YOUR F1 YOUR RULES!!

adz_619 · Post by **adz_619** » Sun Sep 04, 2005 8:29 pm

Havnt u ever had a thought in your mind that since the last 10 years or so, F1 has changed dramaticaly, althought there is more tech involved and faster cars, the excitement level is starting to drop, explain why you think this is happening and suggest some of those good old rules that we would like to have back, I know i who's definetely have a few

<T-K> · Post by **<T-K>** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 12:48 am

If you allow them to put slicks on only one side of the car.....

adz_619 · Post by **adz_619** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 3:19 am

lol

I DONT KNOW HOW THE CAR WHO'D HANDLE WITH THAT RULE, they would probarly go down a level to the gp 2 series

Julian Mayo · Post by **Julian Mayo** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 7:46 am

<T-K> wrote:If you allow them to put slicks on only one side of the car.....

and race them on a banked oval

cmlean · Post by **cmlean** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 12:18 pm

Why not make the undertray flat with no diffusers. Then all aerodynamics would have to be generated above the bodywork. Then limit the wing sizes and positions.

Julian Mayo · Post by **Julian Mayo** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 12:21 pm

cmlean wrote:Why not make the undertray flat with no diffusers. Then all aerodynamics would have to be generated above the bodywork. Then limit the wing sizes and positions.

Just like the transtasman series in the 60-70s!!!!!

cmlean · Post by **cmlean** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 12:32 pm

You would actually see someone's skill in driving a Formula 1 car, not some computer geeks latest addition to management of the projectile.

Julian Mayo · Post by **Julian Mayo** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 1:36 pm

cmlean wrote:You would actually see someone's skill in driving a Formula 1 car, not some computer geeks latest addition to management of the projectile.

I.E. Jochen Rrindt and Piers Courage at Pukekohe in the rain, elbows flailing, the cars never quite pointing where they were supposed to be going, neither giving an inch to the other, yet never in danger of taking each other out, for it would have been unsporting and earned serious words with the stewards.. no launch control, traction control was your foot on the accelerator, ah those were the days

cmlean · Post by **cmlean** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 3:20 pm

Julian, you may be going back a little far. Those were the days when wings were stacked one on to of another and had a tendancy to collapse because they were structurally unsound. But you do have the right drivers though.

Julian Mayo · Post by **Julian Mayo** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 3:46 pm

cmlean wrote:Julian, you may be going back a little far. Those were the days when wings were stacked one on to of another and had a tendancy to collapse because they were structurally unsound. But you do have the right drivers though.

better to be 50% percent right than 50% wrong.

rah · Post by **rah** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 4:13 pm

julian mayo wrote:
cmlean wrote:Julian, you may be going back a little far. Those were the days when wings were stacked one on to of another and had a tendancy to collapse because they were structurally unsound. But you do have the right drivers though.
better to be 50% percent right than 50% wrong.

With the women in your life I seriously doubt if you could ever get 50% right.

I only have a GF and rarely get above 15% right.

Ed · Post by Ed » Mon Sep 05, 2005 5:10 pm

The overtaking problem seems to be getting some attention from the FIA. In their initial proposals from the 2008 regulations they suggested a 90% reduction in downforce however they now realise it could make the cars too slow, Max Mosley said

There have been various attempts to solve the problem which is that the car behind needs to be something like two seconds a lap faster, on the average circuit, before it can overtake the car in front. The only way to solve that problem is some really original thinking. We first attempted to solve the problem by saying ?well, we will run some simulations and see what we do to the downforce to make overtaking possible? and the answer was 90 percent less downforce, much much bigger wheels and tyres. But I think everyone agrees that 90 percent less downforce, even with bigger wheels and tyres, would make the cars too slow - too slow compared to other forms of single seater motor racing, and therefore we would either have to change everything worldwide or find another solution

The current thinking is to limit downforce by quantity to around 50% of the current levels. Max Mosley said

We are going to limit downforce for the first time by quantity rather than by fixing bodywork dimensions and hoping we get the downforce right. In other words, we are going to say the car must never have more than N thousand newtons of downforce in any circumstances. You can work on the drag but you can?t exceed that downforce.

Now that is a fairly dramatic change but the fact that it is necessary is perfectly illustrated by this year where we had new regulations which were devised by the Technical Working Group, by the experts from the teams, with a view to reducing downforce by 25 percent.

Well, what happened was that by the time we got to the beginning of the season most of the 25 percent has been recovered but worse than that, they recover it by putting all sorts of little bits and pieces and little winglets and tabs on the cars which have made the cars even more sensitive to the wake of the car in front, making overtaking even more difficult. So we haven?t lost the downforce and we have got an even bigger problem with the overtaking. It is simply the wrong way to go. For the last 38 years the FIA has tried to limit cornering speeds derived from aerodynamics by specifying the dimensions of the cars. We are going to do it in a more logical way in future which is specifying the maximum downforce and that will be the end of the discussion.

In combination with this large downforce (reduction), we already have, as you know, in the regulations, much wider tyres, slicks, more grip. The net result will be that, to achieve the same lap times in 2008 as we anticipate in 2006, we will have in the order of, and this is still very approximate, but in the order of 50 percent of the downforce levels that we currently have. Obviously it varies from circuit to circuit but in the order of magnitude, 50 percent.

From the FIA Friday Press Conference at the Italian Grand Prix

Julian Mayo · Post by **Julian Mayo** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 5:29 pm

rah wrote:
julian mayo wrote:
cmlean wrote:Julian, you may be going back a little far. Those were the days when wings were stacked one on to of another and had a tendancy to collapse because they were structurally unsound. But you do have the right drivers though.
better to be 50% percent right than 50% wrong.
With the women in your life I seriously doubt if you could ever get 50% right.

I only have a GF and rarely get above 15% right.

Ma-ate, with JV around I don't get above :0000005%

lemon_martini2 · Post by **lemon_martini2** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 7:17 pm

Don't worry.Sheep are much less demanding.

Did I see a mention of slick tyres coming back?

Julian Mayo · Post by **Julian Mayo** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 7:20 pm

lemon_martini2 wrote:Don't worry.Sheep are much less demanding.

Did I see a mention of slick tyres coming back?

concentrate Lemon, concentrate.