Would you be OK if Formula 1 moved to closed wheel vehicles?

[IcySlivers]

Other then tradition, there’s no real reason to stay open wheel, in fact it’s a detriment to aerodynamics, I’m OK with it overall. Would you be ok with a change to a closed wheel design?

 

[HarVee]

No. The thing that makes F1, well, F1 is its open-wheel setup. Make is closed wheel and it might as well be another generic touring car event like any other. Besides which the open wheel setup adds more challenge in that you have to be more careful as not to destroy the car's suspension.

 

[DefNotJake]

It would just give all those people who knocked the halo for "the beginning of the end of open wheel racing" a feeling of righteousness. For that alone, no.

Other then tradition, there’s no real reason to stay open wheel, in fact it’s a detriment to aerodynamics, I’m OK with it overall. Would you be ok with a change to a closed wheel design?

Modern F1 cars aren't supposed to be aerodynamic anyway to be honest. If they were, they wouldn't have wings that create thousands of pounds of downforce.

 

[Terronium-12]

If F1 were closed wheel it wouldn't be F1 anymore, it'd be a Le Mans Prototype or something close to it.

 

[Saidur_Ali]

Other then tradition, there’s no real reason to stay open wheel, in fact it’s a detriment to aerodynamics, I’m OK with it overall. Would you be ok with a change to a closed wheel design?

It makes sense to do so. Talking about tradition, it probably contributed to Mercedes winning their debut F1 race.

 

[Samus]

Eh, I feel like if we had something like the McLaren MP4-X then it'd be a slippery slope until they added more and more bodywork and it was a very expensive, very fast LMP. I did always like the look of this thing though.

Maybe without the huge front sections it'd be alright, slim those down and just cover the rear wheels like Indycar already does.

 

[EngieDiesel]

I feel like there's already more than enough controversy surrounding teams playing silly buggers with aerodynamics, giving them even more bodywork to mess with is just going to create an unending nightmare. More aero parts on the cars would also probably mean longer safety car periods and cleanup times when someone's front wheel pods inevitably get ripped up from a sausage kerb or ill-timed divebomb.

 

[MatskiMonk]

No. The thing that makes F1, well, F1 is its open-wheel setup. Make is closed wheel and it might as well be another generic touring car event like any other.

Instead of being a generic open wheel series like any other?

 

[Gingerale]

Other then tradition, there’s no real reason to stay open wheel, in fact it’s a detriment to aerodynamics, I’m OK with it overall. Would you be ok with a change to a closed wheel design?

Isnt tradition like the whole idea of sports?
I mean, there is no real reason to play soccer with 11 people, but it kind of defines the sport itself.
Racing with closed wheel design is perfectly ok, but it's not Formula 1.

 

[Fezzik]

"a detriment to aerodynamics" - I consider that a good thing, the less aero the better.

 

[05XR8]

If it looked like Formula E cars, why not?

As for aerodynamics, the origins of F1 didn’t have wings. Go back to that.

 

[IcySlivers]

Ok, help me understand, isn’t it the aerodynamics that allow the cars to take turns at such high speeds? So I’m not fully understanding all the responses saying less aero is better, or aero produces too much downforce? Isn’t that the exact point of aero?

 

[Fezzik]

Ok, help me understand, isn’t it the aerodynamics that allow the cars to take turns at such high speeds? So I’m not fully understanding all the responses saying less aero is better, or aero produces too much downforce? Isn’t that the exact point of aero?

in incredibly simple terms, more aero parts equals more dirty air in the wake of the cars, harder for cars to follow, less close racing.

and it makes the cars pretty ugly.

 

[DefNotJake]

Ok, help me understand, isn’t it the aerodynamics that allow the cars to take turns at such high speeds? So I’m not fully understanding all the responses saying less aero is better, or aero produces too much downforce? Isn’t that the exact point of aero?

I'll try and help using my very, very limited knowledge of Aerodynamics I've learned from making tons of setups with racing sims over the years.

'Aerodynamics' (with an s) is simply referring to how a car interacts with the air, but that doesn't mean that F1 cars can cut through the air like this can. Now that you know that, you should also know it's very common in the English language to use the word 'Aerodynamic' as a way to describe something that looks streamline, or 'low-drag'.

Using the word in that way, Formula 1 cars aren't very 'aerodynamic' because it creates way too much drag, but it does so on purpose to create thousands of pounds of downforce that pushes weight down on the tires (which increases based on the speed of the car), and allows the cars to take corners at insane speeds. So if you decided to let off the throttle going 180MPH down the straight in an F1 car, without even pressing the brake pedal...
...it would feel like this>

Now you are probably thinking, "Isn't downforce and drag the same thing?".

The best way I can explain the difference, is that downforce is just drag/air, that has been directed upwards once it comes into contact with a piece of aero. That continuous and consistent contact with the air, and its change of directory upwards, pushes weight into the cars tires in a downward direction.

As for Dirty air/slipstream, they are the exact same thing. They are both described as, removal of drag from the car by following in the wake of another. That is great for top speed in the straights, but will take away your aero performance in the turns. Why? Because the wake prevents optimal amounts of air hitting the car, for the downforce to reach its peak performance.


EDIT: So in short, the only noticeable difference (to fans watching) wheel covers would make to the cars is by making them hideous, and losing their identity. Not worth the slightly increased laptimes.