp track. I wouldn't be surprised if Pole for F3000 race this year is a mid to high 1:59

At most circuits, we have found that we are about 10 sec off F1 Pole time, and all that comes from Medium - High Speed differentials in the cars. Slow speed corners there is no difference.

The gap between the F1 and CART cars was pretty much what would be expected. CART cars actually have more power, wider track (Which should be beneficial in corners) and slick tyres. Where they lose out is that they are about 150-200kg heavier than an F1 car, a substantial difference! Not to mention the cars are manual gearboxes, which will add around 0.5-1.0 seconds per lap. It just isn't physically possible for someone to change gear as quickly as the automatic systems.. Given there are 30-odd gearchanges, it isn't that surprising.

Still, it was an interesting comparison!

[Ross Stonefeld]

Sorry my mistake. The results page I had only listed 'wet' or 'dry' and seemed to include damp as dry.

Ill edit

[Arneal]

Originally posted by shaggy
Before, during and after the race, numerous individual continued to ridicule and humiliate CART b/c its times were slower than those of F1.

shaggy

It is a good thing that CART didn't run at Montreal a couple years ago because they probably would have been faster than the F1 cars. In those days, before the tire war, the F1 qual times were no better than the CART cars did this year.

Pole times:

1999 Micheal Schumacher 1:19.298
2000 Micheal Schumacher 1:18.439

da Matta's pole time was in the 1:18's. Because of ever increasing restrictions on the amount of allowable boost for the turbos the CART times have actually slowed at most tracks the last few years so they would most likely have been in the 1:17's back in 1999 and 2000.

CART shouldn't be humiliated by their slower times because all it really shows is that they have been more successfull than F1 in slowing their cars for safety reasons.

[Ross Stonefeld]

for the one hundreth time



THE TRACK WAS DIFFERENT

[karlth]

Originally posted by jetsetjim
When we test at Spa in the dry ...

We?

Identify yourself please!

[Arneal]

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
THE TRACK WAS DIFFERENT

Yeah, I hadn't realized that. The F1 pole time dropped about 3 seconds from last year. If we figure that 1.5 seconds of that was from the cars being quicker this year than 1.5 seconds would come from the new track.

That means the CART vs. F1 times from 2 or 3 years ago would probably have been about even.

[scheivlak]

Originally posted by Arneal


Yeah, I hadn't realized that. The F1 pole time dropped about 3 seconds from last year. If we figure that 1.5 seconds of that was from the cars being quicker this year than 1.5 seconds would come from the new track.

That means the CART vs. F1 times from 2 or 3 years ago would probably have been about even.

So there's no evolution in CART? CART cars won't go any faster the last few years?

[Arneal]

They have actually slowed down. The amount of turbo boost allowed is dropped every year in an effort to slow the cars down. The engines are currently running at almost no boost at all.

[MrAerodynamicist]

In all the years that Lola & Reynard have built CART cars, have they never once tested at Silverstone?

[JR]

Originally posted by shaggy
Before, during and after the race, numerous individual continued to ridicule and humiliate CART b/c its times were slower than those of F1. Even after CART proved to be much closer that the vast majority of people thought, it was still not enough.

--

Jon Fogarty's pole time in Toyota Atlantics for Montreal this Saturday was 1:32.280.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Originally posted by MrAerodynamicist
In all the years that Lola & Reynard have built CART cars, have they never once tested at Silverstone?

Hard to beleive isnt it. I know they've shook down the Reynard Formula Nippon cars at Silverstone and other stuff, but most of the time it seemed they shipped the Indycars to the US and they got shaken down at Putnam Park (about 30 minutes from most team bases)

Im sure BAR has known for years what CART would do. The BAR was a Reynard-Honda on Bridgestones just like a TKG car. Im sure the Reynard design people could have just changed the parameters of the simulation software and gotten pretty close

[MattPete]

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
F3 is a little closer in feel and 'theory' than F3000. Looking at the times the F3 isnt really that much slower than an F3000, and at really only half the HP. Its the sensational aerodynamics and detail of the technology of F3 that makes it a good F1 training ground.

Ross, that's utterly ignorant to say that the difference between F3 and F3000 is so small is because of F3's superior technology.

F3000 is a spec series, where there is no economic incentive to produce a fast car (has nothing to do with technology). F3 is market driven, with Dallara having the largest market share because they produce the fastest chasis. It's as simple as that.