How would you change F1?

  • Thread starter Thread starter YellowG1
  • 104 comments
  • 9,993 views
Grayfox
Give Hamilton a 4 second head start so he doesn't smash into any one.
Click to expand...

You are onto something there, except hold Vettel back for 4 seconds.
 
I think Bernie should get the best scientist from all over the globe to make a artificial weather maker. So it will hail, rain cats and dogs and for the middle easter tracks as well as Texas make sand storms. Oh and for New Jersey a flood of land fill garbarge (nah I kid NJ).

In reality I'd like to see more aero and engine options on the table. I would want to see anywhere from V6 turbo or twin turbo to V8s, V10s and V12s. Hybrid technology could stay on board if wanted and less regs on the aero choices.
 
LMSCorvetteGT2
I would want to see anywhere from V6 turbo or twin turbo to V8s, V10s and V12s. Hybrid technology could stay on board if wanted and less regs on the aero choices.
Click to expand...

It won't happen because of cost issues for the smaller teams, but it would be good to see how giving the teams limits on power and emissions plus a set amount of fuel and just letting them come up with the best solution, be it inline 4 turbos, V6, V8, etc.
 
Everyone talks about emissions and therefore going to 4 cylinders but I bet more emissions are emitted flying the whole grid to one race than an F1 car emits in a whole season.
 
axletramp
It won't happen because of cost issues for the smaller teams, but it would be good to see how giving the teams limits on power and emissions plus a set amount of fuel and just letting them come up with the best solution, be it inline 4 turbos, V6, V8, etc.
Click to expand...

Yes I understand that but I think a set of rules like you see for varying engine sizes in the Sport Car series could solve that issue.
 
driftking18594
So, you're proposing that the cast of the Jersey Shore invade the track? :sly: :dopey:
Click to expand...

Good one 👍 that was a funny one. Well seeing that a couple of those meat heads would give a new meaning to speed bump...but that would be too dangerous as surely Petrov would run over speed bump snooki into the hudson.
 
mattythedog
Everyone talks about emissions and therefore going to 4 cylinders but I bet more emissions are emitted flying the whole grid to one race than an F1 car emits in a whole season.
Click to expand...

The reduction of engine sizes and the adoption of a turbo are not so F1, as a sport, produces less emissions. It's a refection of global emission reductions and F1's role as a leader in automotive technology and the trickle down effect that technology will have on the road car industry.
 
TheCracker
The reduction of engine sizes and the adoption of a turbo are not so F1, as a sport, produces less emissions. It's a refection of global emission reductions and F1's role as a leader in automotive technology and the trickle down effect that technology will have on the road car industry.
Click to expand...

Exactly ^
 
TheCracker
The reduction of engine sizes and the adoption of a turbo are not so F1, as a sport, produces less emissions. It's a refection of global emission reductions and F1's role as a leader in automotive technology and the trickle down effect that technology will have on the road car industry.
Click to expand...

Very well said. I think even if we didn't have a mandated engine format, most teams would opt for a small, turbocharged motor. As between a V12, V10, V8 or turbo 4/6 cylinder, a turbo should be the lightest configuration...
 
YellowG1
Very well said. I think even if we didn't have a mandated engine format, most teams would opt for a small, turbocharged motor. As between a V12, V10, V8 or turbo 4/6 cylinder, a turbo should be the lightest configuration...
Click to expand...

If by light you mean weight, the old turbo era engines were considerably heavier than the NA ones, probably because the engines had to be built much thicker and stronger to survive the turbo.
 
Bigbazz
If by light you mean weight, the old turbo era engines were considerably heavier than the NA ones, probably because the engines had to be built much thicker and stronger to survive the turbo.
Click to expand...

Yes but in terms of engines we've come further ahead of that time.

YellowG1
Very well said. I think even if we didn't have a mandated engine format, most teams would opt for a small, turbocharged motor. As between a V12, V10, V8 or turbo 4/6 cylinder, a turbo should be the lightest configuration...
Click to expand...

Most teams especially the likes of HRT and Virgin. However, I think if you opened up the engine regs, you could have Ferrari build more than one engine configuration. V12s for the main team and then V8s for say STR or Sauber. Then you have many manufactures from all over wanting to build engines for F1 due to having such a vast pick.
 
Force all teams to have larger car numbers on them.

Bring back the wreath.

Both of these are gone/cut down because of sponsors...
 
thumb.php


This is what we might be seeing eventually (with very little rear wing and mostly ground effect.) :sly:

Somebody thought it looks like a police car. It does!!
 
There's just one major problem with that design - it won't go anywhere. There's no room for the engine.

Canopies are unnecessary. They just cause more problems than they solve.
 
Rich S
This is what we might be seeing eventually (with very little rear wing and mostly ground effect.) :sly:

Somebody thought it looks like a police car. It does!!
Click to expand...

Other advantage which is the most important closed canopy = better safety
 
toyotsupra
Other advantage which is the most important closed canopy = better safety
Click to expand...
Actually, it would be worse.

While most fatal accidents in motorsports involve head traumas, and the canopy is designed to prevent these accidents, very few accidents actually involve head trauma. As for all the other accidents, the canopy will simply get in the way. It will slow down rescue crews trying to get to a driver; it can mist up, blocking a driver's view; its shape will distort a driver's view, making it harder to judge gaps; and in the worst-case scenario, it can jam in place.

Canopies do not create "better safety". They're a knee-jerk reaction to tragic accidents with the sport bowing to political and social pressure.
 
prisonermonkeys
Actually, it would be worse.

While most fatal accidents in motorsports involve head traumas, and the canopy is designed to prevent these accidents, very few accidents actually involve head trauma. As for all the other accidents, the canopy will simply get in the way. It will slow down rescue crews trying to get to a driver; it can mist up, blocking a driver's view; its shape will distort a driver's view, making it harder to judge gaps; and in the worst-case scenario, it can jam in place.

Canopies do not create "better safety". They're a knee-jerk reaction to tragic accidents with the sport bowing to political and social pressure.
Click to expand...

To solve the "stuck in the car in a fire" scenario, it could have small explosive charges in the hinges(like the Merc SLS) and if a fire was detected or some other reason the could blow the canopy off and the driver could escape.
 
That sounds dangerous. It might work on the SLS, but the charges would be considerably closer to the driver in a Formula 1 car.

Sorry, but canopies are not the future.
 
Someone made a comment about extra aero parts.

Aero parts are the ones that made overtaking difficult, because it affects the car behind them drastically. Unless they were specifically designed to create a massive slipstream effect for the car behind them, of course. But then, this would mean that they have no downforce for the corners.... ah, choices!

Ground effect using fans would be the worse thing possible, as the road surfaces needs to be super smooth for it to work, as a slight gap in the vacuum renders the grip and downforce levels useless as the fan is no longer sucking the car to the road anymore and the driver then does a massive crash with bits going all over the place.

Which leads me onto the other thing that annoys me so much with the current crop of cars. Whenever someone crashes, the bits of the car literally flies EVERYWHERE. Which is needed to reduce the impact of the crash. But these pieces from the car always invariably land on the racetrack and lately the safety car is always having to come out more often than before. It would be ideal if there was something that teams can use that doesn't make it break off or create hazards on the roads when there is an accident.

Safety car rules. Change it so that the order is done due to race position, not the actual track position. Its annoying when the safety car gets the first place guy behind it, but the second place guy has to be behind some backmarkers. Well, the safety car should have the first car that comes up behind it first and everyone else file behind it, if it is going by track position. It doesn't make sense having the first place car first, but everyone else by track position.
 
LMSCorvetteGT2
However, I think if you opened up the engine regs, you could have Ferrari build more than one engine configuration. V12s for the main team and then V8s for say STR or Sauber. Then you have many manufactures from all over wanting to build engines for F1 due to having such a vast pick.
Click to expand...

It's the major manufacturers, with the exception of Ferrari, who wanted the engine rules changing. 2.4ltr V8's are irrelevant to road car manufacturers, it's an irrelevant format for a road car. A smaller capacity four or six cylinder engine with a turbo is much closer to what the likes of Mercedes, Renault or any other potential engine supplier, such as VW/Audi, is likely to stick in a road car. Apart from reflecting their similarity to road car engines, the technology is also much more likely to trickle down too.

Having the engine regs thrown wide open to a number of different layouts just means more costs. No company in this global climate wants to be spending more money on engine developments if they don't have to. They're already having to do that with hybrid technology and the like.
 
I don't know why I didn't think about it earlier, but I was part of a test looking at possible new rules. Its fairly complex when looked into in detail, but the premise of the concept is a balance. So those of you wanting V12's could have them, lots of HP, lots of straight line speed. But all that extra grunt will come at the cost of having to run a heavier car. At the other end of the scale you can reduce the HP in exchange for really light and nimble car. The hoped outcome is that you get constant position changes, but also that as the circuits vary over the year you get a constant shift in frontrunners.

There are points to be addressed (hence posting into an open forum for discussion - hopefully!) but an underlying promise is certainly there. My main problem would be in stopping everyone finding the same equilibrium (by copying Red Bull...) and running to similar specifications again. Testing budgets will soar as well...
 
I find the creation of this thread auspicious. Today is the November meeting of the F1 Commission, where there are a whole heap of changes up for discussion - clearer definitions of constructors (hopefully ending the Lotus-Lotus debacle), discussions about the value of certain events (Bahrain and Korea) and the possible introduction of customer chassis.
 
mattythedog
To solve the "stuck in the car in a fire" scenario, it could have small explosive charges in the hinges(like the Merc SLS) and if a fire was detected or some other reason the could blow the canopy off and the driver could escape.
Click to expand...

The main reason for the canopie idea being dropped is due to the danger of debris being deflected into the crowd. I don't know why people keep bringing up the canopie idea, as if it will save many lives. The whole idea is dangerous and there are a whole list of new problems it would introduce.
 
No V10 or V12 in my list. V8.

Old point system, no DRS, but i can life with how it is now.

So for 2013 i want:

2011
 
TheCracker
It's the major manufacturers, with the exception of Ferrari, who wanted the engine rules changing. 2.4ltr V8's are irrelevant to road car manufacturers, it's an irrelevant format for a road car. A smaller capacity four or six cylinder engine with a turbo is much closer to what the likes of Mercedes, Renault or any other potential engine supplier, such as VW/Audi, is likely to stick in a road car. Apart from reflecting their similarity to road car engines, the technology is also much more likely to trickle down too.

Having the engine regs thrown wide open to a number of different layouts just means more costs. No company in this global climate wants to be spending more money on engine developments if they don't have to. They're already having to do that with hybrid technology and the like.
Click to expand...

I understand all this I'm just saying it would make more excitement, cost caps could also be placed. People treat F1 like it is the uncontrollable cost monster, then how does sport car racing work. How can I see a V12 and I4 turbo go head to head? There are ways to do it and F1 can aline themselves with that and not act like the Elitist motorsport. It's not impossible and we know this. Merc is well known for their V8s too. There is alot of Tech that can be used and learned for any engine that could trickle down and make things better for each format. It doesn't have to be limited.

@PM

As far as canopies go...pilots have charges that pop the top off so they're not smashing through glass as they eject out. Also there are places were fire extinguishers can be placed in the car that go off when fires occur (mainly the engine). I do know that there are many fans that just don't want them cause it would infringe on the concept of open wheel racing (not sure how).
 
LMSCorvetteGT2
pilots have charges that pop the top off so they're not smashing through glass as they eject out
Click to expand...
But the problem is that if you place explosive charges in the safety cell, they're right next to the driver. And since they would have to be powerful enough to free the canopy from the cockpit, there's a risk that they would blow the driver's head off.
 

Latest Posts

Back