3 ms·

I'm amused that F1 cars now have a computer mimic manual brakes. It seems schizophrenic to allow advanced technology such as kinetic energy recovery, but ban tr

by ggreer 13y ago

I'm amused that F1 cars now have a computer mimic manual brakes. It seems schizophrenic to allow advanced technology such as kinetic energy recovery, but ban traction control, active aerodynamics, anti-lock brakes, and dozens of other technologies that are in consumer vehicles. The excuse I typically hear is that these restrictions make races depend more on driver skill instead of team budgets. Do people not realize that the teams with the biggest budgets are the ones who can afford the most talented drivers? And it shows: The teams with the most money are the ones that consistently win. I think F1 would be much more exciting if they tweaked the aerodynamics and vehicle size to allow more passing. If race excitement can be boiled down to one metric, it's passing. If you've seen a MotoGP race, you'll probably concur.

mwg66 13y ago
Life is often not quite as simple as that! There are various other reasons for why it is easier to overtake on a motorbike in MotoGP compared to F1. There has been many introductions to ease overtaking in F1 recently - DRS, KERs (now ERS), tyre compounds etc. There is even a working group within the FIA dedicated to exactly this, one of it's most famous studies is the CDG wing (see http://www.f1technical.net/articles/4577 http://www.f1technical.net/articles/4577) - which ultimately was not adopted.
- Theodores 13y ago
  Thanks for the link on the CDG wing - I did not know that. Any ideas why it was not given a go? It seems vastly more in the spirit of racing than the 'push to pass' DRS that has not been exactly popular with the dedicated fan. I don't think the Pirelli tyres have been that popular with fans either. The CDG wing appears a lot more true to the spirit of what racing is about.
  - mwg66 13y ago
    I think it was ultimately concluded that it wouldn't work in practice as well as the preliminary CFD results suggested. It was an interesting study none the less.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
antr 13y ago
it is partly thanks to no traction control that we are seeing so many cars overtaking in corners. with traction control, it would be much tougher
jdietrich 13y ago
Recent F1 championships have been extremely competitive, with several teams in the running for the title. Red Bull have been dominant, but that's not solely down to budget - they have for several years run an almost perfect campaign, down to the last detail. The best driver can't win the world championship without the best team director and the best technical director. Red Bull's success owes as much to Adrian Newey and Christian Horner as it does to Sebastian Vettel. Brawn GP won the 2009 championships without a title sponsor, largely due to the inspired work of Ross Brawn in developing the double diffuser concept. The F1 rulebook is a complex political compromise that needs to satisfy several parties with competing interests. Bernie wants the most profitable show, the FIA want a sport that best reflects the pinnacle of motorsport and the teams want whatever they think will serve to their advantage. That balance of power is fragile and constantly shifting. The Strategy Group and the Commission have agreed to a budget cap for 2015, which should put most of the grid on equal financial terms. There is no simple answer to the management of Formula 1, nor any magic bullet to 'fix' the perceived failings of the sport. For every fan that just wants to see a fair fight between the drivers, there is another who wants to see a pure technical competition. For every fan who wants more overtaking and a better show, there is another that hates the contrivances of DRS, tiny rear wings and the dreaded Pirelli tyres. F1 is a sport that reflects all of the complexities and tensions of finance and politics, for better and for worse. It is the biggest, brashest, richest, maddest show on earth, for better and for worse. Try too hard to constrain those forces and you end up with something like A1GP - a sport that in theory panders to the fans, but in doing so loses the magic that makes people care about this gloriously absurd waste of resources that we call motorsport.

by ggreer 13y ago

mwg66 13y ago

Life is often not quite as simple as that! There are various other reasons for why it is easier to overtake on a motorbike in MotoGP compared to F1. There has been many introductions to ease overtaking in F1 recently - DRS, KERs (now ERS), tyre compounds etc. There is even a working group within the FIA dedicated to exactly this, one of it's most famous studies is the CDG wing (see http://www.f1technical.net/articles/4577 http://www.f1technical.net/articles/4577) - which ultimately was not adopted.

Theodores 13y ago
Thanks for the link on the CDG wing - I did not know that. Any ideas why it was not given a go? It seems vastly more in the spirit of racing than the 'push to pass' DRS that has not been exactly popular with the dedicated fan. I don't think the Pirelli tyres have been that popular with fans either. The CDG wing appears a lot more true to the spirit of what racing is about.
- mwg66 13y ago
  I think it was ultimately concluded that it wouldn't work in practice as well as the preliminary CFD results suggested. It was an interesting study none the less.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

antr 13y ago

it is partly thanks to no traction control that we are seeing so many cars overtaking in corners. with traction control, it would be much tougher

jdietrich 13y ago

Recent F1 championships have been extremely competitive, with several teams in the running for the title. Red Bull have been dominant, but that's not solely down to budget - they have for several years run an almost perfect campaign, down to the last detail. The best driver can't win the world championship without the best team director and the best technical director. Red Bull's success owes as much to Adrian Newey and Christian Horner as it does to Sebastian Vettel. Brawn GP won the 2009 championships without a title sponsor, largely due to the inspired work of Ross Brawn in developing the double diffuser concept. The F1 rulebook is a complex political compromise that needs to satisfy several parties with competing interests. Bernie wants the most profitable show, the FIA want a sport that best reflects the pinnacle of motorsport and the teams want whatever they think will serve to their advantage. That balance of power is fragile and constantly shifting. The Strategy Group and the Commission have agreed to a budget cap for 2015, which should put most of the grid on equal financial terms. There is no simple answer to the management of Formula 1, nor any magic bullet to 'fix' the perceived failings of the sport. For every fan that just wants to see a fair fight between the drivers, there is another who wants to see a pure technical competition. For every fan who wants more overtaking and a better show, there is another that hates the contrivances of DRS, tiny rear wings and the dreaded Pirelli tyres. F1 is a sport that reflects all of the complexities and tensions of finance and politics, for better and for worse. It is the biggest, brashest, richest, maddest show on earth, for better and for worse. Try too hard to constrain those forces and you end up with something like A1GP - a sport that in theory panders to the fans, but in doing so loses the magic that makes people care about this gloriously absurd waste of resources that we call motorsport.