30 replies to this topic

[Shiftin]

What do you think?

Laptimes around 2 minutes are fine by me.. Most are between 1:10 and 1:25 though... Spa is long like Hockenheim once was, Suzuka is also quite long. But what exactly are the pro's and con's of long vs short laptimes? What's ideal..?

Anyone any ideas/info on this?

[lukywill]

14', like old nurburgring

[KWSN - DSM]

A track should test the drivers, at the same time making overtaking possible at more than one place. I am not sure that laptime is a true indicator of how good or bad a track is, unfortunately there really are hardly any good tracks left in F1.

Modern technology and brilliant designers make overtaking basiscally non-existant, and that is what I am looking for more than how long it takes to complete a lap. They should all be more than 1 minute (so Fiorano is out as a race track), but apart from that no special preference, I will take the 1:30 option just to lodge one.

[Chevy II Nova]

Originally posted by lukywill
14', like old nurburgring

[mikedeering]

It's a difficult one. My first instinct was to say 2 minutes, becuase often when you think back about great tracks you tend to dwell on Spa or the old Nurburgring. But then until the changes Hockenheim was one of the longer tracks (1'40") but pretty dull with little variety. Equally in the past we had some great tracks with relatively short lap times - the old Silverstone of the 1980s was a fantastic mecca for speed - yet by 1985 cars were lapping in 65s in qualifying trim.

So I don't think lap times really have much to do with whether a track is any good or not.

[Bayou Bengal]

Variety is the best.

I like the long tracks like Spa but the shorter tracks can be interesting too.

What I really hate is the ultra slow turns on Indy's infield. They wanted a minimum length and forced that "S" shaped turn between the infield straight and the final turn onto the oval.

[Flying Panda]

the length, in seconds, of a lap in Formula one, should be equal to the length of the lap in meters divided by the average speed of the lap in meters per second.

If it doesnt, it defies one of the fundamental laws of physics.

[maclaren]

Originally posted by lukywill
14', like old nurburgring

In my opinion it would be quite boring to watch such race, in place or in TV. 70-80 sec is best in my opinion, but never under 70

[BrundleBud]

I like a variety of lap lenghths, both in terms of distance and time, but as far as the time element is concerned, I think we should have at least 2 races with lap times of around 1'15" (Monaco & Monza?) and 2 races with lap times in excess of 1' 45" (Spa & Sepang, perhaps). At least this brings some variety to tracks which in some cases are very similar.

[Gemini]

Longer tracks are great, as they are able to provide variety of corners. I prefere them definitely when watching TV.

However when on trackside, I would rather have shorter tracks, bacause it matters to me whether the cars are passing my grandstand 45 or 70 times...

My vote went on 1:40-1.50 as I see one race on track and the rest on television... However I still dream one year it will the other way around.

[kenjafield]

Variety There would be nothing wrong at all with one or two huge laps (e.g. 4 mins) as well as the short ones and all in between. What I hate is 16 identical tracks....

[Yelnats]

Originally posted by lukywill
14', like old nurburgring

Actually Fangio was pushing 9 mins in the mid fifties on this monster track in the fifties. It makes an entertaining spectacle but much of the coverage I see is from heliocopters due to the numbers of corners (100+). Of course in-car cameras would help but if low clouds intervened (no Helios and no in-cars) what would we watch? (and full course caution laps would drive most customers to the bar).

If one pooled the drivers on the existing circuits I belive that Suzuka, Malaysia and Spa (it still exists!) would win. All in the 1:30 to 1:40 range. This would seem to be the sweet spot as almost all cornering challenges can be contained in this length of track. Much longer tracks (3 mins plus) prove little about driving skills , penalize those with less local knowlege and become unweildy to supervise and maintain (Plus the new qualifying format would'nt fit in the current one hour TV time slot. ).

Obviously sub 1 minute laps are too go-carty for F1 and are to be avoided at all costs. Some might say in an urban setting we could lower this but I see no need as lower speeds on twisty tracks make it easier to hold this minimum. A 1:15 lap would be a practical minimum for a new track if it is to endure the onslaught of F1 technology fo the next few decades. Beware US GP, get rid of the golf course!

[ZZMS]

I'm in favor of longer tracks as longer tracks harder to master and harder to take it right (if ever possible). So track should have ALOT of corners of various speed and be more than 2 mins... I'd say around 4 would be ideal.

[lukywill]

Originally posted by Yelnats


what would we watch? (and full course caution laps would drive most customers to the bar).

[Ross Stonefeld]

1:25-1:35


What was strange for me, when I raced was Id driven at a variety of lap times, for example


Road America 2:30s
Snetterton 1:09s
Mallory Park :50s
Silverstone (Stowe Circuit) :37s
Putnam Park 1:15s


Yet fundamentally they feel the same. Likewise playing Grand Prix Legends, and doing a 9 minute lap of the N-Ring, I didnt get the feeling "my god tihs is taking a long time" but more of "wow, i just wasted an hour"

Visually I kinda feel the same way. Im not sure I notice a lot of difference between a lap of A1, a lap of Spa, and a sportscar lap at Le Mans. I guess because we look at corners more than the clock.

[benn5325]

Originally posted by ZZMS
I'm in favor of longer tracks as longer tracks harder to master and harder to take it right

300Km is 300Km whatever the track length is. Would you say that the old Hock was harder to master than say Monaco...
I'd say 1 2-3 Mile track with some variety. Maybe a 1:20 - 1:30

[ZZMS]

Originally posted by benn5325

300Km is 300Km whatever the track length is. Would you say that the old Hock was harder to master than say Monaco...
I'd say 1 2-3 Mile track with some variety. Maybe a 1:20 - 1:30

longer lap presumably has more corners hense more chances to make a mistake and also longer time to "memorize" lap hense bigger role of driver...

[Jordan191]

If you are talking just laptimes I'd say anything between 1 minute and 2 minutes in the dry should be okay, presuming the track length and circuit are reasonable as well. I like the A1 ring which is one of the shortest laptimes and I like Spa which is the longest.

[Mila]

I don't know of any advantage for a short lap TIME.

the longer the lap time, though, the better the chance for marshals to clear off wreckage without incident over the early laps.

lap DISTANCE is a whole other matter . . .

[SeanValen]

A lap should be longer then before, about 2 minutes. More corners, different kinds, the f1 cars these days are so advanced, you need to extend the difficulty of the tracks to compensate the car's progress in grip, aero and tyres which make the current tracks less of a challenge, it's either do that, or decrease the aero on cars and have slick tyres for the same sort of tracks, give the driver the challenge to make a bigger difference on the tracks, more Spa and Suzuka type of stuff, mixture of fast, medium and some slow corners.

[Jordan191]

Originally posted by Mila
I don't know of any advantage for a short lap TIME.

the longer the lap time, though, the better the chance for marshals to clear off wreckage without incident over the early laps.

lap DISTANCE is a whole other matter . . .

that's very true .. you'll see a lot less red flags on a long lap

[troyf1]

Originally posted by lukywill
14', like old nurburgring

[Rediscoveryx]

I voted for 1:40-1:50

[Eric McLoughlin]

TV coverage of a 14 mile lap would be far less of a problem today than it was in the 50s, 60s and 70s. Even without on board camerias and helicams the could be pleanty of ground based cameras scattered about to pick up the action.

[Wuzak]

I think that lap times ranging around 1m30 to 2m would be the best operating range.

Albert Park is in the 1m25-1m30 range, Suzuka is about 1m30s, and Spa just over 1m40, butthe rest are a fair bit shorter than that.

Monza is a special case, as the average speed is so high.

But most are in the 1m10 - 1m20 range. Far too short, imo, for too many of the races.

[Nasty McBastard]

assuming that A> we are looking at it from a TV viewers angle, and B> whatever the length of track, all areas are properly covered by cameras, then it shouldnt really matter.

aslong as i can see everything, then there could be 1 x 310km lap for all i care.

[Makarias]

I don't care that much about lap time magnitude, that's more of a concern for live spectators. I think the full races should take longer, though. And slowing the cars down is so boring, so I'd suggest longer race distances. 350 km minimum except Monaco?

[MJP]

I am very comfy with what the Spa track has to offer in every way imaginable, and not just lap duration.

[Yelnats]

Originally posted by Eric McLoughlin
TV coverage of a 14 mile lap would be far less of a problem today than it was in the 50s, 60s and 70s. Even without on board camerias and helicams the could be pleanty of ground based cameras scattered about to pick up the action.

Long tracks (10k plus) are fine for large fields (+40cars) and long races (4 hours plus) but make for boreing watching with the small and similarly paced cars in an F1 field. A 14 mile lap means there would only be an average of 1 car per KM with a 20 car field that F1 now enjoys. Not much to watch! Or to put it another way, there would be about a five to seven minute gap where the only cars passing would be spinners, pitters and Minardis. YAWN!.

With over 100 corners the odds are heavilyy in favour of action happening beyond the range of camera coverage with the 20-30 camera maximum. The editor would be driven mad trying to pick the best vantage point to show from this huge selection and quality coverage is bound to suffer.

[lukywill]

indeed, but who watches races live today?
certainly not the pit crew.

[HBoss]

The tracks should be at least 5 km long, with some having average speeds around 250km/h and other average speeds around 200 km/h. So I guess the times would vary between 1:20 and 1:40.

I just wish we had more extreme tracks, like old Hockenheim was.