2. Posted by Will Fly, 18/05/2015 6:31

"So no in addition to driver being able to run over their pit crew they'll be able to barbecue them as they drive off with the fuel hose attached, great idea BERNIE. WRT tyres I don't understand why F1 tyres are so bad compared to LMP1 tyres, they can RACE for 2 hours at F1 speeds without resorting to 'managing the tyres' so why can't they do the same in F1. We've been there with no tyres stops that didn't work, we've had Pirelli picking the compounds that didn't work, so now let the teams pick, that won't work.

Not sure how they can gain 5-6 secs through Aero evolution, teams spend a fortune trying to get 1/10th. Unless they're going to simplify aero or (re-)introduce ground effect, and give them mega wide tyres they wont reduce lap times by 6 seconds, giving them 1000hp will only help on the straights, not round the corners. A car doing 230mph down the straight is no more impressive than one doing 200mph. Driving round the outside of someone on a corner IS impressive."

Rating: Positive (1)     Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

4. Posted by Martin B, 17/05/2015 20:29

"Good comments ape, I agree with all of them. Pirelli may have to change their view on tyres though or leave.
"

Rating: Neutral (0)     Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

6. Posted by Insane Reindeer, 16/05/2015 8:08

"But. None of this is even close to being in the rule book for next year yet as far as I can see. Has anyone asked the teams that were not present, especially the new American team, what they think about all of this? Forget the new ideas for 2017 for a minute, what I am more interested in is what will happen with Pirelli and the new team. Firstly Pirelli are already on record as saying that they are against that idea. Secondly how will the new team be able to make the best judgement on what tyres to use as they will not have the decades of old data to go back over? Thirdly are we going to see a year of races run on the longest lasting tyre and a single pit stop right at the beginning of the race? Fourth. Has this now opened with way for Michelin to come back and does that mean Pirelli are on their way out or do they fancy sticking around for a fight?

And to anyone who yearns for the old days of big tyres, bugger all aero and ancient engine technology, well....."

Rating: Neutral (0)     Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

8. Posted by Hondawho?, 16/05/2015 7:41

""Re fuelling to make the sport more exciting"!!! Really!!!!

Have you any idea the extra costs this puts into the sport? All refuelling does it make a Fast sprint type race into even more of an endurance race. If I wanted to watch an endurance race I'll watch LM series.

What is needed is fast car to car action with overtaking ant drivers keeping an eye on or now being told how to drive to save their tyres, engines or now " come in for fuel!

Heaven forbid what is going on at the top????"

Rating: Neutral (0)     Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

10. Posted by scf1fan, 16/05/2015 1:16

"@Mugmug, actually quite easy to answer, though not a short answer . . . And please don't take my (sometimes) humorous writing style as personal criticisms . . . Roughly in the order you raised them; then I'll comment.

I will probably never spend that amount of money on a ticket for any sport, even F1 which is by far my favorite! (I might make an exception if I ever wind up touring a country and something special just happens to be going on at that time; maybe.) In the past, I've walked the course at Monaco, and when I lived in/near Indy I went to Carb day and practice a few times, but the race only once; Swede Savage died that year, among others. Frankly I find the coverage on TV so stupendously more interesting that I find it hard to justify going to any race. But . . . to address the one aspect of your comment, I ain't watching/going/listening for the sound!! Period! (More on that later.)

For DRS and the like, I'll lump those into one group as "extra-curricular-technological" gadgets and such . . . Actually, I'll tend to agree with you here - other than to say that, there is a rule book and the objective of the team is to get as much out of the rule book as they possibly can!! (Or dare!! Just ask Smokey Yunick (RIP) with his 4/5 scale "stock" car!) Do I like some rules better than others? Meh, as long as everyone plays by the same rules and the rules seem to fulfill the greater goal . . . (in this case, F1 as the pinnacle of single seat open wheel "road" racing) . . . which is always arguable to some extent. You have to remember though that part of the DRS situation (for example) was caused by all the cries of "passing was too difficult" and the races have become too much like a "parade." So we got DRS and we do have more passing, though to me, the passes are somewhat less meaningful than they had been. Now, if you've read some of my other posts you will have seen that I've made some pretty specific (and rationale) suggestions on how to improve that aspect of the race without needing to resort to what most people call the "gimmicks." Minimize the aero (wings) and harden up the tires! (Policed by, if you lose to much of your tires during the race, you're out!) This will widen the usable track throughout the race as well as improve the racing through several other "knock-on" effects. So in general I prefer "simple" rules . . . but that doesn't necessarily mean that they will result in simple cars.

Now, here's why the "anti" current power unit folks make me scratch my head . . . It's a RACE! First one across the line wins. Period! (Personally I'd like to see a set of rules like "Here's 100kg of gas, don't exceed these volumes/sizes, only variations of current road technology allowed +/-, make it safe; On your marks . . . ! Well, my fantasy rules anyway . . . ) Many of the issues you've listed are not issues with the PU, other than maybe the sound! The type of PU doesn't dictate how many will be allowed in a season, or how much gas it can use per hour, those are flat-out made up rules. And, again from prior posts, I don't agree with a lot of those . . . but they aren't PU technology issues. Secondarily, high-tech companies want to show their stuff with high tech products. Would F1 be better off without MB and Honda? Do you think Audi/VW/Porsche will show up if they can only make "run of the mill" engines? I would say no. That will make the sport less interesting to me.

Didn't you see John Watson sputter on lack of fuel with his Cosworth which allowed Mario win the race in Holland? (Hope I have my facts right on that, the TV coverage here was pretty poor at that time . . . and my memory maybe isn't so hot either . . . ) Fuel issues are not new, but at that time they were controlled by the teams! ("Errr, maybe if we put a bit less gas in the car we'll beat so-and-so to the first corner . . .") Yes, I would prefer that! Technically though, how many V-8s or V-10s would you need to get through a season at 20,000 rpm? If the rules said that only 4 of those engines would be allowed, the teams would be babying them too. So, as I've stated in other posts, I think the whole business of limiting engine numbers (to try to control costs) and fuel flow (to try to control power) is not good for the sport. A blown engine, or running out of gas (and the weight of the additional gas for that matter) during a race are their own penalties.

Though that will bring me back to one of my other <ahem> favorite topics, in that the front runners would then just put a new engine in for every race and the back markers would fall further behind. So there is a happy medium here, and I think the current rules are perhaps a bit too tight on the number of engines and the limits on fuel flow. For the most part, MONEY = SPEED! That is the age old adage in racing; and left unchecked, that will result in a "boring" procession.

So, without me burning up the rest of the page, I'll reiterate my major points; it's a race to a finish line, and everyone is (should be) playing by the same rules. I don't care how it sounds, and as long as it's done as (arguably) safely as reasonably possible, the faster the better without regard to a specific technology . . . (Aren't the Audi diesels an interesting and FAST technology at Le Mans? Do they "wail" at 18k? No, they will barely do 6 or 7k. (Or there about.)) And guess what . . . For a given amount of fuel, (that is, equal in use between the two units) a hybrid PU will smoke a straight internal combustion engine EVERY time. Yes they do cost somewhat more (and I've made suggestions in other posts that could help with that) but this is supposed to be the pinnacle of racing technology!! (And not a fuel economy run either; I'll agree.) There are other events for noise, or for passing, or for crashes, etc., etc.. (And I do believe some of the missing "noise" would be addressed if the RULES allowed the PUs to get enough gas to reach 18-20k rpms. Which they can do! And at that point, they would probably have around 1000 HP . . . but then again, they would probably only last a couple of races . . . So there is the tradeoff that needs to be evaluated.)

(As a side note, personally I don't like SPEC racing! If I could, I'd like to see each team with it's own chassis, engine/PU, gear box and tires! (Or at least some choices in those matters.) That would probably be unsustainable cost wise though, so I'm "ok" with the current setup, but do feel that some of the "rules" could be improved. :-(

So, in all honesty, the sport's "problems" are not a PU (technology) issue. Get 20+ competitive cars on the track and let the viewers decide if they want to watch it. Not everyone will; can't help that, but I will. (Unless it goes to some wildly priced pay-per-view. ;-)

Please pardon any grammar, rambling or syntax errors . . . My fingers are starting to smoke a little . . . :-)"

Rating: Positive (3)     Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

12. Posted by Mugmug, 15/05/2015 22:26

""@scf1fan
I'm not trying to be sarcastic or derogatory, but you seem to be just fine with the current rules/PUs so let me ask you a question. For the current cost of a decent F1 ticket $350-500 , which would you rather go to, a race where the cars are screaming at 18000 RPM, with wide tires, no DRS, with some ballsy overtaking moves that if you saw them, you'd never forget. Or, the current PUs, that are lucky to achieve 12000 RPM, are begging for more fuel, and have to last 4-5 races, which means they are de-tuned and sound like a leaf blower.
Maybe I'm old school, but no way would I shell out that kind of money to listen to and watch something that puts me to sleep.
And yes I've been to races with both types of PUs."

Rating: Neutral (0)     Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

14. Posted by nonickname, 15/05/2015 16:38

"Great savings.. now they have to cart bowers and teams to refuel??
I don't think most of these guys could organize a fete and they try to run a F1 team.Easy solution. FORCE them to run on the budget available to Marussia, and drop all the rules."

Rating: Positive (6)     Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment