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.
The easiest car to drive is one without any driver adjustable settings.
No. Giving the driver the ability to adjust things makes the car easier to drive. More complicated to manage, yes, but the point of the settings is to make it easier to be quicker.
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.
I don't see how, for instance, diff adjustments make the car easier to drive. They enable the driver to change the setup in the car from corner to corner and even the different phases of the corner. I think it makes the car even harder, like picking the right gear, but then in extreme. The opposite of a driver aid like ABS/ESP/TC, where the settings of a car are changed without the driver in the loop.
If they can change three different differential settings that´s not to make the cars more difficult to drive and/or slower Jolle, but the contrary. Differential settings allow to setup the car for the perfect amount of oversteer both at the corner entry, apex and exit. Without these differential settings cars would be perfect in some corners, but would tend to oversteer and understeer at some others, so drivers would have to work harder, and top drivers would shine.
Anyone can drive a perfect car, but if it´s not perfect you need someone talented to make the most of it
I don't see how, for instance, diff adjustments make the car easier to drive. They enable the driver to change the setup in the car from corner to corner and even the different phases of the corner. I think it makes the car even harder, like picking the right gear, but then in extreme. The opposite of a driver aid like ABS/ESP/TC, where the settings of a car are changed without the driver in the loop.
If they can change three different differential settings that´s not to make the cars more difficult to drive and/or slower Jolle, but the contrary. Differential settings allow to setup the car for the perfect amount of oversteer both at the corner entry, apex and exit. Without these differential settings cars would be perfect in some corners, but would tend to oversteer and understeer at some others, so drivers would have to work harder, and top drivers would shine.
Anyone can drive a perfect car, but if it´s not perfect you need someone talented to make the most of it
I disagree completely. Its nonsense to think this is true. Look at the drivers that swapped teams this year. Each car has a core philosophy designed into it as to how it needs to be driven to extract the lap-time. This is showing to be HARD. Even the top end RBR is showing that with a veteran driver.
I would say that the drivers that can squeeze more out of a bad car need to get better at developing a good car, because being known for that must come from the experience of always being stuck in a bad, undeveloped car.
But some drivers like a pointy front end and others prefer a looser rear. If you are a legend at extracting time from a pointy car you may struggle with a loose rear.
But some drivers like a pointy front end and others prefer a looser rear. If you are a legend at extracting time from a pointy car you may struggle with a loose rear.
That's my point. Not ANYONE can drive a perfect car as has been claimed, if that car's "perfect" is different to their natural driving style.
Probably perfect was not the right term, as nothing is perfect. But obviously if you can adjust differential at the three corner stages you´re able to adjust your car to your own preferences much better than if there´s no diff settings. Obviously differential can´t make a car understeer or oversteer by its own as the frame and aero play a much bigger role.
Take it this way, they adjust cars for X track, but then they need fine tunning for each corner as asphalt, camber, radius... all plays a role in car behaviour. That fine tunning is done with wheel adjustments, they can´t override the overall car behaviour, but they aid making the car to behave exactly as driver likes at each corner.
Bur if a car is designed for a driver driving style (take Max as an example), no wheel or even box adjustments will override that behaviour. I think that´s the reason drivers like Checo are struggling, same as in MotoGP none can ride the HRC to Marquez level despite all the talented riders who tried
But the whole point of the finetuning which the top teams do is to make the cars easier and more predictable to drive (not less), so the drivers can go faster.
I imagine Lauda would describe the ol' Minardi PS02 as a s*&^box! It constantly wants to go sideways and has a severe lack of traction.
Of course, that´s the point of fine tunning the car at every single component, but then TC, ABS, ESP should be included too, as those aids make the cars easier to drive and faster, but they´re banned for a reason.
I know this is completely subjective, but IMHO brake balance or the three differential adjustments fall into same category, they´re faster and easier to drive with them, but if F1 don´t want to become some sort of hidden Roborace (no driver involved) I think these adjustments should be banned to keep some relevance on the driver side.
When a car is not perfectly stable at every corner, and at every point of every corner, then driver relevance increases drastically as cars become more difficult to drive.
Would you like to go back to solid front and rear axles too?
How about Drum brakes?
Analog gauges?
Verified symmetrical setups?
All of those tech innovations make driving "easier" as well. What is your REAL concern?
In a situation where the car is considered to be an aero platform beam front & de-Dion rear axles really are worth considering, particularly if you can include a tuned-mass damper in your suspension control system; in fact they could be aerodynamically beneficial if configured appropriately!
Perspective - Understanding that sometimes the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view.
Of course, that´s the point of fine tunning the car at every single component, but then TC, ABS, ESP should be included too, as those aids make the cars easier to drive and faster, but they´re banned for a reason.
I know this is completely subjective, but IMHO brake balance or the three differential adjustments fall into same category, they´re faster and easier to drive with them, but if F1 don´t want to become some sort of hidden Roborace (no driver involved) I think these adjustments should be banned to keep some relevance on the driver side.
When a car is not perfectly stable at every corner, and at every point of every corner, then driver relevance increases drastically as cars become more difficult to drive.
Would you like to go back to solid front and rear axles too?
How about Drum brakes?
Analog gauges?
Verified symmetrical setups?
All of those tech innovations make driving "easier" as well. What is your REAL concern?
In a situation where the car is considered to be an aero platform beam front & de-Dion rear axles really are worth considering, particularly if you can include a tuned-mass damper in your suspension control system; in fact they could be aerodynamically beneficial if configured appropriately!
I'm down. They are bespoke cars. They should only be limited by the physics that they challenge.
I'm down. They are bespoke cars. They should only be limited by the physics that they challenge.
[/quote]
Totally agreed!
F1 should be the pinnacle of race technology.
Development is the most interesting thing of this sport.
And this is a team sport! Where engineers play a big hole!
Maybe, to make the races more human-like (introducing errors), there should be allowed one setup change per lap. - that would be a lit bit fanny to see drives struggling in different corners...
Shouldn't racing be about driver skill as much as engineering skill?
If you want to go down the engineering at all costs route, you end up with 4 channel ABS, dual channel traction control using the brakes as well as clever diff etc., stability control using the brakes as well as the power steering, active aero, active suspension. It would be a technical tour de force and absolutely full of "tech porn". But it would leave the driver as just being a lump of breathing ballast. Indeed, anyone able to memorise the track layout and physically withstand the loads they're subjected to, would be able to drive the cars at their maximum. A fully drive-by-wire car wouldn't need any driver skill to pedal it around - just plant your right foot and turn the wheel, stamp on the brake pedal at a predetermined point for maximum ABS-assisted braking.
Is that what people really want? I suppose the one benefit of it would be that we wouldn't have any more "my driver is better than your driver" arguments.
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.
These changes are all just to make the sport 'more curious' given what we have.
Let's face it, if we get all the exact same recipy for 10 years, it's not that the sport or cars become any less spectacular - but we just grow completely used to it and then it becomes, well, boring.
FWE driven cars will have their pro's and their con's. The biggest impact will be that it will be the same for everyone, so you don't really ever get to judge it.
If however teams were allowed to choose, then it's different. Perhaps then you could see a benefit: if FWE driven cars have a huge benefit over normal (RWD) cars, then the benefit is proven and teams will invest and adapt.
However, given the unavoidable: it's going to cause more weight up front, at the wheels, it's going to alter the balance significantly, it's going to need massive reinforcements (and weight) on the suspension etc, and it's going to impact safety too (stronger wheel tethers etc.) this is going to cost a lot more too, and it's unlikely that its going to have a massive performance gain.
After all, let's be honest here: perhaps you can go faster through a corner or 'pull' yourself better out of a corner with AWD. however, again, there's going to be significantly more weight, and weight kills performance.
AND, again, safety: your front crash structure is build as it is right now. Now let's imagine you drive into a wall, but with a wheel and suspension thats 25 kg's heavier than now. That's going to have a bigger impact on the structure, the walls, and the G's that contact will have to process.
I'm thoroughly impressed by for example a VW Pheaton with a W12 producing 400+ hp, weighing 2200 + kg, driving in about 6 secs to 100, and according to Clarkson being able to drive 360+ kph all in extreme luxury, despite all of it's weight, which is logical due to the nature of the vehicle.
However, i would not want or have little interest in seeing that car compete in a race, whether that be SPA, Monaco or the Nurburgring.
A lap would be interesting, but nothing more.
If i want spectacular racing, i'd seek to find the lightest car with relatively the most power available.
F1 has gone overboard with gimmicks and weight.
Which also have an impact on safety.
A lighter car has less impact in a crash, and needs less structural protection than a heavy car.
You keep going spraling out of control untill the cars are going to weigh what, 2000 kgs? Which then get extremely dangerous when losing control due to the weight.
Personally, i rather see a 500 HP F1 car that weighs 500 kgs and is 4,5 meters long (and safe) than a 1500 HP F1 car that weighs 1500 kgs and is 6,5 meters long (and safe).
Yes, the latter has 1000 HP more, but it's also a truck by now. The idea that the latter one is safer because it's roll hoop can manage the weight of another car of 1500kgs is rediculous, as the first one does not need that protection, it's just as safe, just that it's roll hoop can 'only' carry 500kgs but it also never HAS to carry more than 500kgs.
And this is what's going on in F1 nowadays: we go to more and more extremes, and it's all impressive, sure. But in the end, well, yeah, it's also a bit overboard.
The problem stays the same: if we have the SAME recipy every year, it's gonna get boring.
If we get 10 years watching driver skill, we get bored and want to see 'engineering skill'.
If we get 10 years watching engineering skill, we get bored and want to see 'driver skill'.
A balance of the two is what obviously is what F1 'should' be about: but we still will get bored.
Which is why things HAVE to change.
I'm not really welcoming FWE driven cars at all - but i think that at some point, it's going to become inevitable.
"Explain the ending to F1 in football terms"
"Hamilton was beating Verstappen 7-0, then the ref decided F%$& rules, next goal wins
while also sending off 4 Hamilton players to make it more interesting"
