Discussion
2016 Formula 1 cars have the potential to beat the 12-year old lap record at Brazil and probably one or two other circuits. The cars are getting much faster for next year so the number of circuits where the lap record is potentially doable will increase.
This would appear to be quite a coup for the sport, beating the three litre formula and the very effective tyres available at that time. Maybe it'd shut up the naysayers and the jokers on here who were so critical of the potential of the 1.6 V6T (remember all that 'slower than GP2' b
ks? That didn't last long... I really must read some old threads from winter '13/14 to remind myself)
I suppose my point is, why am I not hearing more about this? Surely pushing for lap records would be great publicity for the sport, it'd inject some interest and dispel any remaining doubt that the hybrid formula is up to task.
I know that in real terms the cars aren't on lap record pace, nowhere near at most circuits, but who's to put it past a driver like Vettel to pit late for tyres and turn his engine up?
This would appear to be quite a coup for the sport, beating the three litre formula and the very effective tyres available at that time. Maybe it'd shut up the naysayers and the jokers on here who were so critical of the potential of the 1.6 V6T (remember all that 'slower than GP2' b
ks? That didn't last long... I really must read some old threads from winter '13/14 to remind myself)I suppose my point is, why am I not hearing more about this? Surely pushing for lap records would be great publicity for the sport, it'd inject some interest and dispel any remaining doubt that the hybrid formula is up to task.
I know that in real terms the cars aren't on lap record pace, nowhere near at most circuits, but who's to put it past a driver like Vettel to pit late for tyres and turn his engine up?
HustleRussell said:
Not mutually exclusive?
They are. The biggest difference between today's cars and the ones of a decade ago is aero. They're working the air so much harder and that's what makes it so boring - the wake turbulence is so strong that if you're driving the same car you will kill the front tyres after a couple of laps in DRS range. It's why we've not seen Hamilton battle with Rosberg much - they can't get close to each other. I have a feeling that the Mercedes aero has been designed to run at the front anyway, so it doesn't do well in turbulent air. davepoth said:
HustleRussell said:
Not mutually exclusive?
They are. The biggest difference between today's cars and the ones of a decade ago is aero. They're working the air so much harder and that's what makes it so boring - the wake turbulence is so strong that if you're driving the same car you will kill the front tyres after a couple of laps in DRS range. It's why we've not seen Hamilton battle with Rosberg much - they can't get close to each other. I have a feeling that the Mercedes aero has been designed to run at the front anyway, so it doesn't do well in turbulent air. davepoth said:
They are. The biggest difference between today's cars and the ones of a decade ago is aero. They're working the air so much harder and that's what makes it so boring - the wake turbulence is so strong that if you're driving the same car you will kill the front tyres after a couple of laps in DRS range. It's why we've not seen Hamilton battle with Rosberg much - they can't get close to each other. I have a feeling that the Mercedes aero has been designed to run at the front anyway, so it doesn't do well in turbulent air.
Mmm, a decade ago we used to have races where it was headline news if someone overtook on the track. http://cliptheapex.com/overtaking/
The "glory years" everyone goes on about from 1995-2010 with the V12/10/8 whatever ... saw precious little overtaking.
Next year we will still have the naysayers on here complaining about how slow they're going in the race...fair enough I guess.
The thing that interests me the most about F1 is the speed of the cars, so I certainly enjoy watching the drivers piloting the cars and how the cars behave at speed. The visual impact of an F1 car taking a fast corner pulling some serious g is one thing. Another is the fact that, these hybrid cars do look more on the edge and more 'spectacular' than the previous V8 era. This is partly due to the hybrid engines torque/power, but also I feel that we have a decent balance between aerodynamic and mechanical grip now. However, I'd like to see the drivers being able to push for a larger proportion of the race distance which the tyres don't allow in all the races now. We did have a couple of races in the season where the drivers were pushing more, but I don't recall it resulting in more wheel-to-wheel situations which suggests that there is no clear correlation between the two.
If we are to have a productive discussion, I'd like to see the term "quality racing" defined. What does quality racing look like?
Aerodynamic grip/downforce is a key element of the speed of these cars so there's no getting away from it. It is not fair to demand purity of racing from F1, IMO. There are plenty of other series that provide that. I'd rather have a formula that doesn't lend itself too easily to overtaking, so when the overtakes do happen, I can marvel at the skill of the driver that executed it...we know that turbulence affects the front end of the following car, so to overtake, you almost have to transcend the physics to be able to execute...I'd rather have a few overtakes where I come away thinking that the driver did something special there than the cars able to follow nose to tail easily where the faster car overtakes by virtue of having inherently better grip/speed (which is why he's at another car's gearbox in the first place).
With the hybrid engines and DRS, I think there is a happy medium now. But if we increase the drag of the cars as in 2017, it's possible that DRS would have a greater effect, impacting on the 'quality' of the racing.
I remember when Hamilton drove the first hybrid cars, he was quoted as saying that these engines put in a chassis built to the previous era's regs...now that would be something else to drive. Well, his wish is coming true next year. Most important consideration for me is that we get drivers being able to push more in the race.
The thing that interests me the most about F1 is the speed of the cars, so I certainly enjoy watching the drivers piloting the cars and how the cars behave at speed. The visual impact of an F1 car taking a fast corner pulling some serious g is one thing. Another is the fact that, these hybrid cars do look more on the edge and more 'spectacular' than the previous V8 era. This is partly due to the hybrid engines torque/power, but also I feel that we have a decent balance between aerodynamic and mechanical grip now. However, I'd like to see the drivers being able to push for a larger proportion of the race distance which the tyres don't allow in all the races now. We did have a couple of races in the season where the drivers were pushing more, but I don't recall it resulting in more wheel-to-wheel situations which suggests that there is no clear correlation between the two.
If we are to have a productive discussion, I'd like to see the term "quality racing" defined. What does quality racing look like?
Aerodynamic grip/downforce is a key element of the speed of these cars so there's no getting away from it. It is not fair to demand purity of racing from F1, IMO. There are plenty of other series that provide that. I'd rather have a formula that doesn't lend itself too easily to overtaking, so when the overtakes do happen, I can marvel at the skill of the driver that executed it...we know that turbulence affects the front end of the following car, so to overtake, you almost have to transcend the physics to be able to execute...I'd rather have a few overtakes where I come away thinking that the driver did something special there than the cars able to follow nose to tail easily where the faster car overtakes by virtue of having inherently better grip/speed (which is why he's at another car's gearbox in the first place).
With the hybrid engines and DRS, I think there is a happy medium now. But if we increase the drag of the cars as in 2017, it's possible that DRS would have a greater effect, impacting on the 'quality' of the racing.
I remember when Hamilton drove the first hybrid cars, he was quoted as saying that these engines put in a chassis built to the previous era's regs...now that would be something else to drive. Well, his wish is coming true next year. Most important consideration for me is that we get drivers being able to push more in the race.
Edited by Dr Z on Sunday 6th November 18:52
Dr Z said:
I did. Fastest laps in F1 matter to me. It matters to me that drivers are pushed physically by the cars. I don't care as much for "quality racing" whatever that means for you.
But they probably won't be pushed hard. The cars will be quicker because the aero and tyres will let them go quicker. The drivers will just be along for the ride.If the drivers are being "pushed physically by the cars", is that not the reverse of what should really be happening i.e. the drivers should be pushing the cars to the physical limits of the cars"?
Eric Mc said:
Dr Z said:
I did. Fastest laps in F1 matter to me. It matters to me that drivers are pushed physically by the cars. I don't care as much for "quality racing" whatever that means for you.
But they probably won't be pushed hard. The cars will be quicker because the aero and tyres will let them go quicker. The drivers will just be along for the ride.If the drivers are being "pushed physically by the cars", is that not the reverse of what should really be happening i.e. the drivers should be pushing the cars to the physical limits of the cars"?
If the drivers are being pushed physically by the cars, the ultimate limit of the car is going to be that much harder to reach and therefore the driver that can get to that limit consistently in the race is going to be rewarded for it...it means driver performance will likely have a bigger influence in the overall performance of the car. One complaint drivers have of the current cars is that the lap times they do in the race means that they are quite a way off the car's and their own physical limits.
Eric Mc said:
If the drivers are being "pushed physically by the cars", is that not the reverse of what should really be happening i.e. the drivers should be pushing the cars to the physical limits of the cars"?
That is an interesting point: which should be the limiting factor? The drivers ability to hustle the car vs the innate capability of the car. For some years, as evidenced by the number of young and inexperienced drivers able to enter F1 and immediately be on the pace: cars have been too easy to driver - I suspect if you took almost any of the current F1 drivers and put them in the Merc, they'd finish top 3 in the championship. You don't see a Senna or Mansell stagger as an exhausted driver crawls from a car anymore - although drivers are also a lot fitter. So the limiting factor has been the car; or more to the point given the incredible reliability of modern F1 cars, the limiting factor has been the (engineered to be) weakest link of the tyres. Once upon a time cars were much more unreliable, gearbox issues, engines, suspension failures etc, so drivers have always had to nurse the car within its limits, so the current tyre and engine allocation constrained specification is no different. It would be nice if the changes meant that a good/great driver in a decent car could compete with someone (perhaps with less 'talent') in a slightly more capable car and you'd be able to see the difference in style/approach. the thread question? lap times almost irrelevant, given changes in circuits, cars, tyres, tarmac etc. Absolute speed more irrelevant: I have tried to like Indycars/NASCAR but even lapping 200mph+ doesn't do it for me, just turning left and drafting might be skilful but not F1.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff