How do we fix F1?Formula 1

[MIE1992]

F1, being a Formula series, has relatively uniform cars. In most Formula series I've read about, either the car is developed by the teams but held to strict regulations, or it's supplied by a third party such as Dallara with F2 and F3, or Spark with Formula E. I think I had heard that F1 is about displaying upcoming technology, but I think this notion is antithetical to the formula format, where there's a benefit in being uniform. I think that the best fields to display upcoming technology & engineering is in series where the rules aren't as strict, like the LMP1 successor class coming in the next WEC season. How does one use a formula series to display new technologies when the very nature of a formula series is uniformity?

I mean yeah, you can have strict regulations while still leaving the wholesale development of the car to the automakers, but I think in the name of both fairness (e.g. the "Formula 1.5" meme) and making it more affordable for prospective teams to enter, I think F1 ought to have their chassises supplied by a third party just as we see with F2, F3, and FE. You can say that it's not traditional, and indeed many automakers have good reason to be proud of the F1 cars they've produced in the past. But tradition and pride doesn't cut paychecks, and at the end of the day, pragmatism & adaption always precedes beauty and tradition, much like how racing stripes and colors (e.g. British Racing Green) were originally for making each car in a race visually distinguishable. We're already seeing literally every automaker make cross-over SUVs, even Ferrari. But if F1 wants to cling to a sinking ship known as tradition, so be it, as traditions are just vestigial memes.

 

[TenEightyOne]

F1, being a Formula series, has relatively uniform cars.

Although they look quite different from one another.

In most Formula series I've read about, either the car is developed by the teams but held to strict regulations, or it's supplied by a third party such as Dallara with F2 and F3, or Spark with Formula E.

Yes, that's how Formula sports work.

I think I had heard that F1 is about displaying upcoming technology, but I think this notion is antithetical to the formula format,...

Formula 1 is about winning races in the world's fastest cars. Every car is a prototype. It's not "about displaying upcoming technology", the teams use the latest technology to shave time off their laps - it's a natural by-product.

...where there's a benefit in being uniform. I think that the best fields to display upcoming technology & engineering is in series where the rules aren't as strict, like the LMP1 successor class coming in the next WEC season.

The rules of F1 aren't as strict as a series where every team has to use an identical car - where's the fun in that? And it makes it hard to see your point - spec racing or formula?

How does one use a formula series to display new technologies when the very nature of a formula series is uniformity?

Formula 1 does exactly that, and the nature of a "Formula" series isn't uniformity, you're misunderstanding the notion.

F1, being a Formula series, has relatively uniform cars. In most Formula series I've read about, either the car is developed by the teams but held to strict regulations, or it's supplied by a third party such as Dallara with F2 and F3, or Spark with Formula E. I think I had heard that F1 is about displaying upcoming technology, but I think this notion is antithetical to the formula format, where there's a benefit in being uniform. I think that the best fields to display upcoming technology & engineering is in series where the rules aren't as strict, like the LMP1 successor class coming in the next WEC season. How does one use a formula series to display new technologies when the very nature of a formula series is uniformity?

I mean yeah, you can have strict regulations while still leaving the wholesale development of the car to the automakers, but I think in the name of both fairness (e.g. the "Formula 1.5" meme) and making it more affordable for prospective teams to enter, I think F1 ought to have their chassises supplied by a third party just as we see with F2, F3, and FE.

That would kill the whole point of having a constructors' championship.

But tradition and pride doesn't cut paychecks, and at the end of the day, pragmatism & adaption always precedes beauty and tradition, much like how racing stripes and colors (e.g. British Racing Green) were originally for making each car in a race visually distinguishable.

That seems a mangled point... and I'm sure the F1 teams are paying their bills, are you saying they aren't? Amongst your mixed messages about uniformity versus formularity are you also saying the teams can't afford to race?

We're already seeing literally every automaker make cross-over SUVs, even Ferrari.

You're losing me at this point.

But if F1 wants to cling to a sinking ship known as tradition, so be it, as traditions are just vestigial memes.

Perhaps you could address the fundamental problem that you see in F1 which you're evidently building up to? Don't just leave us hanging with philosophical wordsoup

 

[daan]

What is broken with it?

 

[MIE1992]

What is broken with it?

Isn’t the “Formula 1.5” meme a symptom of over-centralization? Like how some teams will always have more money to spend on R&D and thus have a consistent edge.

 

[GTPorsche]

"We" can't.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Isn’t the “Formula 1.5” meme a symptom of over-centralization? Like how some teams will always have more money to spend on R&D and thus have a consistent edge.

What do you mean by over-centralisation? Wouldn't a situation where all the F1 cars have the same chassis be even greater centralisation? Did you miss all the other questions in post 2?

 

[C-ZETA]

One simple observation goes a long way towards explaining why the sport is struggling and what needs to be done to reverse its decline. It has become too predictable.

Formula One prides itself on the professionalism of its competitors with good reason. But that expertise, allied to sky-high budgets (and the prize money system that sustains them) allows for the steady elimination of every variable that might produce a surprise.

So how that can be remedied – without resorting to the kind of naff gimmicks that cheapen the sport?

If the FIA and FOM want to inject more excitement into F1 they need to bombard teams with variables and strip away the means for them to spend their way to success. Here’s a few thoughts:

More competitors. The more cars there are on track the greater the opportunity for anything to happen.
Smaller teams. Lower the existing limit on the number of staff each team can bring to a race and keep bringing it down each year, which will also reduce costs. Cut back pit crew numbers to a bare minimum (which also makes sense from a safety point of view).
Trim back the rule book. For example, let everyone have a free choice of what tyres to start on and which they use during the race – the more choices teams can make, the more choices they can get wrong.
Make tracks harder. Revise run-off areas and penalties so that drivers cannot leave the track without losing time.
Ban tyre warmers. If IndyCar and GP2 drivers don’t need their tyres pre-warming, nor do the F1 elite.
Get rid of DRS. Overtaking moves used to be an unpredictable occurrence. DRS has made them predictable, formulaic, mundane.
Accept that some races will still be predictable. Because without those races the unpredictable ones could never excite us.

 

[MatskiMonk]

Just because Formula 1 isn't as good as Touring cars, GT's, Prototypes, NASCARs, Dragsters or Drift cars.. doesn't mean it needs fixing.

 

[ScottPuss20]

Build X2019 Competitions for everyone! Or have teams create their own version of the car! It has the sound, the speed and the style which would get people excited about F1 again. Who doesn't want to hear a V12 that revs to 19,000 RPM?

 

[jake2013guy]

Ban tyre warmers. If IndyCar and GP2 drivers don’t need their tyres pre-warming, nor do the F1 elite.

Good news, this is coming for 2021.

 

[PeterJB]

I wouldn't mind a return to the 2012-spec cars. Back then the midfield could actually challenge the front runners from time to time.

 

[ScottPuss20]

I wouldn't mind a return to the 2012-spec cars. Back then the midfield could actually challenge the front runners from time to time.

The first half of 2012 was brilliant, I think we had 7 different winners in 7 seven different races. Then Vettel ran away with the championship.

 

[PeterJB]

The first half of 2012 was brilliant, I think we had 7 different winners in 7 seven different races. Then Vettel ran away with the championship.

He didn't really run away with it, at least not in the same way as 2011 and 2013. It went down to the wire, he just found his mojo in the second half. But the idea of having Force India's leading races or Saubers starting on the front row is alien to F1 today.

 

[Dotini]

One way to fix F1 is to terminate it and have the Championship races run for F2. This has happened several times in the past when racing at the F1 (top) level grew moribund for one reason or another and was replaced by more competitive and economically feasible voiturettes.

 

[jake2013guy]

One way to fix F1 is to terminate it and have the Championship races run for F2. This has happened several times in the past when racing at the F1 (top) level grew moribund for one reason or another and was replaced by more competitive and economically feasible voiturettes.

An idea I have related to that would be to have a few chassis manufacturers and then allow teams to add things onto those to improve the aero. Pretty much how DPi works. It won't happen but it would be interesting to see how that would work in open wheel.

 

[desmodan]

I've been shot down in flames before . But here goes .
Reduce the mechanical grip !

 

[jake2013guy]

I've been shot down in flames before . But here goes .
Reduce the mechanical grip !

Then they'll lose even more grip behind cars. What is really needed is to reduce aerodynamic grip and then go from there. If they're too grippy after that, then reduce mechanical grip.

 

[Dobermann92]

Three words: BOP

 

[desmodan]

See shot down .
While I agree that areo has gone too far . Who wants to see all the overtaking done by the car with the highest top end ?
Rather if the mechanical grip were reduced the onus would be on the driver (not the funds of the team) to get the car stopped and then driven out of the corner.

 

[jake2013guy]

Three words: BOP

Part of me thinks that would make no difference. It would be massively politicised as we've seen in other series and balancing these cars would just be farcical.

 

[Dobermann92]

Part of me thinks that would make no difference. It would be massively politicised as we've seen in other series and balancing these cars would just be farcical.

It is like democracy: we don't have anything better yet. It helps to provide close racing, and it works in most of the series using it, and F1 needs it because right now there are at least 3 different classes of cars in the field.

 

[shoemaker]

No more street races. Cost cap. No loyalty payment to Ferrari. Less practice sessions. No more DRS. Cheaper tickets. All races on free to air tv. Keep Ross Brawn overseeing all technical regulations.

 

[jake2013guy]

It is like democracy: we don't have anything better yet. It helps to provide close racing, and it works in most of the series using it, and F1 needs it because right now there are at least 3 different classes of cars in the field.

Yes. But an advantageous BOP is important and isn't something gained by skill which is what F1 is about. There are stories of teams purposefully going slower to get a better BOP in the future which ruins one aspect of BOP.

 

[Dobermann92]

Yes. But an advantageous BOP is important and isn't something gained by skill which is what F1 is about. There are stories of teams purposefully going slower to get a better BOP in the future which ruins one aspect of BOP.

F1 is all about the engine development right now, although I don't doubt that most of the drivers have great driving skills. You can either use BOP or you can use the same engine in all of the cars.

There are stories of teams purposefully going slower to get a better BOP in the future which ruins one aspect of BOP.

You can go slower until the first race where if you want to win you have to go full throttle thus revealing your advantage. Then after the race the BOP will be readjusted a bit.

 

[jake2013guy]

You can go slower until the first race where if you want to win you have to go full throttle thus revealing your advantage. Then after the race the BOP will be readjusted a bit.

I'm on about fast teams reducing their times in order to game the system. E.g. Lynk & Co did this at Zandvoort in WTCR to prevent being hit by the BOP too much thus keeping their advantage.

F1 is all about the engine development right now, although I don't doubt that most of the drivers have great driving skills. You can either use BOP or you can use the same engine in all of the cars.

No it's not. The aero is still important and it's returned to being an aero formula after the development over the years. The engines are much closer than the aero is and I'd argue that it's been the case since 2014 as well where Mercedes were clearly fastest.

 

[ScottPuss20]

He didn't really run away with it, at least not in the same way as 2011 and 2013. It went down to the wire, he just found his mojo in the second half. But the idea of having Force India's leading races or Saubers starting on the front row is alien to F1 today.

Yeah I didn't think my memory served me right.

 

[Akwaaba]

Fixing F1 could be a relatively an easy thing to do. There are two ways in which F1 has always been interesting. a. When cars and drivers are equal, with the chasing car has a slight advantage (ie when slipstream means the car in front can't put away, or the car behind has fresher tyres). or b. when grip levels are difficult to judge (ie when wet for instance)

1. Increase breaking distances - so reduce the size of the disks, or harden the braking material. Breaking distances need to treble - at least
This is the most significant change that should take place.

2. Clean up the surfaces - there are all sorts of ways that these could be regulated (especially for the front wing)
Improve the look of the cars - they should be good looking

3. Make the cars rely more on ground effect and mechanical grip. Add a completely flat vertical element to the read wing (this should increase the power of the slipstream)
Rely less on having clean air, and so cars should be able to follow another car more easily. There is no need for DRS if the car in front leaves a nice big hole in the air the car behind to benefit from.

4. Reduce the number of tyres available for the whole weekend - and ensure that cars have to do a minimum amount of laps throughout the weekend. I want cars to have varying amounts of grip throughout the race. No need to use tyres as a set.
Make sure the tyres are reasonably durable, but make sure they have a cliff when the rubber is worn away. I would quite like the tyres to have 2 layers. The top layer to be worn down to one that is a distinctively different shade, that indicates less grip.

5. At least 2 suppliers to a common fixing (so that they are interchangeable) for brakes, and all other main ancillaries. The costs of these should be fixed
Bring down the costs of the items that most of us don't get to hear anything about.

6. Success ballast - 20 kg for first and then down to 2kg for 10th. More points for a win
I have mixed feelings about this - but I pretty well stopped watching F1 during the Schumacher/ Ferrari domination.

7. Cars should be able to start cold, and without needing to be plugged into anything.

8. Tyre blankets to be banned
It is a skill to bring tyres upto temperature. Also an interesting balance. Cars that a good on tyres tend to have trouble getting heat into the tyres in the first place. Drivers that are good at getting heat into tyres may not be so good in getting their tyres to last.

9. F1 Teams should not have a significant input in the rules - they value their own self interest higher than that of others)

10. Teams that finish in the top 4 should be compelled to run 3 car teams the following season. Points are awarded to the top 15. These teams expenses increase when running 3 cars.
When we have Norah Ark grids - at least we'll have inter-team battles to keep the race interesting? The big teams we have more logistic issues. The teams that don't do so well will have less cars to build and operate, and so should be more efficient.

11. Race lengths should increase slightly year on year
We've had 80 min races - if the cars continue to get faster we'll be getting 70 min races soon.

 

[Veinz]

F1 needs a complete overhaul, but they should start by getting rid of the strategy group, the teams have way too much power as is.

Just incase you don’t know what the strategy group is, here is an old article about it. A joke and a sham is a pretty accurate description.

https://jalopnik.com/the-formula-one-strategy-group-is-a-joke-and-a-sham-1704523408

 

[Peter.]

What's wrong with it? The nature of F1, which is limited overtaking and slow, gradual development of a race highly focused on meticulous strategy, is having the negatives amplified by one thing. Disparity.

While I am marvelled by the incredible technology on display with these new engines, an argument can be made that they might be the worst thing to happen to the sport this decade. Not only because of the set up to allow the biggest manufacturer by far, that also got a head start, to stretch their muscles and annihilate the competition, but because it highlights how inept the governing body is at actually tailoring the rules of the sport towards competition. The 2017 rule changes highlight that issue even more, as they gave the big guys even more room to flex their financial muscles and put distance between them and the midfield and back markers, while strapping those guys for cash trying to just stay in the sport (RIP Manor). The abysmal payment structure is another issue that made these rule changes a death sentence for competition.

I dont want budget caps. I want the small teams to be able to not only survive, but compete. I dont want the big guys who have endless streams of income, including selling cars, to get paid the budget of a back marker merely for existing. This, and costly rule changes that do the opposite of close up the grid, is why Formula 1.5 is a thing.

If you look past the Mercedes dominance and the disparity that questionable rule changes created, there are a lot of great things about the sport recently. We have somewhat struck a balance with DRS where it is a net positive for the sport overall, but the Pirelli tyres have gotten a lot more conservative since their inception. We are almost back to the 2010 Bridgestones. The racing is good at the tracks that allow it, bad at others. People forget that a few years ago overtaking was pretty bad at every track. Overtaking figures are up post 2009 and post Pirelli/DRS.

The framework of the sport does not encourage, or allow competition to develop organically, even if the environment (good tracks) or tools (DRS, variable tyres strategies) allow there to be exciting racing when the gaps between the teams are small.

 

[twitcher]

Take the point of view of the FIA. Does F1 really need saving? Or would it be better to just let it finish sinking?

The FIA inherited F1, along with all of F1’s BS, including the nonsense from the manufacturers (eg Ferrari threatening to quit if they don’t get their way, etc).

On the other hand, FE is the FIA’s pet project. They set the rules, their way or the highway. No historical “special favours” based on power games. Don’t like it, don’t sign up. Despite that though, almost every major manufacturer has shown interest in it. Some, like Jaguar and BMW, showed interest specifically because it was NOT F1.

Look at the absolute mess that the new regs are. Dozens of chefs in the kitchen, and we can pretty much guess how much difference the new regs will make.

Over the weekend, I heard two things of note:
1, Silverstone has extended its contract for 5 more years.
2, Kravitz jokes that “it’ll only be a few years before they’re all electric anyways”. Crofty asked, “You think so?” to which the entire broadcast team said “whoa let’s not even go there, we don’t have time for that discussion.”

I think F1 has roughly 5 years before its position as the premier motorsport category is seriously questioned. I don’t think Earth is big enough for two FIA sanctioned, global, premier open wheel categories.....and I think we all know which category the FIA would prefer to be the one that remains. The only reason F1 remains on top right now is because that’s where the big money is. If cost caps are introduced in F1, and manufacturers start throwing big bucks at FE drivers, the shift will happen faster than we’ll even realize.