2014 too slow? (or not, as the case may be)

[beelsebob]

I'd like it if they actually removed the minimum weight limit from the cars, or tie in the weight limit based on engine selection..

The best suggestion i've heard is something the effect of the WRC power limited regulations.

Something like the cars can have up to 800 hp.
How you get there, totally up to you, V12 or V4 turbo? up to you... volumetric capacity, fuel flow, rev limit... all up to each individual manufacturer.

That would be something that drives efficiency.

I'd like to see this enforced in an even more open way - at the start of the race your car may have at most x MJ of energy on board in any form of fuel. No fuel may be added. How you get to the end is entirely your choice, including how much power you generate from that energy.

[Andres125sx]

Your post made me think of "The Wizard of Oz," WB: an anthropomorphized Formula One loudly proclaiming its worth to the masses while desperately trying to hide the truth behind a thin facade of marketing spin.

May I ask what´s that truth?

Maybe that 4g cornering is quick enough and tracks are not prepared for faster cornering speeds?



It´s always the same, when aerodinamics go too far, FIA put some restrictions so the cars become slower. Then engineers find the way to overcome those restrictions and continue increasing the downforce, lap times, cornering speeds.... so FIA has to put even more restrictions.

Nothing new with 2014 rules, it´s the same they´re doing since the 70´s-80´s. They´re slower? Of course, that´s the point of the rules, I´ve never seen a rule trying to make the cars quicker


The only problem is they´re limiting F1 development for so many years now GP2 cars are getting closer... Ok, if that bother you, then you should ask for more GP2 restrictions, because F1 reached the safety limits some decades ago, don´t ask for faster F1 cars, that will never happen.... at least while F1 still go to tracks like Monaco, Singapore, Montreal... if the championship would go only to new Tilke tracks then they will probably allow further develpment.

You have to choose, more development or urban tracks, both are not compatible

[bhall]

Indeed, the FIA has made many changes over the years to keep performance in check, and yes engineers generally manage to claw back a great deal of what's lost. But, the sport never quite "recovered" from the switch to V8s from V10s, if you will, which means the change to V6T-based PUs with limited fuel and limited ERS has left Formula One as much as 10s off the pace of laptimes set in 2004-2005.

When the speeds in cheap spec-series begin to catch up with those in expensive "developmental" series, I think something's a bit wrong.

[Töm87]

So some 10 GP2 cars were faster in qualifying than the Caterhams

[bhall]

Marussia, too. Those two teams combined to spend well over $100,000,000 last year, and they were just outclassed by cars from a spec-series that costs around €1.8/year.

Pinnacle, indeed.

[Sevach]

Indeed, the FIA has made many changes over the years to keep performance in check, and yes engineers generally manage to claw back a great deal of what's lost. But, the sport never quite "recovered" from the switch to V8s from V10s, if you will, which means the change to V6T-based PUs with limited fuel and limited ERS has left Formula One as much as 10s off the pace of laptimes set in 2004-2005.

When the speeds in cheap spec-series begin to catch up with those in expensive "developmental" series, I think something's a bit wrong.

It's quite sad that back in the early 2000s F1 had 900+ horses while a Ferrari Berlinetta had 490.

Now the 458 Speciale has 600+ while the F1 has 750.
Even worst they only have this much power for a percentage of the lap, they don't even have that much power full time.

The Barcelona results vs GP2 have been quite embarassing for F1 imo.

[Artur Craft]

Where is it set in stone that you have to have two tons of downforce? I think that cars with less downforce are more difficult to drive and more spectacular to watch. All these comparisons to other formulae are meaningless in the end because the general public never watches the races. Only anoraks ever watch such races and the occasional European race goer who watches the whole program from his seat at the track. 99.9% of viewers are watching via TV and less than 1% of them ever get to see a junior class race. So commercially those formulae are totally irrelevant. They only exist for the sporting idea and for drivers to climb the ladder to F1. So again, why are we worried about those formulae?

Your points also seem fair to me. I just don't like the odd fact that a driver leaves GP2 to go to the "pinnacle of motorsport" and end up facing a car that will be slower in high speed cornering. From the drivers POV it must be somewhat strange, but yes, for us it's not that important.

To stay on topic, we can't blame much on tyres this 4,5 deficit to Rosberg 2013 pole. GP2 cars are the same as last year's, AFAIK, and they were only 0,6s slower on qualifying. So, the tyres are only responsible to that margin of around half second.

The 50kg increase in weight accounts for around 1,7s. But they are losing more than the remaining 2,3s on downforce because now they have much more straight line speed to compensate for it.

If that reduction in downforce improved the racing, I would like it. But I'm not sure if that is the case here. Imho, they should have diminished the wings even more and increased diffuser a la GP2. That seems to provide better racing.

[Juzh]

5.3s slower than 2010 pole. 5.3!

[cirrusflyer]

But it is about the safety...
Lowe explains it...
http://adamcooperf1.com/2014/04/08/niki ... -get-lost/

[PlatinumZealot]

So some 10 GP2 cars were faster in qualifying than the Caterhams

The weight is the real enemy here not the concept.We just have to hope that battery technology advances to give smaller. lighter, cooler batteries/super capacitors.

[Artur Craft]

5.3s slower than 2010 pole. 5.3!

and that because in 2010 the top speeds were 310kmh while today it was 338kmh

[Tim.Wright]

I think this laptime thing is being blown out of proportion. In the early days of F1 you could enter F1 with an F2 or F3 car, so an overlap in performance isn't something new nor is it the end of the world. Still no other classes are lapping these tracks faster than the fastest F1 cars.

And personally, I'm enjoying watching the drivers fighting the cars in the corners now. As much as I hate the new engines, they are working well with the new harder tyres to provide a good challenge to the drivers which is entertaining to watch.

[bhall]

The weight is the real enemy here not the concept.We just have to hope that battery technology advances to give smaller. lighter, cooler batteries/super capacitors.

The enemy of performance right now is absolutely the concept. For one thing, the battery only weighs between 20 and 25 kilograms (5.4.3).

Generally speaking, you can't radically slash downforce, impose a fuel-flow limit, impose a fuel cap, restrict
energy harvest/storage/discharge, prohibit in-season development and then expect a miracle whereby cars produced under such constraints will somehow turn out to be as quick as those from previous years. It simply can't happen.

I'll say it again, because I think it bears repeating: the top GP2 cars are now faster than the slowest F1 cars. Let that sink in, folks.

I don't think things are going to get much better, either, because any increases in efficiency in the coming years will be met with further fuel restrictions. This is the status quo.

It seems like F1 is now a contest to see who can circle the drain the longest without slipping under. (Or to see who can make the most money with the disingenuous marketing claims and other chicanery born out of F1's new, spurious obsession with "road relevance.")

[beelsebob]

Generally speaking, you can't radically slash downforce, impose a fuel-flow limit, impose a fuel cap, restrict
energy harvest/storage/discharge, prohibit in-season development and then expect a miracle whereby cars produced under such constraints will somehow turn out to be as quick as those from previous years. It simply can't happen.

Of course not - but that wasn't the goal. The goal was that it would be slower so that there was some room for the inevitable chunks of time the engineers would find, and more exciting.

I'll say it again, because I think it bears repeating: the top GP2 cars are now faster than the slowest F1 cars. Let that sink in, folks.

1. Only at certain circuits.
2. Okay, it's sunk in... Now I've got something for you to let sink in... So? Why does that matter?

I don't think things are going to get much better, either, because any increases in efficiency in the coming years will be met with further fuel restrictions. This is the status quo.

Of course it'll get better - this has repeatedly happened in F1. You get a year where the rules get tightened significantly, then a series of relatively small things taken away, while the teams gain back the time lost.

[johnsonwax]

I think people are missing the bigger picture here. We've had a good decade of advancing the ICE due to precise manufacturing, high speed control systems, and new materials, but there's vastly more headroom from here on out on the electrical side of things. Mercedes is demonstrating that now. Getting 1-2s on the field through engine development hasn't happened in ages. It's all been aero and grip, brakes, etc. It's been great if you employed Adrian Newey, but now teams can compete through other means than just aero. That's a good thing. Aero has been too dominant the last few years, it needed to be balanced.

And that 1-2s advantage that Merc has will be matched and exceeded by the rest of the field by next year. Getting another 1-2s through improved software, ERS, ICE performance or mileage, packaging is entirely possible. F1 has a wider foundation to improve performance that it didn't have before. Teams don't have to simply out-aero Newey.

And I think it's odd that everyone is complaining about pace when we just came off a period when the top 10 cars were covered by half a second or so. There was scant room for anyone to advance the car. That means we're going to have some dominant seasons like this, but they'll be pushing record lap times again before long.

You have to appreciate that the grip these cars are getting is unprecedented. We're getting 4.5-5Gs on the drivers, and you can't really exceed that. You can load all the HP and downforce you want but the only path to go faster is through the tires and if you push everything else ahead, you wind up with everyone tire limited from the same manufacturer. That's what led to many of F1s problems 10 years ago where passing was rare because the was insufficient differences in vehicle acceleration (including braking) where multiple tire manufacturers were seen as a solution to add a new variable (which failed). The sport has to artificially keep the cars well clear of the tire limit, give them acceleration opportunities (DRS/KERS), and give teams room to innovate from the limit to the tire limit, otherwise we go back to slot-cars, with pass-less processions, and lots of R&D yielding nothing.

This is happening in every other form of racing. IRL/CART were up against the same g-force/tire limit. Speeds on the ovals have stayed flat or gone down. NASCAR has held speeds flat as well. Everyone is limited on tire grip/g-forces on drivers.