[8IhGpvH0]

...and to be honest, as much as I dislike the guy, for once, I agree with him.

What's the point in reintroducing slicks if you're going to gimp them with unnatural degradation features? Do you want to see racing or a strategy board game?

The problem with F1 is not mechanical grip. It's the f*cking downforce and crazy aero packages.
Adding gimmicks like Kers, DRS and weirdo tires are only tricks to generate artificial speed advantages. FIA officials pat eachother on the back because there is more overtaking this season. Great stuff, kudos to the guy who overtook someone with used tires with his DRS wide open. Well f*cking done!

I say ban wings.
Now that would suddenly start to be fun.

Edit: Link to the article

[Hrennilasi]

A prime example of the joke that is tyres is Kimi Raiikonnen dropping from 2nd to something 14th in the space of a couple of laps...

[Nothatspecial]

[my 5 cents worth]
Modern F1 cars are so close in performance that without these 'artificial' means to allow a car an advantage at times there'd be litle overtaking and probably a lot more accidents as attempts were made that came out badly.
People have, inded, been saying for years that the problem is to much aero' and not enough mechanical grip but even it that issue was addressed (yet again), it'd come back to the cars being closely matched again.
Personally, I think the current tyre spec' and rules is a pretty good idea - it gives the drivers and teams that can optimise tyre wear and degradation an advantage, those that burn them up, or don't use their qualifying options well, are penalising themselves.
Kimi should have come in as soon as he noticed any degradation as he'd have lost around 25 seconds rather than the 50 odd seconds by staying out and would have finished around 7th or 8th - by my estimate, of course - and possibly quite a bit higher as he'd've been on fresh tyres. That was, IMO, just a bad call, just like making the wrong call on a wet track.

Looking forward to this weekend to see who's going to be the first to get two wins this year - or if it's going to yet another driver to make 5 from 5

[Frodogzzz]

A prime example of the joke that is tyres is Kimi Raiikonnen dropping from 2nd to something 14th in the space of a couple of laps...

I think that's good in that the team actually have to have an understanding of the tyres and better plan your pit stops. Also communication between driver and team engineer and thus how the team works together as fluid as possible. However there should be more variability each weekend because we'll get to mid season and everyone knows what's going to happen on the Wednesday.

[Payodcapy542fro]

It's a team sport, and working out the tyres is all part of it. Mistakes will be made, but it's up to both team and driver to make tyres work. The Mercedes has always seemed to be harder on tyres, so they're bound to moan.

Personally I don't mind KERS, but DRS is a bit too artificial for me. Although I've enjoyed the racing generated by these changes all the same.

[yasalaioqe]

But surely there's a problem if you can't drive aggressively and push forward because you have to manage tires the entire race!?

So the F1 champion is not the fastest/best driver, it's the guy whose team has built a car that doesn't use up so much rubber and who's got the best head of race strategy? Kimi drove a brilliant race but didn't get rewarded a bit for it because his tires fell off a cliff right at the end. I don't think that's racing to be honest.

And Gordo, HOW has the aero issue been addressed properly? With an artificial DRS? As I say, we need drastic changes in the aero department. Just compare the front wing of an HRT with a McLaren and see what I mean.

To restore racing of the quality we had in the 70's and 80's, in my opinion we'd need to address

1) downforce (70% of the problem)
2) tires (30% of the problem)

It's a team sport, and working out the tyres is all part of it. Mistakes will be made

The driver should make the mistakes. Not the team's tyre strategy dude.

[Snweyuag]

The driver should make the mistakes. Not the team's tyre strategy dude.

It's certainly a shame if the team **** it up for the driver, like Raikkonen's race a few weeks ago. But, the team are also cocking it up for themselves.

I agree the aero issues need further addressing. If it was me making the decisions, I'd get rid of DRS and make all the cars run standard front and/or rear wings. Some adjustment available, but the same low down-force wing available to every team.

Once teams weren't allowed to develop engines, the aero package became very important. I think Marussia, Caterham and HRT and struggling to come up with a good one, and because they can't buy themselves an engine advantage, they're way off still.

[gennickhif]

'Mike, What I said was (with the two typo's corrected) "People have, indeed, been saying for years that the problem is to much aero' and not enough mechanical grip but even if that issue was addressed (yet again), it'd come back to the cars being closely matched again."

In no way did I intend to suggest it was addressed properly and surpised you read that into it.

It doesn't really matter what they do, the designers will find any means that can sneak through the rules to gain whatever advantage they can get, redarding the front wings, what is your point? Convergent development will generally end up with very similar results with some variations depending on teams focusing on different types of tracks - low drag/high speed Vs high downforce/low speed cornering as the chassis/bodywork can be a big influence on these, and other, properties.
Some of you may remember Renault and their strong starting performance which was due to a greater rearward CoG than the other teams - something that is now limited by the F1 regulations. Regulations that force the manufacturers to use ever more similar designs of engines and chassis to meet the reg's. In the past there were numerous engine configurations, from V8, flat 8, v and flat 12s and even a couple of 16 cylinder configurations - IIRC, Ferrari even had a 2 cylinder for monaco. Bores and strokes also varied.
perhaps they should have got rid of a lot of these limiting regulations, with basic weight, engine configuration, safety and perhaps fuel limitations? This could change several performance attributes but I would expect we'd lose the close racing that we currently have - I don't think anyone would like to get back to having the winner lap everyone else and cars finishing 6 laps in arrears?

[Fertassa]

'Mike, What I said was (with the two typo's corrected) "People have, indeed, been saying for years that the problem is to much aero' and not enough mechanical grip but even if that issue was addressed (yet again), it'd come back to the cars being closely matched again."

Apologies, I did misread indeed.

It doesn't really matter what they do, the designers will find any means that can sneak through the rules to gain whatever advantage they can get, redarding the front wings, what is your point? Convergent development will generally end up with very similar results with some variations depending on teams focusing on different types of tracks - low drag/high speed Vs high downforce/low speed cornering as the chassis/bodywork can be a big influence on these, and other, properties.
Some of you may remember Renault and their strong starting performance which was due to a greater rearward CoG than the other teams - something that is now limited by the F1 regulations. Regulations that force the manufacturers to use ever more similar designs of engines and chassis to meet the reg's. In the past there were numerous engine configurations, from V8, flat 8, v and flat 12s and even a couple of 16 cylinder configurations - IIRC, Ferrari even had a 2 cylinder for monaco. Bores and strokes also varied.
perhaps they should have got rid of a lot of these limiting regulations, with basic weight, engine configuration, safety and perhaps fuel limitations? This could change several performance attributes but I would expect we'd lose the close racing that we currently have - I don't think anyone would like to get back to having the winner lap everyone else and cars finishing 6 laps in arrears? I think there is also a commercial issue here, as I truly believe that the sport would benefit from imposing simple design standards for everyone to follow (which would gimp the ego of the big manufacturers who would have not much to gain from throwing in big sums of money into development into expensive aero packages). Motorsports doesn't have to be high-tech to attract viewers (look at Nascar). And we do not actually have close racing. We have close Trulli-train rides occasionally interrupted by artificial means (DRS & f*cked up tires). If we keep patching up with this sort of "aids", we might as well go for weapon- and boost-activation, just like Death Race or WipeOut...

[LoohornePharp]

OK, we agree to differ about the racing, that's .

With NASCAR*, it's close but that's largely due to the regulations being very tightly controlled - too controlled according to the teams on Sunday when the cooling restrictions to stop the 'truck and trailer' racing went a bit too far and had most of the field on the ragged edge of overheating even running in the pack.
For instance, they've just started using EFI and 16" wheels to reduce tyre blowouts due to overheating from the brakes.

*most of you will probably find it boring, especially on the ovals, but try catching one of the 'road' races where thing can get rather heated as some are definitely better and/or more aggressive than others and pay-back is a [female dog]

[Garry Hovard]

Whats a Tyre?

[RussellPG]

Something you wouldn't understand, sad, really...

[WapSaibian]

Something you wouldn't understand, sad, really...

Lol, wut, isnt it just a tire, but different spelling?

[dubGucKcolo]

With correct spelling , simpler than you expected, huh?
Apparently tyre behaviour is one of the hardest things to model when analysing suspension and chassis behaviour - quite important as tyre deformation is around half the total 'suspension' movement and, as it's effectively undamped, it may partially explain why some teams are having more trouble looking after they tyres than others. Then again, I would expect a lot to come down to the drivers and their driving style as some seem to manage better than their team mates.
Something else that needs careful management is the fuel, too much adds mass which slows down the car and increases wear on tyres and brakes while not having enough means they have to back off later in the race and potentially even run out or not have enough for the mandatory fuel check. BTW, anyone find out about whether they can use a 'sump' or other means of ensuring they have enough for the fuel test, even though they 'run out' of fuel in the main tank? There didn't seem to be anything in the FIA F1 regulations to prohibit it.
Regardless, roll on the weekend

[geniusxs81]

Just in, from Fernando Alonso himself (on Gilles Villeneuve):

"What I know of the father [Gilles] came only through films and obviously, the one I remember best is the duel he had with Arnoux at Dijon," Alonso said. "Unfortunately, these days, we no longer see this sort of fight because there are more difficulties to deal with: the cars are now dominated by aerodynamics and those sorts of passing moves are no longer possible.

At least we agree on something!

Edit: source

[M1zdL0hh]

I agree, bring back refueling, improve the tires and let them race again.

Watching driver’s tippy toe round the track trying to preserve the tyres is great fun.

[Vemnagelignc]

I agree, bring back refueling, improve the tires and let them race again.

Watching driver’s tippy toe round the track trying to preserve the types is great fun.

it wasn't that long ago everyone was complaining about refueling, people wanted it banned so the drivers had to actually manage the car.

No one is ever happy.

[GoodLover]

The problem with aero' was that it was supposedly difficult for a car to close up to the one in front because the turbulent (dirty) air reduced front downforce, leading to understeer. That's why they had the adjustable front wings a few years back, the wider front wings and narrower rear wings were intended to reduce the dirty air behind the cars and the front wing to be les suceptable to this turbulent air.
Seems to be working pretty well as there's a lot of close passing.

Someone mentioned using control wings, but the bodywork and, of late, exhausts make a major difference on how well they work by altering the airflow behind and ahead of the front and rear wings, respectively.

main problem of the DRS, for the teams/drivers seems to be that they have to decide what to go for with the top gear ratios - slightly short to maximise top speed without DRS (I figure that'd be what the guys that expect to qualify well will chose, expecting to have to do little passing) or slightly taller, so they have a speed advantage with DRS and can actually overtake. We've seem several ocassions where a car has pulled out to pass with DRS but hit the limiter before they can do so - perhaps they should have an extra 2/3/4 hundred rpm to go with the DRS?

Don't really like the new reg's coming up, but as F1 is supposed to be technology driven - Caterham have just announced a partnership with GE that both sides are very happy with, BTW - high efficiency turbo-charging and energy recovery has more real world potential than exotic high rev'ing NA engines.

[Smabeabumjess]

I'm not sure gearing is too much of an issue as they can run DRS whenever they want in Qual, and they use it, and as you know they can't change a thing after qual (well top 10 anyway).

It's just that they run into the same issues they would normally face, better than expected track conditions, use of KERS, and just sometimes both of these and a perfect tow really leaves them banging the rev limit (Red Bulls) while a more streamlined car (Renault) can get away with just using KERS too hold them off as they already have a higher top speed in general running.

[13spebampiliece]

I would say the gearing is critical - a little low would allow slightly better acc'n to the rev' limiter but restrict the top speed - this would apply for Red Bull, for instance, if they were set up expecting to lead and not need a slightly higher top speed to pass - the DRS and KERS having no affect when it's on the limiter.
A slightly higher top gear and it would reduce acc'n in top gear and potentially limit the top speed to the same or even slightly lower than the short gearing, depending on the drag* Vs available power - regardless, it will take longer to get there. However, the use of DRS would reduce the drag*, probably allowing better acc'n and top speed due to the drag reduction and taller gearing allowing more speed before the limiter is reached.
I would expect the DRS to have at least as much significance for the acc'n as for the top speed on a number of tracks.

*of course, the wing settings and exact vehicle configuration will also be a significant factor, even without the DRS when chosing the optimum gearing for the track.


Oh, P2 just starting