Ideas for Formula One
Discussion
Been discussed a bit recently but.
So they should really be looking at cheaper, short term solutions to limiting speeds so that some manufacturers who may be concerned with costs don't leave.
Well here's a a few ideas I have thought about, they should limit speeds and not hinder costs too much. What do you think about.
Gearboxes. - 5 gears maximum (possibly only 4)
Engines - rev limiters (if they currently rev to 18,000 cut it to 14,000 - increased engine life)
Testing - only allowed at GP organised testing venues, at the circuit the GP is about to race at between 7-14 days before the GP. No other testing allowed elsewhere during the season. Testing of new cars during the Winter off season permitted but for a limited number of days.
WeightIncrease minimum weight of a F1 car from 600kg (inc driver) to 800kg.
Fuel Not sure if they do use pump fuel but all F1 engines to run on standard pump fuel (ideally 95RON, not the most exotic the fuel company makes in any country it supplies). All cars to carry a fuel tank to hold a race distance fuel load. (give teams ability to gamble on no stops or pit stops).
I think all of the above can be acheived without spending more money as everyone would be building a new car next year or modifying an current chassis. The racing might be improved and the costs kept down as well.
If Max Mosely decides to stand down from the FIA I'm up for election
Grand Prix.com said:
On Friday afternoon Flavio Briatore told his fellow team bosses in a meeting that he is worried about the future of Renault in F1. Automobiles Renault gets a new management in March next year and decisions will then be made about the F1 project. Briatore himself admits that he is not going to be part of the team for much longer and it seems that he has built himself a new role as the head of an engine company, preparing 2.4-litre V8 engines for Max Mosley's brave new F1 world in 2006.
The 2.4-litre V8 question is a big issue at the moment. Mosley says that he is insisting on the new engine rules on the grounds of safety and argues that the new rules will reduce power outputs to 650 bhp. The engine designers do not agree, arguing that simple calculations of horsepower per cubic centimetre, show that the new engines will immediately produce 750 bhp and engineers reckon that they will get that back to 800 bhp very quickly.
So they should really be looking at cheaper, short term solutions to limiting speeds so that some manufacturers who may be concerned with costs don't leave.
Well here's a a few ideas I have thought about, they should limit speeds and not hinder costs too much. What do you think about.
Gearboxes. - 5 gears maximum (possibly only 4)
Engines - rev limiters (if they currently rev to 18,000 cut it to 14,000 - increased engine life)
Testing - only allowed at GP organised testing venues, at the circuit the GP is about to race at between 7-14 days before the GP. No other testing allowed elsewhere during the season. Testing of new cars during the Winter off season permitted but for a limited number of days.
WeightIncrease minimum weight of a F1 car from 600kg (inc driver) to 800kg.
Fuel Not sure if they do use pump fuel but all F1 engines to run on standard pump fuel (ideally 95RON, not the most exotic the fuel company makes in any country it supplies). All cars to carry a fuel tank to hold a race distance fuel load. (give teams ability to gamble on no stops or pit stops).
I think all of the above can be acheived without spending more money as everyone would be building a new car next year or modifying an current chassis. The racing might be improved and the costs kept down as well.
If Max Mosely decides to stand down from the FIA I'm up for election
Good ideas. Not too sure about increasing the weight though - more energy to discipate in the (rare )event of an impact.
Cutting the engine revs should allow a reduction in car weight, without affecting power to weight.
Also, as has been said by the engine manufacturers many times, the three seconds a lap speed increase this year has nothing to do with them. Do feel a bit sorry for them being made the scapegoats therefore.
I don't know why we are not running race distance fuel. This to me is a no brainer. Just looking back through the Autosport archives shows some great spectacle purely because of this - usually Mansell thinking that he could get away without a pitstop, Prost knowing so, Mansell has to stop then go on a mad balls out charge to get back on terms.
That's what we want
)event of an impact. Cutting the engine revs should allow a reduction in car weight, without affecting power to weight.
Also, as has been said by the engine manufacturers many times, the three seconds a lap speed increase this year has nothing to do with them. Do feel a bit sorry for them being made the scapegoats therefore.
I don't know why we are not running race distance fuel. This to me is a no brainer. Just looking back through the Autosport archives shows some great spectacle purely because of this - usually Mansell thinking that he could get away without a pitstop, Prost knowing so, Mansell has to stop then go on a mad balls out charge to get back on terms.
That's what we want
RickApple said:
If you didnt allow pit stops it would be even more of a procession, with the race winner essentially found in qualifying. Much of the 'excitement' of F1 is the tactics involved with pit strategies, especially in the last few years...
Which is why I said that all teams muct have a fuel tank capable of carrying a full race distance so they have the choice to go without or to take fuel stops.
Fuel stops are pretty traditional in F1. Only in the turbo years did they ban them because of the advantage the turbos were getting and they had to slow them down somehow.
Hows about points for qualifying. That should mix the grid up a bit as the like of Minardi would qualify on fumes to get a shot at some points.
Also all electronics removed from the cars (even if they have to use carbs) That way we get rid of all of these driver aids which seem to remove the advantage of experience.
Bring back the days when youth and bravery were battling experience.
Also all electronics removed from the cars (even if they have to use carbs) That way we get rid of all of these driver aids which seem to remove the advantage of experience.
Bring back the days when youth and bravery were battling experience.
Pit stops for fuel were virtually unknown from about 1958 through to 1982 - even though they weren't specifically banned. With the tyre wear characteristics in those years, it was deemed better tactics to continue out on track without stopping. Prior to 1958 the use of "special" fuels such as benzol, methanol etc had made fuel stops fairly common and early F1 (1948 to 1951) also featured fuel stops because of the massive fuel consumption of the 1.5 litre supercharged engines (the Alfetta 159 did 1.5 miles to the gallon). Fuel stops came back with the introduction of turbo-charging and the playing off of tyre wear against sheer speed.
A chronology of fuel stop history would go something like this:
1948-1951 absolutely necessary (although not compulsory)
1952 - 1958 often necessary (but not compulsory)
1963 - 1981 virtually unknown
1982 - 1983 considered the best tactic for turbo cars and therfore increasingly utilised (although still not compulsory)
1984 - 1993 banned, because of a number of fire incidents
1994 - reintroduced and now virtually compulsory.
I actually think they ruin modern F1.
A chronology of fuel stop history would go something like this:
1948-1951 absolutely necessary (although not compulsory)
1952 - 1958 often necessary (but not compulsory)
1963 - 1981 virtually unknown
1982 - 1983 considered the best tactic for turbo cars and therfore increasingly utilised (although still not compulsory)
1984 - 1993 banned, because of a number of fire incidents
1994 - reintroduced and now virtually compulsory.
I actually think they ruin modern F1.
I would like to see the cars keep the current engines and technology, but have standard front and rear wings.
i would like there to be some kind of overboost button like in formula palmer audi for overtaking, and i'd like to see a three race format like in the btcc, with proper 12 lap qualifying on the saturday.
additionally i'd like the race weekend, to include a masters formula 1 race, an historics race, for cars pre 70 and post 70 ( eg thouroughbred gp) and a juniors ( young drivers using curent f1 cars) race as a warm up on the sunday.
job done...
i would like there to be some kind of overboost button like in formula palmer audi for overtaking, and i'd like to see a three race format like in the btcc, with proper 12 lap qualifying on the saturday.
additionally i'd like the race weekend, to include a masters formula 1 race, an historics race, for cars pre 70 and post 70 ( eg thouroughbred gp) and a juniors ( young drivers using curent f1 cars) race as a warm up on the sunday.
job done...
I reckon:
1. Only supply wet weather tyres.
2. No refueling
3. Pump fuel.
4. Limit the amount of fuel available in a race, if the cars get too fast it can be reduced at one race notice. There will still be strategy as cars will be leaner at some points and richer in others.
5. Points for qualifying. Then start the cars in reverse order. (So the leaders have to start from the back).
6. No electronics. Except possibly FIA stuff for black box monitoring, possibly to measure downforce to allow restrictions. This may not be possible with alternative fuel loads or necessary with the downforce restricted.
7. If it is possible to police (maybe by looking at ground clearance v. speed) give a maximum downforce limit. Then allow the engineers to do anything with the shape.
8. Anything allowed on engine. (Just a maximum fuel level, possibly allowing alternative fuels with different limits).
9.
1. Only supply wet weather tyres.
2. No refueling
3. Pump fuel.
4. Limit the amount of fuel available in a race, if the cars get too fast it can be reduced at one race notice. There will still be strategy as cars will be leaner at some points and richer in others.
5. Points for qualifying. Then start the cars in reverse order. (So the leaders have to start from the back).
6. No electronics. Except possibly FIA stuff for black box monitoring, possibly to measure downforce to allow restrictions. This may not be possible with alternative fuel loads or necessary with the downforce restricted.
7. If it is possible to police (maybe by looking at ground clearance v. speed) give a maximum downforce limit. Then allow the engineers to do anything with the shape.
8. Anything allowed on engine. (Just a maximum fuel level, possibly allowing alternative fuels with different limits).
9.
Some good ideas, but Ferrari would never agree to the testing bans, they would winge about how much they have invested in Fiorano and why should they be punished just because others haven't made that investment etc.....
Ban all pit stops for fuel and tyres.
Why reduce costs. Just make Bernie distribute his share amongst all the teams equally. Then no-one would be short of money (except Bernie, but the interest on what he already has would probably enable him to scrape by).
Ban all pit stops for fuel and tyres.
Why reduce costs. Just make Bernie distribute his share amongst all the teams equally. Then no-one would be short of money (except Bernie, but the interest on what he already has would probably enable him to scrape by).
Schumacer retire, the other can comete at there level.
More Montoyas and Rikonens eg, racers.
All races at spa, or Suzuka, (possibly silverstone)
Sprinkler systems at all tracks, with random sprinkler patterns.
Loose the corporates eg, Jaguar(bye), toyota etc. The best teams will be dedicated race teams eg, Mclaren, Williams etc. Car manufacturers 'sub out' there programs.
Scrap concorde agrement. They ll never agree, to much self interest etc. FIA make rules, teams play by them.
Scrap treaded slicks, and 'cost reducing' such as one engine per meeting. Top teams spend more developing motors.Ditch all traction controls.
F1 is in a real mess at the moment. Million s to follow each other in circles. Are viewing figres droping? Strangr Brit GP sell out 100's pounds to get in, you gtta be jokin!
More Montoyas and Rikonens eg, racers.
All races at spa, or Suzuka, (possibly silverstone)
Sprinkler systems at all tracks, with random sprinkler patterns.
Loose the corporates eg, Jaguar(bye), toyota etc. The best teams will be dedicated race teams eg, Mclaren, Williams etc. Car manufacturers 'sub out' there programs.
Scrap concorde agrement. They ll never agree, to much self interest etc. FIA make rules, teams play by them.
Scrap treaded slicks, and 'cost reducing' such as one engine per meeting. Top teams spend more developing motors.Ditch all traction controls.
F1 is in a real mess at the moment. Million s to follow each other in circles. Are viewing figres droping? Strangr Brit GP sell out 100's pounds to get in, you gtta be jokin!
I agree, the acceptance fee really will hold back new comers. It's bad enough having to develop a car let alone paying Bernie and co millions just to race it.
Years back almost anybody could enter if they could pre-qualify.
Although I think the diminishing number of teams at present may indicate the fee isn't the only factor.
If we lose three this year would F1 even survive in the long term? Especially as one of those teams is owned by one of the worlds largest car manufacturers)
Possibly have an "overtaking index" where the two circuits with the least overtaking are dropped for a year. The grand old circuits (Spa, Silverstone, Monza) often produce the best races due to the ability to overtake on them.
The rules are now too restrictive - what is the chance of another Colin Chapman, Cooper or Chaperal (OK, that was CANAM) turning the sport upside down again?
There used to be all sorts of cars including six wheelers, four wheel drive, front engine, mid engine.
If an engine uses more fuel it will be penalised - why not just restrict the fuel flow the way they do it at Le Mans?
Years back almost anybody could enter if they could pre-qualify.
Although I think the diminishing number of teams at present may indicate the fee isn't the only factor.
If we lose three this year would F1 even survive in the long term? Especially as one of those teams is owned by one of the worlds largest car manufacturers)
Possibly have an "overtaking index" where the two circuits with the least overtaking are dropped for a year. The grand old circuits (Spa, Silverstone, Monza) often produce the best races due to the ability to overtake on them.
The rules are now too restrictive - what is the chance of another Colin Chapman, Cooper or Chaperal (OK, that was CANAM) turning the sport upside down again?
There used to be all sorts of cars including six wheelers, four wheel drive, front engine, mid engine.
If an engine uses more fuel it will be penalised - why not just restrict the fuel flow the way they do it at Le Mans?
Holy Thread resurrection.
However, it seems that the pistonheads wise sages of 2004 came up with the format for current F1. Good to see the leaders of F1 read pistonheads, even if it has taken them best part of 20 years to implement.
Suggested above include
standard wings
some kind of overboost
multiple races per day
points for qualifying.
reduced rev limits
max fuel limits
limited testing
it's essentially the blue print for today's F1.
However, it seems that the pistonheads wise sages of 2004 came up with the format for current F1. Good to see the leaders of F1 read pistonheads, even if it has taken them best part of 20 years to implement.
Suggested above include
standard wings
some kind of overboost
multiple races per day
points for qualifying.
reduced rev limits
max fuel limits
limited testing
it's essentially the blue print for today's F1.
Dynion Araf Uchaf said:
Holy Thread resurrection.
However, it seems that the pistonheads wise sages of 2004 came up with the format for current F1. Good to see the leaders of F1 read pistonheads, even if it has taken them best part of 20 years to implement.
Suggested above include
standard wings
some kind of overboost
multiple races per day
points for qualifying.
reduced rev limits
max fuel limits
limited testing
it's essentially the blue print for today's F1.
I would like to see mandatory 2 stops per race with the current tyres.However, it seems that the pistonheads wise sages of 2004 came up with the format for current F1. Good to see the leaders of F1 read pistonheads, even if it has taken them best part of 20 years to implement.
Suggested above include
standard wings
some kind of overboost
multiple races per day
points for qualifying.
reduced rev limits
max fuel limits
limited testing
it's essentially the blue print for today's F1.
The Pirelli and Hybrid era has been one of tyre preservation over out and out racing.
Mandating more frequent stops would mean that there'd be more racing and less cruising
mat205125 said:
I would like to see mandatory 2 stops per race with the current tyres.
The Pirelli and Hybrid era has been one of tyre preservation over out and out racing.
Mandating more frequent stops would mean that there'd be more racing and less cruising
It's an oxymoron of sorts. Pirelli created high-deg for those reasons alone but the reality is that teams have better analysis tools for tyre strategy which means eking out stints via tyre preservation is more beneficial due to pit deltas (time lost pitting) and so forth.The Pirelli and Hybrid era has been one of tyre preservation over out and out racing.
Mandating more frequent stops would mean that there'd be more racing and less cruising
I think it was the 2013 Spanish GP that had 4 pit stops and that didn't go down too well particularly if you were watching the highlights.
The tyres now are far better than in the past and far more raceable. For better strategy variation it should be like the mid-2010s when the compounds were closer and there was the option to use three different compounds.
I may be in a minority of one but I find the F1 tyre situation ludicrous. What possible purpose is served by making tyres which often have a shelf life of a few minutes and then - how green - are thrown away , at the annual rate of 40, 000 plus ? It is an awful advert for Pirelli whose stock would rise in my eyes if they made tyres which actually lasted the rigour of a whole Grand Prix . Contrived pit stops often ruin the flow of a race and are only interesting when something goes wrong. The only time the prospect of a tyre change is remotely intriguing is deciding when , or if , to change from wets to dries in unpredictable weather . Or vice versa
Dynion Araf Uchaf said:
standard wings
some kind of overboost
Overboost - a fixed amount to be deployed when and where the driver chooses.some kind of overboost
Standard body profile - wings can be what they like, but airflow around the body (front axle to rear axle the same for everyone) - no stupid strakes, bargeboards, flutes, louvres or wasting any time sodding about with that s
t.Standard wing mirrors and mounts - no need to spend millions on those either.
But wings need to be a differentiator, otherwise end up with Indycar - nothing wrong with that, but don't need another Indycar.
I would simply bring back refuelling, allow a different tyre manufacturer, and have zero tolerance on track limits, try and bring back gravel traps in places, clear white lines and have literally zero tolerance on it,
Yes a few races would be shambolic, as these petulant morons would still try and push it, but if you word the rules properly to eliminate any grey (you have to do this to prevent these cheating egoists from making the sport as ridiculous as uit is now)
it also might mean a few more older tracks might start to be able to have F1 again, as most modern tracks are either redesigned or built to suit these stupid massive tolerance track limit rules.
Yes a few races would be shambolic, as these petulant morons would still try and push it, but if you word the rules properly to eliminate any grey (you have to do this to prevent these cheating egoists from making the sport as ridiculous as uit is now)
it also might mean a few more older tracks might start to be able to have F1 again, as most modern tracks are either redesigned or built to suit these stupid massive tolerance track limit rules.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff