How to fix F1?

[Vinlarr89]

Bring back v10s running on a sustainable fuel. Refuelling, and give teams greater flexibility on tyre selections.

Delete DRS
Keep the ground effect but force simplicity on wings etc.

[Zynerji]

Are we able to consider 2 stroke v-6s on bespoke synth fuel that sound like high RPM v12s? Maybe 600hp screamers?

Do you have an example / video of such an engine...

That should be close. A simple Mercury 2T v6 boat engine...

I'm sure a modern F1 developed one would be much more interesting.

[Zynerji]

Are we able to consider 2 stroke v-6s on bespoke synth fuel that sound like high RPM v12s? Maybe 600hp screamers?

Why synth fuel? It has no future in road cars and there is much too little of it; it would just be greenwashing. Use synfuel for areas where alternatives are hardly available, like aviation.
And for f1, just use a bit of regular - and acknowledge that f1 is what it is, an entertainment product with no relevance for day to day automotive products. A sports that is a relic of the past, like archery, but can be entertaining nevertheless.

Synth fuel in a way that is as ultra-concentrated as possible to try and get down to 50L with no hybrid or refueling.

I care not for the green angle at this scale.

[DChemTech]

Are we able to consider 2 stroke v-6s on bespoke synth fuel that sound like high RPM v12s? Maybe 600hp screamers?

Why synth fuel? It has no future in road cars and there is much too little of it; it would just be greenwashing. Use synfuel for areas where alternatives are hardly available, like aviation.
And for f1, just use a bit of regular - and acknowledge that f1 is what it is, an entertainment product with no relevance for day to day automotive products. A sports that is a relic of the past, like archery, but can be entertaining nevertheless.

Synth fuel in a way that is as ultra-concentrated as possible to try and get down to 50L with no hybrid or refueling.

I care not for the green angle at this scale.

That clarifies, thanks

[TimW]

I think the bigger issue is not the cars, but simply the level of professionalism and that everything has become too predictable. Everything is planned, each scenario is reviewed, and no risks are taken. The engineering is too mature. F1 was about exploring new avenues, not about optimizing a winglet. Basically it's role, a platform to develop car technologies (road relevant or not), is irrelevant. Been there done that.

Driver careers are too long, no lineup changes is a big issue, again risk avoidance. If the cars don't bring excitement the drivers should. But I don't have much excitement on how any driver is going to perform this year. Maybe if Piastri or Norris will come out on top, but that is it. Even Bearman's debut was boring. He drove like a machine. From an 18 year old I want to see the belief that they can singlehandedly topple the championship, not that they can fit in.

We need a shakeup. The RBR bomb bursting would be a start. Next race let's have Max in the Merc, Hamilton to Ferrari, and Sainz in the Red Bull. Why wait? All three are in an awkward situation now

[Vinlarr89]

There’s no other way than driving like a machine whist the current tyres and lack of refuelling exist. The cars at full weight can’t be driven and won’t be driven like a car with only 20 laps fuel on board. In addition the tyres are being designed to wear to encourage the pit stops strategies and try and force a difference of approach between the teams.

However this all means that the drivers can’t or very rarely push to the limit during the Sunday, and it becomes a procession once a few laps are out the way and everything settles down.

In addition, the power of the undercut now has teams fearing it to the point that as soon as one pits, they all do.

I completely agree with the point about the technology and how it’s misused.
Would more regular rule changes to prevent teams continually perfecting their cars help in this regard?

[TimW]

Would more regular rule changes to prevent teams continually perfecting their cars help in this regard?

I have been thinking in this direction. You could have drastic changes every year, and new rules made available only in October.
That would result in immature designs at the season start and a development war up to September.

This would heavily reward fast design cycles (AI?) and rapid prototyping, so F1 could also become an interesting platform to develop such technologies.

[SiLo]

Tyres have become so important now as well. They used to absolutely rag on them but if you do that now they are dead within 5 laps. It's just a preservation formula now.

[Rikhart]

MUCH Smaller and lighter cars, much more durable tyres (but you can mandate 1 or whatever number pitstops). I can't stand eggshell racing any longer. That would be a great start.

[SiLo]

I think there needs to be acceptance that all problems can't be solved, so you have to pick the ones you want to solve and accept the rest as they are.

[Vinlarr89]

100% you can’t solve all problems. And one solution creates another problem.

I think that part of the beauty of the 2022 season was that the teams had to learn from scratch on the job. There was also a rawness about the design of the cars, that is now refined to the point of enthusiasts looking at minute details around a brake duct. (I’m exaggerating of course but that’s where we will be soon)

Strategies were more varied as teams hadn’t figured out all the data and best strategies from each scenario.

I think really mixing up the rules would create much more diversity in terms of solutions and strategies as a consequence. You could even mix it up and introduce refuelling for a couple of seasons then go back to one tank of fuel and mix the tyres up. It’s the unpredictability which needs to be mixed in to keep teams guessing.

[Tommy Cookers]

I come here seeking relief from the relentless optimism talked in the refueling thread ... but ....

... You could even mix it up and introduce refuelling .....

won't official provision of the substantial sample of fuel at the end of each part of the race disrupt said race ?
as loadable fuel quantity is limited useable fuel quantity is reduced by the amount required for the sampling

also from 2026 the loadable quantity limit will be different for each team's fuel

[Andi76]

More frequent and significant rule changes would spice things up.

The problem with budget cap, wind tunnel restrictions, and no testing it is really hard if not impossible for a team to catch up. Red Bull got an advantage just like Mercedes with the engines and will maintain that advantage due to restrictions.

I think that refueling and the removal of limits on powertrains, gearboxes, etc. would change Formula 1 for the better. In my opinion, the effects would only be positive if you ignore the costs. Refueling would open up a lot of strategic possibilities, especially with three tire compounds. That alone would provide more variation and not just undercut or overcut, the other one covers so that nothing happens... the lifting of the restrictions would ensure that the teams would have to go to the limit again and build engines that deliver maximum power for 350 km, which would bring reliability back into play. And last but not least - the drivers would have to drive at the absolute limit all the time in the race again, which would lead to more mistakes. Today, drivers are not really driving at their limit or the limit of the car, it's about getting the best possible performance out of the tires. The tires and how the car and driver use them are the deciding and limiting factors and so Formula 1 is about who can slow down the fastest. But in my opinion that's the wrong approach because I personally want to see drivers who are on the razor's edge and ultimately it's about having the best vehicle control and not about who can "manage" best. And it's also more spectacular when drivers have to drive at the absolute limit all the time instead of just 80 or 85% like they do today. And I think that's what F1 should be about - which driver has the best car control and is the fastest! But in the end this only becomes apparent when the drivers have to drive at the absolute limit all the time in the race and not when they "manage" 90% of the time and don't drive at the limit. But that's my personal opinion, which I don't think is that wrong. Because it's only at the limits of the car that you really see which driver has superior vehicle control and can move it the fastest.

[Edax]

Tyres have become so important now as well. They used to absolutely rag on them but if you do that now they are dead within 5 laps. It's just a preservation formula now.

Agree, but is that really solvable?

Rubber is a living material. The teams are using the car to post cure the tires into something that is optimized for the race or Q. It is chemical processing really. No other race series does that to that extend.

The only way I can think off is to make the tires thermally dead, which means that the properties are the same over a broad range of temperatures. But I suspect that that means that the properties are pretty bad for racing.

[Oehrly]

I want to give my opinion here as well because it differs quite a lot from what some/many people in this thread are proposing. I think that is very interesting, and I'm not entirely sure what may be the cause of this.

First, I started watching F1 shortly after 2010. That means, for me, an F1 car has always had DRS and a (K)ERS system. Also, that was near the end of the V8's, so I never grew to associate the screaming V10 and V12 engines with Formula 1. This all probably has a noticeable impact on how I see Formula 1 today.

The screaming V10 and V12 engines from past times do sound impressive, that is for sure. But I also find them rather annoying (please forgive me) after hearing them for a while. And importantly, they don't spark the "hey that's proper F1" feeling in me like they do for some of you, apparently.

For me, Formula 1 is at least as much an engineering competition as it is a driver competition. That means technology should be on the bleeding edge. And being better than the rest by building the superior car is part of F1 for me. A balance of performance regulation would partially destroy what I like about F1.
But bleeding edge should also mean that reliability is not as close to 100% as it is now. In that regard, I agree a lot with the suggestions of @Andi76. Make the teams push their car more to the limit to make reliability a bigger factor again.

Additionally, pushing to the limit would mean that we the viewers can better see the incredible work that the drivers are doing. I wouldn't even necessarily argue that the car, fuel and tire management they are doing nowadays is much less demanding. But it is certainly something that the viewer doesn't visibly see much of. Wrestling the car while pushing to the limit is much better to watch.

Reintroducing refuelling would be interesting, for sure. More strategic options are certainly interesting for the avid fan. If you want to cater to a more casual audience as well, this added complexity is maybe not a good idea. And while I'd enjoy it a lot, I'm not sure that it would be beneficial for the sport overall.

In general, the ideas like BOP, reverse grids, going back to screaming V10s (or other engines just for the sake of the sound) are really not appealing to me. F1 should be an engineering competition. F1 should not be what it was back at some point. It should be on the bleeding edge of technology and that bleeding edge is moving forward and F1 needs to move with it.