Pelican Parts Forums - F1 - What should the rules be?

Pelican Parts Forums (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/)

- Off Topic Discussions (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/off-topic-discussions/)

- - F1 - What should the rules be? (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/off-topic-discussions/821438-f1-what-should-rules.html)

Sounds like many of you long for the 1960s. Funny that NASCAR gets blasted for using archaic tech, yet that seems to be the predominant response here.

I really think my fuel idea would solve alot of the current complaints. ....
Still restrict the amount of fuel total to be used during the race.
It'll be up to the teams to determine when they can up the rate for more power. .... This will keep the green aspect of it in itself. ...
More fuel means higher revs, solves part of the sound problem. .....
Ban fuel flow rate restriction.....

I think the electric motors on board are awesome, it's a technology that needs to be further pushed. .... especially on the turbo side. ...

Quote:

Originally Posted by onewhippedpuppy (Post 8172553)

I agree with Jeff, damn near unlimited. F1 used to be a proving ground for many technologies that eventually trickled down to normal cars. They should be the fighter jets of auto racing, the pinnacle of no holds barred performance. They are well into the too many restrictions realm, way too NASCAR. When the pundits are focusing on nuances such as the subtle differences in nose cone shape, they have officially jumped the shark.

WHo is Jeff?

Eliminate 90% (or more ) of the aero assist as a starting point.

If I want to see pushrod engines and no innovation, I can go watch historic racing. F1 should be about the pinnacle of automotive engineering and driving.

I like the way Le Mans encourages innovation without too many restrictions. The leading cars had four, six, and eight cylinders with different hybrid technologies. I want the unlimited nature of F1 to push engine, chassis, and design that will ultimately trickle-down to mainstream production. I like not having refueling as it is a real-life constraint. I agree with other to get rid of fuel flow restrictions and let that be part of race craft.

I like the idea of energy recovery systems and managed energy reserves - that's a real-world way to have lower HP engines with a passing or freeway entry mode.

When I think about ABS, traction control, launch mode, etc. - I agree they don't belong in racing. Seeing how different drivers launch is part of the fun.

Unlimited F1: 4WD turbine driven active aero ground-effect auto-shifting cars that would basically drive themselves and have one monkey inside, trying to survive G-forces.

It would be a slot-car race for techno geeks, with spectacular crash from time to time, spewing car- and body parts all over the track.

I think it's good as it is, it's pushing technology further, but technology that still might have a chance to be used in real cars.

Make it unlimited but the yearly team budget is capped at 20 million and consumables can not exceed $100k per race. Oh and each team is allowed 2 cars that must last the season, all repairs cut into the 20 mil.

Quote:

Originally Posted by beepbeep (Post 8173384)

There ya go. Racing as it was meant to be.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Por_sha911 (Post 8173199)

WHo is Jeff?

Porsche-O-Phile. I prefer to use real names when possible.

The last thing F1 needs to do is become yet another spec racing series where there is no difference in the cars. That is just a driving contest and we have enough of those.

I can see the point of trying to reign in the costs of F1. When the top teams are spending hundreds of millions how can a new team compete? Money alone does not do it or Ferrari would be winning.

The cars are already approaching the limits of human endurance. There has to be some war to keep the speeds from increasing. I hate the fuel limits where it becomes an economy race. Who can get to the checker first with the best gas mileage is not what F1 should be, yet there must be some way to limit the total speed of the car.

I saw some expert calculate that if a car was built with no restrictions and had all the bells and whistles of active suspension, traction control, full aero, ground effects, ABS and so on it would be running laps approaching 300 MPH and G loads so high no human could endure more than a few laps. Almost any wreck would be fatal.

My rules:

No traction control and no ABS even though every new street car sold must have those to comply with DOT regulations.

No refueling
Unlimited tire changes.
A maximum fuel flow or a intake restrictor
Rev limit
Obvious size and shape guidelines and weight minimums
Limit the aerodynamics to single plane front and rear.

Revert to the old rules: Three-liter engines of any configuration (get completely rid of ERS), transmissions free, races of 200 miles or two hours, whichever comes first.

I'd also revert to the old weight limits - what, 1340 pounds or so? The weight limit this year was increased, which is what I gather has led to the midget drivers - no, struggle as I might, I don't get the connection, but maybe I've got this whole thing wrong....

Cast-iron brakes, no moveable aero (ditch the hydraulic rear-wing system); I think with iron brakes you'd see a lot more passing, thanks to longer braking distances.

No refueling, anyone who wants to supply tires may do so.

Maintain all current safety regs.

I really do not see how F1 can continue on its current trajectory. Everybody - and I mean everybody - expresses concern over the expense of fielding a team, but there seems to be no resolution to this problem. My resolution would be to make the cars much less expensive to build and maintain.

How about Bernie sharing the profits with the teams. Maybe then the lesser teams will have the money to be competitive.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 5String43 (Post 8174343)

The midget drivers have always been preferred, but previously the car could be made so much lighter than the weight limit that they could still ballast the car of a bigger driver to the cg height and weight distribution that they wanted.

Now the ERS's have added a lot of weight to the cars, and even the increased minimum weight is not enough, such that the bigger drivers on the teams without the big bucks to optimize the car are carrying little or no ballast, or even being slightly over the minimum weight. Thus you see some going on starvation diets so that they can add ballast to the car.

That is why I would propose a minimum driver weight, not car weight with driver. The limit would be high enough that no physically fit driver would be over it. Then ballast the lighter drivers with ballast at a specific height and wheelbase location such that the ballast is approximately at the drivers center of mass.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iciclehead (Post 8171886)

Gentlemen, it was suggested in the German F1 forum that we need a rules rethink in F1, and am starting this thread to have the discussion.

My thoughts:

1. I believe that F1 ought to have some relationship to normal cars, not in the sense that they should look like passenger sedans, but rather that they only use technologies that have some plausible likelihood of being in our motoring over time.

2. Aero is the most egregious area where current F1 thinking is wrong as over the past few years, most of the winning cars have won by having some sort of aero advantage (blown diffusers, now the front/rear suspension linkage, historically ground effects etc). I would propose that we have a limited plan (as in shadow area of the car) with a fully flat floor and allow only very tiny wings, just enough to trim the car so it doesn't try to fly. Raise the minimum ride height to something around the ride height of our beloved Porsches. Limit the wetted (as in total surface area of the vehicle) so as to minimize extraneous protrusions and nonsense.

3. Materials. Limit the materials to steel, aluminium, titanium, carbon fibre, ceramics.

4. Engines. Turf the idiotic energy recovery systems or downplay them significantly. I like the standard engine management system. Go back to displacement based engine rules. Cars must be able to start themselves, unaided by external devices. Must use pump gas.

5. Raise weight limits by 100kg or more, partly to eliminate the nuttiness around design and midget drivers.

6. Tires. No tire warmers, but unlimited tires, get some competition back and let them change to their hearts content.

7. 4 guys over the pit wall. No power or air tools allowed. Fuel if you want, but only at the rate of a good Shell station gas pump.

8. Transmissions. I could go either way on flappy paddle shifters, but my vote would be for shifters closer to street cars, get the drivers more engaged in driving and less in computer games.

9. No telemetry. Downloads of data allowed at pit stops. Radio communication to driver is OK.

Thoughts? Improvements?

Dennis

IMO most of that is WRONG.
I agree with getting rid of the STOOPID energy recovery systems, that was just a dumb gimic to make the tree-huggers happy.
And I agree they should not have limits on tires. I say run whatever you can make or find that works best, that way tire technology can grow.

But for the rest of the limitations you suggest, I got to go thumbs down. Limitations and meddling is what is killing the sport.

F1 is, AND HAS ALWAYS BEEN, the cutting edge of technology.
Countries have always done their best to build and design the fastest car using their best technology. And that is what has made F1 special.

If want to make it some dumbed down spec-racer wanna-be go watch nascar or indy cars.

I'd rather se F1 die that have that happen any more than it already has.

F1 should be the best that is possible.
Tghe best design, the best materials, the best controls.

Yes, they cal limit the engine size and weight as they have done for a long time, that doesn't hurt the sport unless they completely change the design every two years (ya hear that bernie you dork?)

Instead they should allow the technology to evolve to it's limits, let us see what is possible.
THAT is what makes F1 special.

Here's what I would do:

Make very minor or no changes year to year, let the technology evolve.
No limits on engine design or performance except:
3 liter N/A or 1.5 liter turbo. As many cylinders and you want, the more the better.
Limit 12 engines a year per TEAM. Run out of engines, someone has to sit and watch.
Must burn gasoline (racing gas is fine).
Gearbox? Whatever you want as long as the driver shifts and not the computer, replace them every race if you want.
Minimum weight? Fine where it's at.
Suspension? Whatever works best. No limits of aero or ground effects or electronic aids.
Whatever technology makes the cars faster is good.
Let the damn things get so fast the drivers blackout from G forces and become the limiting performance factor.
THAT would be cool.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Plumley (Post 8173307)

If I want to see pushrod engines and no innovation, I can go watch historic racing.

Seriously. The curmudgeon factor is high in this thread.

I like the rules the way they are. It is the cutting edge of racing and the rules should be too. After all it is Formula One; the TOP formula.

I would like to see fuel flow limit increased though so they can rev to 15,000 rpm as needed and as the rules allow.

It was getting to where the cars would never break unless they hit something and as every engineer knows, if it's not broke it doesn't have enough features!

P.S. I think standing restarts are good too.

I think the attendance at Hockenheim has their attention now. Whatever the future holds, it seems they recognize that the current series as it is is boring.

You can sniff "curmudgeon" all you want, but if it isn't raw, exciting racing, then I'm just too busy doing other things to care.

I swear this forum could be a serious part of psychological research, but I digress.

As I tell my friends, I am not as dumb as I look, my initial posting is based on some thought about "why not make it unlimited in every respect" and certainly the last 20 years or so of F1 or other forms of racing has demonstrated that the state of the art has gotten to the point where a car/engine/suspension/tire system could be built that would exceed the human factor by a significant amount, if full computerized controls were allowed, the strapped down ape would be irrelevant and, most importantly, no one would watch.

So somewhere, we need some form of regulations that finds the middle ground between this and a spec series a la Nascar or CART. Question is, is that possible or desireable, hence my thoughts on the matter.

I keep coming back to what parts of modern F1 might I eventually find in my Porsche, as part of the racing improving the breed, and can see all sorts of things like carbon fibre, better braking systems and so forth, but cannot see any of the aero things ever appearing on a car near me.

What we regular humans want is mechanical grip, high speed stability, ever better power to weight ratios, cornering power and so forth....so how do we make rules and regulations that encourage development of those kinds of things.

The thought on plan area and wetted area controls along with reasonably high ride height are some pretty limited regulations, lots of room for innovation there without making aero the dominant factor it is today.

In discussion with my very limited set of friends, we tend to agree that seeing a driver working a car to its limits, dealing with its limitations and exerting racecraft is a big part of the appeal.

Dennis

Reduce the aero grip

Increase the HP

Do not allow communication between the driver and the pits.

Make the cars look better.

Bring back the clutch....