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

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
User avatar
strad
117
Joined: 02 Jan 2010, 01:57

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

Post

They were certainly not easier to drive
Nigel Roebuck interview with Gilles
Gilles hated the breed of Grand Prix car spawned by the rules of the time.
As with todays cars those of the early 80s had a tremedous amount of downforce, but back then much of it was generated by ground effects, by shaped underbodies and all the cars had skirts to create a seal with the ground. Problem was, while these ha previously been of the sliding variety now they had to be fixed and the only way to keep them from instantly being destroyed was to create a car effectively without suspension.
This made them hellish to drive. "I probably enjoy driving for its own sake more than alot of drivers. Gilles said "but I hate these cars. Two or three years ago I used to enjoy myself 15 times a lap. Now its once every 15 laps! No one outside of F1 can know what shìt these things are to drive.
There is a moment going over a bump and turning into a corner at the same time when you lose vision. Everything goes blurred. The G forces are unblievable and the steering is ridiculously heavy, like being in a big truck with the power steering not working. Sometimes you feel you don't have the strength to pull it around the ccorner. And of course we have no suspension. You go over a bump and its like someone is kicking you in the back. Your legs are flung around against the steering rack. Your head constantly hits the back of the cockpit or the roll bar. After awhile your sides ache, your head aches, and you become aware of not enjoying driving a racing car.
I asked where a drivers most important quality was his physical strength, his stamina?"
Yes, Absolutely. The days of driving with your fingerstips are gone.Now you have to grip the wheel, simply to hold on, to get the car to turn through the corner. A lot of the art has gone out of it - nearly all, in fact." . . . . All right then, I said, define your ideal F1 car. "For me it is very simple" Gilles said. "I lover motor racing. To me it is a sport, a spectable, not a technical exervise. My ideal F1 car would have no ground effect - in fact, very little down force at all. It would have a 5-litre normally-aspirated engine., at least 800 hp, with 21 in. rear tyres. Some saw we should have narrower tyres, but I'm not in favour of that because you need big tyres to slow you down if you spin. And you need a lot of horsepower to unstick big tyres, to make the cars slide. " That would be a fantastic spectacle, I can tell you.
To achieve anything, you must be prepared to dabble on the boundary of disaster.”
Sir Stirling Moss

User avatar
strad
117
Joined: 02 Jan 2010, 01:57

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

Post

"beelsebob]
That is, F1 is about the peak of driving ability, not about the peak of technological advancement.
Well then it fails on that score as well. We now have drivers that complain they cannot control a loose race car.
To achieve anything, you must be prepared to dabble on the boundary of disaster.”
Sir Stirling Moss

bonjon1979
bonjon1979
30
Joined: 11 Feb 2009, 17:16

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

Post

beelsebob wrote:
bhall wrote:Speaking only for myself, the performance of this year's cars doesn't constitute the sole reason for my discontent. Rather, it's the straw that broke the camel's back following years of mounting frustration.

2007 Spanish Grand Prix (the first race on the current layout): Massa, 1:31:36.2, average: 1:23.3
2014 Spanish Grand Prix: Hamilton, 1:41:05.2, average: 1:31.9

2007 Spanish GP2 round, sprint: Glock, 38:08.6, average: 1:28

You could take a seven-year-old car from a feeder series and clobber the W05 Hybrid, this year's best and well on its way to being considered one of the all-time greats.

http://i.imgur.com/noEQeKT.jpg
Again, as other people have said, many times. No you couldn't, because the GP2 car would run out of fuel. If you put enough fuel in (an imaginary infinite tank) for it to be able to complete the race, it would be much much slower than that average time.

Forget the gp2 car, the 2007 f1 car would run out of fuel

User avatar
Cam
45
Joined: 02 Mar 2012, 08:38

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

Post

beelsebob wrote:That is, F1 is about the peak of driving ability, not about the peak of technological advancement.
OMG beelsebob, I agree with you. Is hell freezing over?

However, there is no driving ability anymore. As a wise man once said "it's the car stupid". F1 doesn't need all the gizmos and gadgets to be the 'pinnacle', we already have series to draw domestic tech from. It does however have to be much faster than anything else and it must, must, must provide the ultimate challenge to the driver - and not turning knobs either.

The W05 will go down as one of the great cars for all the wrong reasons. The RB9 was great because all teams had stable rules over a long time, it was a fair and equal play field. The W05 has lucked out on new rules, with frozen regs, it's impossible for anyone to beat them. That's not "great", it's Maldonado in Spain all over again. And it could have been Ferrari or Renault powered cars in the same situation and we'd be engraving their names in the books instead.

This is why F1 is a farce IMO. Whether F1 is too slow is so no longer the point.
“There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance.”
― Socrates
Ignorance is a state of being uninformed. Ignorant describes a person in the state of being unaware
who deliberately ignores or disregards important information or facts. © all rights reserved.

mrluke
mrluke
33
Joined: 22 Nov 2013, 20:31

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

Post

daft.

The RB9 was great because other teams were focusing on this years car, this even more exaggerated for the 2nd half of last season where for some reason RB threw resource at the car probably expecting merc to run them close.

The W05 has "lucked" into a healthy lead this season because the team has spent far more time and effort developing it, rather than trying to match the RB9 for the final season before the regs changed.

beelsebob
beelsebob
85
Joined: 23 Mar 2011, 15:49
Location: Cupertino, California

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

Post

Cam wrote:
beelsebob wrote:That is, F1 is about the peak of driving ability, not about the peak of technological advancement.
OMG beelsebob, I agree with you. Is hell freezing over?
Could well be :twisted:
However, there is no driving ability anymore. As a wise man once said "it's the car stupid". F1 doesn't need all the gizmos and gadgets to be the 'pinnacle', we already have series to draw domestic tech from. It does however have to be much faster than anything else and it must, must, must provide the ultimate challenge to the driver - and not turning knobs either.
I disagree that it needs to be fastest. The cars this year require far far more skill to drive than the 2010 cars exactly because they're not as fast. Removing downforce means the drivers have to earn their living again.
The W05 will go down as one of the great cars for all the wrong reasons. The RB9 was great because all teams had stable rules over a long time, it was a fair and equal play field. The W05 has lucked out on new rules, with frozen regs, it's impossible for anyone to beat them.
I disagree that they lucked out - Merc have been saying for several years now that 2014 would be the year they won. They clearly knew they had something big already, and if that's the case, that's not luck.

munudeges
munudeges
-14
Joined: 10 Jun 2011, 17:08

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

Post

The essential truth is that you can't have Formula 1 be the pinnacle of motorsport, have lap times get slower every year to the point where they overlap feeder series and have Formula 1 continue to be credible.

Drivers are already driving well within themselves.

User avatar
Artur Craft
40
Joined: 05 Feb 2010, 15:50

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

Post

Pierce89 wrote:All the fudged figures in the world mean nothing. We have no real numbers for any of the numbers you claim, but I promise you 130r at Suzuka will see peaks well over 3.2g, and I also promise you that the top f1 cars have more df than a gp2 car.

I never claimed f1 is great at the moment, but I also don't believe your claimed figures are correct because lap time difference for hp or df neither one is a linear relationship which renders your numbers pretty close to pure speculation.

Edit: I also noticed you claimed f1 and gp2 to be the same weight. Totally false. F1 has a higher minumum weight and much more fuel.
fudged figures? please...

Of course the correlations are not exactly accurate. The relations of laptimes variation with DF or HP variation is indeed not linear but my calculations are the best approximations I have.

I would like to have the wind tunnel data of the Dallara GP2 car and that of Mercedes' or Red Bull' car to know for sure, but your claim in bold is 100% guess based in absolutely nothing.

My numbers are far better speculation/guess than yours, simply because your's is based on nothing.

They will reach higher lateral acceleration in faster corners like Copse, but Campsa is already quite quick so the max G is not far from that, maybe they will achieve 3.5 or 3.7G in a top speed corner, and that's it.

about their weight, GP2 weights 688kg versus F1's 691kg
http://www.gp2series.com/Guide-to/The-car-and-engine/

It's basically the same. I'm sorry but, please, search before posting wrong things(like their mass).

Btw, on the same page, you can see "Max. lateral acceleration +/- 3.9 G ".

User avatar
Cam
45
Joined: 02 Mar 2012, 08:38

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

Post

beelsebob wrote:
Cam wrote:However, there is no driving ability anymore. As a wise man once said "it's the car stupid". F1 doesn't need all the gizmos and gadgets to be the 'pinnacle', we already have series to draw domestic tech from. It does however have to be much faster than anything else and it must, must, must provide the ultimate challenge to the driver - and not turning knobs either.
I disagree that it needs to be fastest. The cars this year require far far more skill to drive than the 2010 cars exactly because they're not as fast. Removing downforce means the drivers have to earn their living again.
Say what? F1 does not need to be the fastest cars in motorsport? Well, thank goodness hell is still hot as I completely disagree here and I'm sure I'm in the majority on this one. By you're reckoining, it's ok for F1 to be slower than GP3 as long as they're hard to drive....... :wtf:
beelsebob wrote:
Cam wrote:The W05 will go down as one of the great cars for all the wrong reasons. The RB9 was great because all teams had stable rules over a long time, it was a fair and equal play field. The W05 has lucked out on new rules, with frozen regs, it's impossible for anyone to beat them.
I disagree that they lucked out - Merc have been saying for several years now that 2014 would be the year they won. They clearly knew they had something big already, and if that's the case, that's not luck.
Yes Merc started a heck of lot earlier than anyone else and yes they focussed on 2014 being 'their year' - but that's no guarantee of results. They could have turned up 1st day of practice and been 2 seconds off the pace. They had no idea where they were in comparison to other teams. Unless you're suggesting they're psychic or had inside knowledge...?

This is why reg freezes are ridiculous (for non-stock series). If you make one error, you're screwed and there's no way to rectify. So it's not the best car/team/drver that wins, it's the one that happened to fluke it right first go. No other team is anywhere near Merc - that's not competition. It's fine if you're a Hamilton fanboy (and there's a few of them around here), but if you like an actual fair fight, there's no chance.

Take the Brawn DD. Awesome innovation, well deserved. Other teams had the opportunity to catch up, to develop. Red Bull did the better job here, but Ferrari and others had the same opportunity. Now, Ferrari and Renault are screwed. That's not right.
“There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance.”
― Socrates
Ignorance is a state of being uninformed. Ignorant describes a person in the state of being unaware
who deliberately ignores or disregards important information or facts. © all rights reserved.

Vettel Maggot
Vettel Maggot
4
Joined: 28 Jan 2014, 08:30

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

Post

Formula One stopped being the pinnacle a long time ago, pretty much when the tobacco money stopped. When you have rules that freeze development how can the series be considered the pinnacle? There's little room for development and the cars are now too quiet/slow, the drivers are not pushing all race and the only people that are happy are the Hamilton lovers.

User avatar
Juzh
161
Joined: 06 Oct 2012, 08:45

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

Post

Cam wrote:
beelsebob wrote:
Cam wrote:However, there is no driving ability anymore. As a wise man once said "it's the car stupid". F1 doesn't need all the gizmos and gadgets to be the 'pinnacle', we already have series to draw domestic tech from. It does however have to be much faster than anything else and it must, must, must provide the ultimate challenge to the driver - and not turning knobs either.
I disagree that it needs to be fastest. The cars this year require far far more skill to drive than the 2010 cars exactly because they're not as fast. Removing downforce means the drivers have to earn their living again.
Say what? F1 does not need to be the fastest cars in motorsport? Well, thank goodness hell is still hot as I completely disagree here and I'm sure I'm in the majority on this one. By you're reckoining, it's ok for F1 to be slower than GP3 as long as they're hard to drive....... :wtf:
beelsebob wrote:
Cam wrote:The W05 will go down as one of the great cars for all the wrong reasons. The RB9 was great because all teams had stable rules over a long time, it was a fair and equal play field. The W05 has lucked out on new rules, with frozen regs, it's impossible for anyone to beat them.
I disagree that they lucked out - Merc have been saying for several years now that 2014 would be the year they won. They clearly knew they had something big already, and if that's the case, that's not luck.
Yes Merc started a heck of lot earlier than anyone else and yes they focussed on 2014 being 'their year' - but that's no guarantee of results. They could have turned up 1st day of practice and been 2 seconds off the pace. They had no idea where they were in comparison to other teams. Unless you're suggesting they're psychic or had inside knowledge...?

This is why reg freezes are ridiculous (for non-stock series). If you make one error, you're screwed and there's no way to rectify. So it's not the best car/team/drver that wins, it's the one that happened to fluke it right first go. No other team is anywhere near Merc - that's not competition. It's fine if you're a Hamilton fanboy (and there's a few of them around here), but if you like an actual fair fight, there's no chance.

Take the Brawn DD. Awesome innovation, well deserved. Other teams had the opportunity to catch up, to develop. Red Bull did the better job here, but Ferrari and others had the same opportunity. Now, Ferrari and Renault are screwed. That's not right.
This! =D>
Pretty much summed up my thoughts.

SGeorge
SGeorge
0
Joined: 27 Feb 2014, 15:17

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

Post

I loved watching the Early 00's cars develop, with the big power v10 and aerodynamic advances, less so when they were "clipped" - but not from a visual perspective, more the principle of them not being the pinnacle of what can be achieved.

The reality was that I cant tell by viewing the cars that the laptimes drop - you cant really appreciate the difference unless there is a comparitive faster car.

If I was running the sport, my vote would strongly be on increasing the power and getting back to the 900-1000 bhp cars that squirmed under power, and would be a real joy to watch with the reduced downforce.

The difference in speed between F1 and GP2 is not that important to me because you dont watch them together, but it would be nice to maintain the "step" in performance.

User avatar
Andres125sx
166
Joined: 13 Aug 2013, 10:15
Location: Madrid, Spain

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

Post

bhall wrote:What the sport calls innovation, I call 40-year-old technology.

http://i.imgur.com/gCwDPwm.jpg
So since petrol companies stopped hybrid development 40 years back, we should discard that technology.... even if it has evolved enough to make it useful :roll:

Are you serious?

User avatar
Andres125sx
166
Joined: 13 Aug 2013, 10:15
Location: Madrid, Spain

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

Post

Cam wrote: with frozen regs, it's impossible for anyone to beat them. That's not "great", it's Maldonado in Spain all over again. And it could have been Ferrari or Renault powered cars in the same situation and we'd be engraving their names in the books instead.

This is why F1 is a farce IMO. Whether F1 is too slow is so no longer the point.
Upvote for this.

I really can´t understand how people can be so critic with 2014 sound and laptimes, but don´t worry so much about the complete lack of competitiveness...


I´m pretty close to stop watching F1, and the reason is I see no sense watching a competition that I know who´ll win before FP1... And I know who´ll be the world champion (both!) months before the end of the seasson.... every seasson


I´d love V12 or V10 sound, but that´s something circumstancial for me, I´d never stop watching F1 because of the sound.

I´d prefer if F1 cars are 5 seconds faster than GP2 cars but, who care? I´m conscious F1 cars are really far from their full potential because of the rules, and I know this is happening for some decades now, nothing new, so I´m not worried about GP2 getting closer. I agree with those who say it´s a nosense GP2 cars can be as fast as Caterham for a fraction of the investment, but as a fan that really doesn´t worry me.

But the lack of competitiveness is killing me. I can´t watch a competitiveless competition. And don´t get me wrong, the driver winning has nothing to see with this. I´m spanish and support Marquez since he was a 125 driver, but I´m worried about him being too dominant too... actually I´ve lost some interest in MotoGP this seasson too... even when it´s first time ever three spanish drivers are so dominant on MotoGP.


Any competition MUST be competitive, and F1 is failing in this aspect for too many sesson now :cry:

Harsha
Harsha
12
Joined: 01 Dec 2012, 14:35

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

Post

I have a question for you guys what is Needed for F1 right now is it quick lap times we saw glimpses in 2010 or 2013 or Super quick lap times like Pre 2004 with sprint finishes or Slow lap times what we had now ?
I don't mind seeing one team dominating as child's play but i don't like to see how slow these cars are
Agreed we are in first 5 races of a entire new regulation set but is this slow is really needed for F1 even as a base start?