Why overtaking is dead, and might never come back

[Monster Hesh]

If you have a craving for great racing, just watch MotoGP. Last weeks Assen GP was one of the greatest races ever. F1 cars are too fast, wide and stop too easily.

[DiogoBrand]

If you have a craving for great racing, just watch MotoGP. Last weeks Assen GP was one of the greatest races ever. F1 cars are too fast, wide and stop too easily.

Don't take this personally, but I honestly can't stand this --- anymore.
Why is there still people complaining that the cars are too wide?
Cars were just as wide up until the 90's, yet nobody complained about it back then. In fact, in the late 90's (98 I think), then they had the idea of making cars narrower because in their minds this would somehow improve overtaking, it didn't make any difference. I would say that the added mechanical grip of wider cars actually helps with overtaking.

It's just an 11% difference from 1800mm to 2000mm, people should just stop saying this crap.

[zac510]

Overtaking only results in more controversy, thus they should just ban it all.

[Monster Hesh]

If you have a craving for great racing, just watch MotoGP. Last weeks Assen GP was one of the greatest races ever. F1 cars are too fast, wide and stop too easily.

Don't take this personally, but I honestly can't stand this --- anymore.
Why is there still people complaining that the cars are too wide?
Cars were just as wide up until the 90's, yet nobody complained about it back then. In fact, in the late 90's (98 I think), then they had the idea of making cars narrower because in their minds this would somehow improve overtaking, it didn't make any difference. I would say that the added mechanical grip of wider cars actually helps with overtaking.

It's just an 11% difference from 1800mm to 2000mm, people should just stop saying this crap.

All cars are too wide, too wide for the narrow racing line. It wasn't F1 targeted in honesty. From now I''ll rephrase it to "racing line too narrow".

[strad]

1. They all have the same brakes which makes overtaking in the braking zone almost non exsistant as all the drivers have the balls and the same braking ability.
2 they have a hard time trusting their fellow drivers so require an almost fool proof opportunity.
When you have to fear your fellow driver will cut you off or bash into you, you tend to be more careful about attempting a pass.
3 The big one to me. We care too much about overtaking rather than being able to race closely together.
We don't need more passing, we need more racing.
4 Part of that stems from a lack of parity. As has been mentioned we have too much stratification of performance

[Edax]

I can’t remember the last time I heard that someone made a gear shift error, while that was a frequent cause of overtakes in the 80’s.

With the current paddles it is just a matter of clicking up and down and as long as you watch the lights you’re OK.

Interestingly, if you go back far enough you find two speed manuals in F1. Which would entail less shifting, less opportunity for error, more hands on the steering wheel. What modern afficionados would call too easy, or boring, while claiming F1 as not being like it used to be.

Driving with one hand on the steering wheel and one hand on the shifter, whilst feathering the throttle and the clutch is a different matter.

Drivers had one hand on the f-duct and one hand on the brake balance lever while altering the front wing in 2010, so there's precedent for complex operations in recent history. Didn't always lead to passing or crashing.

Interesting never heard of 2 speed manuals, what era/ cars were they?

As for the amount of operation. Surely the workload in the cars got heavier not lighter. Fangio had not to worry about brake balance, motor management, Kers, pit radio, diff settings etc. But crucially this happens all on straights.

Take this for measure:


Takes some big brass round things to drive through the starting field with one hand.

You know Hugenhold designed the Suzuki esses especially for overtaking. His philosophy was that if you created a challenging flow of corners a lesser driver would make a mistake and drop out of the rythm, running slow or wide, creating an overtaking opportunity. The same you can find in his designs for zandvoort, and the Motordrome. Part of that was that at some point you have to shift gears.

[garygph]

It's just an 11% difference from 1800mm to 2000mm, people should just stop saying this crap.

I do not think 11% is "just" anything in the F1 scheme of things!?

[joshuagore]

Didn't the f1 rule makers know about the delta narrowed by technology and subsequently design a qualifying system and a rule structure with tires which fictitiously created passing battles which would come from the teams own ability to predict and produce a car which can deal with varying tire/temp conditions? This is why they start on q2 tires but could swap onto tires which may produce .5 second delta mid race?

I think one of the greatest issues plaguing F1 is a commentating crew who can't seem to narrate the story of strategy from qualifying to race finish. In q2 you rarely hear about how those tires might effect the race, when we could be predicting the delta battle to come. During the last race the entire conversation could have been about how Ferrari chose conservative, making a bad call not to push earlier when at the end the blistered car won by only a few seconds. This is a real tight strategic race which if narrated had a great competitive story, problem is either the fans don't want that narrated battle because half of it is off track, or the announcers fail to produce it.

[DiogoBrand]

It's just an 11% difference from 1800mm to 2000mm, people should just stop saying this crap.

I do not think 11% is "just" anything in the F1 scheme of things!?

When you consider that a track can fit 3 or 4 cars side by side, I don't think it is that significant.
But that's not the point, my point is that there's no basis to say that 1800mm wide cars will have an easier time overtaking than 2000mm cars.

[DiogoBrand]

If you have a craving for great racing, just watch MotoGP. Last weeks Assen GP was one of the greatest races ever. F1 cars are too fast, wide and stop too easily.

Don't take this personally, but I honestly can't stand this --- anymore.
Why is there still people complaining that the cars are too wide?
Cars were just as wide up until the 90's, yet nobody complained about it back then. In fact, in the late 90's (98 I think), then they had the idea of making cars narrower because in their minds this would somehow improve overtaking, it didn't make any difference. I would say that the added mechanical grip of wider cars actually helps with overtaking.

It's just an 11% difference from 1800mm to 2000mm, people should just stop saying this crap.

All cars are too wide, too wide for the narrow racing line. It wasn't F1 targeted in honesty. From now I''ll rephrase it to "racing line too narrow".

The racing line point is valid. In fact there was a post on this forum about making corners with more than one ideal line to aid overtaking. But the fact that you have to drive on a compromised line to be able to overtake was always a part of motorsport.

[strad]

It's just an 11% difference

When I read that my first thought was how when they moved an oil cooler on Hunts car just a few mm it turned it from a winner to a loser and when they moved it back it returned to winning. Sometimes a small change can mean a lot.

[DiogoBrand]

It's just an 11% difference

When I read that my first thought was how when they moved an oil cooler on Hunts car just a few mm it turned it from a winner to a loser and when they moved it back it returned to winning. Sometimes a small change can mean a lot.

It can. But there's still no evidence that an 11% difference in width will aid or harm overtaking.

[strad]

Sorry I wasn't clear.
In this case I agree with you. It's just what popped into my head about Hunt.
I listed my thoughts on the subject. Mostly I think it's the lack of parity, carbon brakes and all the marbles limiting the available line.
I didn't mention that one but I believe these stupid tires make so many marbles that mostly they don't dare go off the established line.
If I had my way they would have two compounds. A hard and a soft for all races all season and one of those able to last the whole race.
Gumball tires have gone too far. imo

[Ringleheim]

F1 consistently focuses on the wrong thing---the car itself---as a way of solving the overtaking problem. It's not the car, it's the tracks.

Certain track layouts give rise to boring races year in and year out, with little passing. Tracks need to be reconfigured to allow for passing; the secret is a long straight followed by a tight corner....and the following car has to be able to get on the lead car's ass at the beginning of the straight. Where you have that, you will have passing.

Regarding tire compounds: Pirelli has screwed this all up. ALL of their rubber compounds are much too hard these days. They need to be massively softer so that differing tire strategies can be a possibility again.

Engines are reliable b/c they are being pushed nowhere near their limits as they always were in the past. Get rid of engine usage limits and let teams go back to developing the engines all season long. Get rid of fuel flow restrictions as well.

If engines go back to being on the limit, we will see random engine failures again, and that tends to add drama/uncertainty to a race. This makes things more interesting.

Consistent reliability across the whole field tends to make things predictable and boring.

Lastly! Yes, F1 was not always better in the old days, and there have always been plenty of follow the leader races. But in the old days, when you got a great race, it was fantastic.

The best races now are not nearly as entertaining as the best races, say, in the '80s or '90s in my opinion.

[jjn9128]

Don't take this personally, but I honestly can't stand this --- anymore.
Why is there still people complaining that the cars are too wide?
Cars were just as wide up until the 90's, yet nobody complained about it back then. In fact, in the late 90's (98 I think), then they had the idea of making cars narrower because in their minds this would somehow improve overtaking, it didn't make any difference. I would say that the added mechanical grip of wider cars actually helps with overtaking.

It's just an 11% difference from 1800mm to 2000mm, people should just stop saying this crap.

All cars are too wide, too wide for the narrow racing line. It wasn't F1 targeted in honesty. From now I''ll rephrase it to "racing line too narrow".

The racing line point is valid. In fact there was a post on this forum about making corners with more than one ideal line to aid overtaking. But the fact that you have to drive on a compromised line to be able to overtake was always a part of motorsport.

The cars were made narrower in 1998 to reduce the aerodynamic efficiency - to make the cars (especially the floor) work worse. The idea being that the front wheel wakes would pass under the floor and reduce overall downforce. Problem is teams got wise and bargeboards became more complex, then the sidepod undercut was introduced and we end up with the problem we have now where the legacy of the car in the disturbed air is significantly wider (about a car width wider each side) than the actual car.

I think narrower cars, but also shorter cars, are preferable for wheel-to-wheel action for a number of aerodynamic reasons, but F1 tracks are a minimum of 11m wide (grade A so excluding Monaco) so the actual width (1.8m-2.15m) shouldn't make much difference on track space available for overtaking.

I've said it before, for me, the issue is the driving line. Over 3 days of running (+ F2 use the same tyre compounds) the racing line becomes the only line the drivers can use, as it becomes impregnated with rubber with all the debris shed to the outside of the corner - it's part of the reason wet races are better for passing, partly because average speed is lower and aero is less important but also because they can play with their line (Verstappen and Hamilton seem to be better at this than most atm). So harder tyres (fewer marbles) with the track being cleaned (scrubbing the rubber off the racing line) between sessions could well help towards allowing drivers to experiment when following a competitor. The cars would also slide a bit so there's maybe the chance of some mistakes because they don't have absolute grip in the same way. Also it's maybe because I'm fed up of talking about Pirelli every race.