Smaller cars without length restrictions

[trinidefender]

As we all know next season onwards there will be maximum imposed length restrictions and it seems that the current thought process here is that most cars will go to the maximum imposed wheel base/car length which isn't even much smaller than the current cars. Larger cars means less overtaking on many tracks especially ones like Monaco.

So I'm proposing a hypothetical question to the forum at large. In the future how can F1 reduce the overall size of cars without use of length restrictions so every car ends up being more of the same (myself and others enjoy cars having more variety) and other serious adverse affects such as reducing safety or a large increase in cost?

P.s. I placed this here but it can also fit into the PU section of the forum so all answers welcome.
P.P.s. please don't let this topic devolve into a senseless argument.

[jjn9128]

As we all know next season onwards there will be maximum imposed length restrictions and it seems that the current thought process here is that most cars will go to the maximum imposed wheel base/car length which isn't even much smaller than the current cars. Larger cars means less overtaking on many tracks especially ones like Monaco.

So I'm proposing a hypothetical question to the forum at large. In the future how can F1 reduce the overall size of cars without use of length restrictions so every car ends up being more of the same (myself and others enjoy cars having more variety) and other serious adverse affects such as reducing safety or a large increase in cost?

P.s. I placed this here but it can also fit into the PU section of the forum so all answers welcome.
P.P.s. please don't let this topic devolve into a senseless argument.

Engines are kinda short these days - 480mm (the v10s were 620mm-->575mm through their evolution). Most of the added car length is in the gearbox case and fuel tank - which is long and thin to shrink the sidepod width rather than short and fat as it used to be.

So it'd be easy to lop at least 1m off the length of a current gen car - the gearbox bellhousing alone is like 600mm long - it would mess with the weight distribution and the rear coke width though. The weight distribution issue could easily be fixed by changing the front tyre size so it's proportional again. That has the added benefit that a more rearward weight distribution needs a more rearward aero distribution - so less front wing (not that the front wing is necessarily the issue for following).

I'd have a max car length of 5m like the LMPH rules (I know it's fixing length but that really is the only way I can see to do it as the performance advantages of a longer car outweigh the negatives). Easy peasy. Problem is teams get involved in the rule writing and don't want to lose the aero performance and stability. I think the original plan for the 2022 max wheelbase was 3.2m and it was bumped up to 3.6m because the teams complained.

[Jolle]

Read about the history of racing in Monaco (for instance Moss’ win in 1961) and you’ll find that car size hasn’t much impact on racing in Monaco. It’s always been like this, even in the small, light and nimble F2 cars.

On other circuits, bigger problem is the wake behind the car. Tracks have grown significantly during the past decades (which becomes very visible when they go to an old “new” track like Suzuka). Length and width doesn’t matter if you can’t get within 1.5 seconds without reduced downforce, brake performance and cooling.

[trinidefender]

Read about the history of racing in Monaco (for instance Moss’ win in 1961) and you’ll find that car size hasn’t much impact on racing in Monaco. It’s always been like this, even in the small, light and nimble F2 cars.

On other circuits, bigger problem is the wake behind the car. Tracks have grown significantly during the past decades (which becomes very visible when they go to an old “new” track like Suzuka). Length and width doesn’t matter if you can’t get within 1.5 seconds without reduced downforce, brake performance and cooling.

If you want to argue that a smaller car won't increase overtaking then go ahead and present that case. Watching Formula E at Monaco they seem to be able to pass on corners and parts of the track that F1 cars can't. Formula E cars are about half a metre shorter and 23cm narrower than F1 cars.

A longer and wider car will simply take up more space making passing harder. Nobody is saying that a smaller car will make Monaco the most racy track out there but there is some potential for improvement.

As to your second paragraph, that's exactly what I was trying to avoid. We have many topics talking about the aerodynamics and how it affects following and passing and we are pretty much all in agreement there. As such I specifically excluded that part in this topic. Unless future replies deal directly with the aerodynamic affects of a smaller car and how that might affect the overtaking then I ask you to avoid that avenue of discussion as it will just lead this down a path that has been discussed ad nauseam.

[hollus]

My shot at reducing car length would simply be to reduce the minimum weight. I've said this before, but the circumstances have not changed: minimum car weight was there to prevent rich teams from outspending poorer teams on lighter materials. Well, now all teams will have similar budgets, so there is a clear chance there.

Alternatively, just ban the "free floor" from the rules. Car length is there largely to create free, exposed floor. But one could extend the sidepod rules with minimum radius and such to include the floor. If you could only have floor where there is bodywork directly above and connected to it, I think we'd see much shorter cars.

But then, as long as the rules are the same for everyone, I am happy with a maximum length. They do specify a maximum width, why would this be different?

[Jolle]

Read about the history of racing in Monaco (for instance Moss’ win in 1961) and you’ll find that car size hasn’t much impact on racing in Monaco. It’s always been like this, even in the small, light and nimble F2 cars.

On other circuits, bigger problem is the wake behind the car. Tracks have grown significantly during the past decades (which becomes very visible when they go to an old “new” track like Suzuka). Length and width doesn’t matter if you can’t get within 1.5 seconds without reduced downforce, brake performance and cooling.

If you want to argue that a smaller car won't increase overtaking then go ahead and present that case. Watching Formula E at Monaco they seem to be able to pass on corners and parts of the track that F1 cars can't. Formula E cars are about half a metre shorter and 23cm narrower than F1 cars.

A longer and wider car will simply take up more space making passing harder. Nobody is saying that a smaller car will make Monaco the most racy track out there but there is some potential for improvement.

As to your second paragraph, that's exactly what I was trying to avoid. We have many topics talking about the aerodynamics and how it affects following and passing and we are pretty much all in agreement there. As such I specifically excluded that part in this topic. Unless future replies deal directly with the aerodynamic affects of a smaller car and how that might affect the overtaking then I ask you to avoid that avenue of discussion as it will just lead this down a path that has been discussed ad nauseam.

Formula E car's also have (compared to other single seater racing series) very limited aero and rock hard all weather street type tires (and very heavy compared to their power output).

[JordanMugen]

Engines are kinda short these days - 480mm (the v10s were 620mm-->575mm through their evolution).

Why were shorter wheelbases preferred in the 1990's, even to the extent of designing transverse gearboxes?

(I think it's '93 when F1 adopted the current ratio of front and rear tyre sizes (by keeping the same front tyre width and reducing tyre width), which were then scaled up proportionally in 2017. Is that right? So if they wanted to go more forward on the weight distribution, you'd think teams would have done that already in '93?)

Car length is there largely to create free, exposed floor.

Even the F1 cars from 10 years ago seem a lot shorter than the current cars -- why? Why didn't they make them longer back then?

[Jolle]

Engines are kinda short these days - 480mm (the v10s were 620mm-->575mm through their evolution).

Why were shorter wheelbases preferred in the 1990's, even to the extent of designing transverse gearboxes?

Car length is there largely to create free, exposed floor.

Even the F1 cars from 10 years ago seem a lot shorter than the current cars -- why? Why didn't they make them longer back then?

McLaren/Newey started to elongate the cars with positive effect, so much that most teams whiped up some spacers to lengthen their cars as well. As for why they didn't earlier, probably understanding of the aerodynamics and better ways to use a bigger floor. Through the years there were a lot of lightbulb moments that now look so logical (like the raised noses, engine in the middle, radial and slick tires, etc etc)

[Ringleheim]

Read about the history of racing in Monaco (for instance Moss’ win in 1961) and you’ll find that car size hasn’t much impact on racing in Monaco. It’s always been like this, even in the small, light and nimble F2 cars.

On other circuits, bigger problem is the wake behind the car. Tracks have grown significantly during the past decades (which becomes very visible when they go to an old “new” track like Suzuka). Length and width doesn’t matter if you can’t get within 1.5 seconds without reduced downforce, brake performance and cooling.

Yeah, I don't equate car size with passing or a lack thereof.

Nor is it all about track size! Remember when places like Malaysia were knew, and they promoted the huge wide track? Problem is, the track can be 10 car lengths wide, but there is still only 1 fastest line, and that's only going to be 1 car width in size.

I hate these current huge cars. Big heavy pigs.

When Alonso did his run at Abu Dhabi last year, I was amazed at how light, small, and nimble his old Renault looked. These cars have just grown more and more all the time.

[Ringleheim]

Read about the history of racing in Monaco (for instance Moss’ win in 1961) and you’ll find that car size hasn’t much impact on racing in Monaco. It’s always been like this, even in the small, light and nimble F2 cars.

On other circuits, bigger problem is the wake behind the car. Tracks have grown significantly during the past decades (which becomes very visible when they go to an old “new” track like Suzuka). Length and width doesn’t matter if you can’t get within 1.5 seconds without reduced downforce, brake performance and cooling.

Yeah, I don't equate car size with passing or a lack thereof.

Nor is it all about track size! Remember when places like Malaysia were new, and they promoted the huge wide track? Problem is, the track can be 10 car lengths wide, but there is still only 1 fastest line, and that's only going to be 1 car width in size.

I hate these current huge cars. Big heavy pigs.

When Alonso did his run at Abu Dhabi last year, I was amazed at how light, small, and nimble his old Renault looked. These cars have just grown more and more all the time.

[jjn9128]

Engines are kinda short these days - 480mm (the v10s were 620mm-->575mm through their evolution).

Why were shorter wheelbases preferred in the 1990's, even to the extent of designing transverse gearboxes?

(I think it's '93 when F1 adopted the current ratio of front and rear tyre sizes (by keeping the same front tyre width and reducing tyre width), which were then scaled up proportionally in 2017. Is that right? So if they wanted to go more forward on the weight distribution, you'd think teams would have done that already in '93?)

Car length is there largely to create free, exposed floor.

Even the F1 cars from 10 years ago seem a lot shorter than the current cars -- why? Why didn't they make them longer back then?

Wheelbases have been growing forever. It's accelerated since 2010 and the KERS/hybridization of F1 - also increasing weight but that may/may not be a cause/effect relationship. Mainly I think the progression of CFD has meant teams can keep flow attached over the long length of floor which in the past they struggled with - Newey says so much about the FW16 that they made the sidepod/floor too long and got an intermittent stall.

[jjn9128]

Another graph this is the length of article 3 (the bodywork bit of the regulations) pretty much follows a nice exponential curve (until 2022 when things go mental). As freedom is ever more restricted, all the teams have left to change performance is to increase the wheelbase

[Jolle]

Engines are kinda short these days - 480mm (the v10s were 620mm-->575mm through their evolution).

Why were shorter wheelbases preferred in the 1990's, even to the extent of designing transverse gearboxes?

(I think it's '93 when F1 adopted the current ratio of front and rear tyre sizes (by keeping the same front tyre width and reducing tyre width), which were then scaled up proportionally in 2017. Is that right? So if they wanted to go more forward on the weight distribution, you'd think teams would have done that already in '93?)

Car length is there largely to create free, exposed floor.

Even the F1 cars from 10 years ago seem a lot shorter than the current cars -- why? Why didn't they make them longer back then?

Wheelbases have been growing forever. It's accelerated since 2010 and the KERS/hybridization of F1 - also increasing weight but that may/may not be a cause/effect relationship. Mainly I think the progression of CFD has meant teams can keep flow attached over the long length of floor which in the past they struggled with - Newey says so much about the FW16 that they made the sidepod/floor too long and got an intermittent stall.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E1WbmQmXoAE ... name=large

You can almost pull two straight lines trough the car length, one for the 2.20 -2.00 m wide cars and one for the 1.8 m wide cars.

The engine sizes, and fuel tank sizes varied over the years, but apart from 2010 had little effect (pre-1994 they were running monstrous 220l tanks with bulky 3.5l V12's in the back and big generic gear boxes)

[hollus]

My theory, posted in other threads, is that the cars got longer because the minimum weight got higher to allow the poorer teams to compete. The richer teams used the extra minimum weight to make longer cars, which forced the poorer teams to make longer cars, which then were overweight. This made the regulators increase the minimum weight, which the richer teams used to make their car longer... repeat every 3-4 years.
So, since we no longer will have rich and poor teams, reduce the minimum weight!

[CMSMJ1]

My theory, posted in other threads, is that the cars got longer because the minimum weight got higher to allow the poorer teams to compete. The richer teams used the extra minimum weight to make longer cars, which forced the poorer teams to make longer cars, which then were overweight. This made the regulators increase the minimum weight, which the richer teams used to make their car longer... repeat every 3-4 years.
So, since we no longer will have rich and poor teams, reduce the minimum weight!

That's it. Simply put.

The minimum weight should be something to strive towards and not the figure that allows the largest aero floor.

The amount of free floor space is crazy.

Shorten the cars. They could be asked to shrink them by 10% and they'd look very cool and perform still!