|
Engine noise something something something. Tronchetti Provera (Pirelli Chairman) reckons we'll see a reduction in laptimes by 4.5 secs next year (2.5 from the new tyres, 2 from the aero). Impacts (I think): Following through corners will be tougher given the need for clean air More fuel burned (assuming: longer acceleration periods, more drag due to higher speed) Physically harder on the drivers (higher corner speeds, more g's) Will this make the cars harder to drive and make the driver a more important part of the equation? Will it shake up the pecking order? Was this a knee-jerk to all the bitching about lap times from the drivers/commentators and minority of fans? Does any of this make F1 a better product?
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 14:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 11:32 |
|
|
I'll let wicka take this one.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 14:16
|
|
|
the new aero rules will favor mclaren and, to a lesser extent, red bull, both of whom are handicapped by engines somewhat (the former to a greater extent than the latter), so i'm worried that we will ultimately continue with mercedes domination
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 14:17
|
|
|
IanTheM posted:The blacking out actually started in F1, with some drivers getting dizzy in testing. I feel like the only way ground effects could be regulated is if there's just completely standardized floor tunnel dimensions like LMP cars have. CART had a hilarious slip streaming thing added with the Hanford Device. Literally a 90 degree angle plane added to the end of the rear wing, it reduced downforce and increased the size of the slip stream to produce what is ultimately probably the most insane era of closed circuit racing. 240 MPH side by side, getting pulled along even faster by all the sling shooting. Interesting, I thought those were still a form of "Gurney Flaps", but it seems that they were added to do a very specific job (as you describe). The Gurney Flap is much smaller, and increases both downforce and drag, while the Hanford Device is a lot taller, adds a lot of drag and actually reduces downforce. Dudley posted:The problem is if everyone pushes 100% with a perfect car all race, you get races even more static than the others we have now. I don't see how drivers actually pushing harder instead of putting around to conserve fuel and tires would make racing more static. I'm not saying you're wrong, I just don't get how. Can you elaborate? Ecstatic posted:Tronchetti Provera (Pirelli Chairman) reckons we'll see a reduction in laptimes by 4.5 secs next year (2.5 from the new tyres, 2 from the aero). His name sounds like the Latin motto for a
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 14:51
|
|
|
wicka posted:my favorite thing about the V12/V10 eras was how the louder engine noise cancelled out the turbulent airflow and allowed the cars to follow more closely Spectacle is important in motorsport.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 15:02
|
|
|
Myrddin_Emrys posted:I DONT GIVE A loving FLYING gently caress ABOUT RADIOS I second this notion to stfu about radios already. edit: also, are people really still moaning about engine noise?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 15:04
|
|
|
wicka posted:the new aero rules will favor mclaren and, to a lesser extent, red bull, both of whom are handicapped by engines somewhat (the former to a greater extent than the latter), so i'm worried that we will ultimately continue with mercedes domination I'm going to slightly quibble with the last bit, because Red Bull (or at least the bogan) has put Ferrari in its rearview mirror. Red Bull may pick up enough speed to be a bit more competitive with Mercedes, but that assumes that Merc doesn't figure out how to fully abuse the new aero rules like it did as Brawn.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 15:05
|
|
|
Ecstatic posted:Tronchetti Provera (Pirelli Chairman) reckons we'll see a reduction in laptimes by 4.5 secs next year (2.5 from the new tyres, 2 from the aero). Historically rule changes have produced faster cars than expected. 1998 is probably the best example where the rules were supposed to significantly slow down lap times but the cars were lapping nearly as fast as they were in '97 at the first race of the year.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 15:06
|
|
|
Alain Post posted:Spectacle is important in motorsport. understanding context is much, much more important. we don't have high-revving V8/10/12 engines anymore because the auto manufacturers who are footing the bill for half the sport in lieu of tobacco companies don't want to invest a billion dollars into engines that are totally and completely irrelevant to anything else they do. is fighting for the vroom vroom noise that's only fully audible to people at the track worth turning the sport upside down? why is this the hill you want to die on? people talk a big game about F1 needing to appeal to a younger audience. do you think they will achieve that by turning away the car manufacturers, turning away technology, turning away basically any possibility of major sponsors, and getting cosworth et al to build them loud gasoline engines? because that's the only way you're getting that noise back, my man. and hell, if you're trying to increase race day attendance, a literally deafening engine noise probably pushes away more people than it attracts. it'd be like complaining that no one shoots underhand free throws anymore. we're not going back, it's just a waste of breath. iospace posted:I'm going to slightly quibble with the last bit, because Red Bull (or at least the bogan) has put Ferrari in its rearview mirror. Red Bull may pick up enough speed to be a bit more competitive with Mercedes, but that assumes that Merc doesn't figure out how to fully abuse the new aero rules like it did as Brawn. that's fair. i think the biggest question is how much engine performance renault and honda can gain relative to mercedes given that development is now basically wide-open, which ultimately then comes down to how much more mercedes can squeeze out of an engine that's supposedly already producing 1000bhp, and obviously none of us have that information wicka fucked around with this message at 15:41 on Sep 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 15:35
|
|
|
F1 is and always has been a R&D platform for the motor, tyre, and petrochemical industry. If you want to see technology which was out of date 5 years ago then find out when your local track is holding a classic race and go watch that. If it's all about the noise for you then go watch drag racing and DUDE! THAT WAS SO COOL, IS MY EAR BLEEDING? I THINK IT VIBRATED MY SPLEEN!
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 15:51
|
|
|
The whole noise thing is dumb. It was a valid point when they forced everyone to go to V10s and you lost all these different engine sounds and they all started to sound the same but now I really don't see what's gained by having that droning sound be louder.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 15:52
|
|
|
Stop talking about loving engine noise. It just brings out the "make f1 great again" idiots.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 15:55
|
|
|
The manufacturers and promoters may discover that motorsport isn't run in a vacuum, and that their desire for tech research needs to be balanced with a product that people will actually be passionate about watching.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 15:59
|
|
|
and thus they would probably value a product that is entertaining to watch vs a product that is artificially loud to appease a vocal (heh) minority of complainers who are already watching the dang sport if they develop a formula that produces great racing AND is loud, more power to them, but the noise of the engines should never ever ever be considered, there are a million more important things
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 16:01
|
|
|
Just give us live internet streaming with the ability to choose to view whatever camera we want and listen to whatever we want. I'd pay good money for that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 16:05
|
|
|
Lou Takki posted:Just give us live internet streaming with the ability to choose to view whatever camera we want and listen to whatever we want. I'd pay good money for that. I want a WAGcam option.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 16:09
|
|
|
Norns posted:Stop talking about loving engine noise. It just brings out the "make f1 great again" idiots. If people want engine noise, they can go to NASCAR or V8 supercars 
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 16:20
|
|
|
gret posted:I want a WAGcam option. someone didn't watch singapore
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 16:24
|
|
|
Ecstatic posted:Engine noise something something something. It all depends if the drivers are still tip-toeing around the track trying to conserve tyres for most of the race and if we're still racing on tracks where all the drivers say it's "impossible to overtake". F1 to my mind should be the pinnacle of motorsport, drivers should be pushing as hard as they possibly can at all times during the race and not be penalised for doing so.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 16:30
|
|
|
Not exactly related to on track action, but if F1 adopted WEC style engine rules, I think we might see more manufacturer involvement and definitely more variety.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 16:43
|
|
|
George Zimmer posted:Not exactly related to on track action, but if F1 adopted WEC style engine rules, I think we might see more manufacturer involvement and definitely more variety. What rules exactly are you talking about here? Are you talking about LMP1 factory vs privateer here?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 16:44
|
|
|
LMP1 factory, sorry
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 16:45
|
|
|
George Zimmer posted:LMP1 factory, sorry What rules do you propose bringing over then and how would it increase involvement?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 16:48
|
|
|
LMP1 has 2.5 manufacturers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 16:50
|
|
|
Let's bring Toyota back.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 16:51
|
|
|
Alain Post posted:Let's bring Toyota back. And the other Schumacher
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 17:03
|
|
|
Human Grand Prix posted:LMP1 has 2.5 manufacturers. It always baffles me that LMP1 is held up as a great success when in reality its more or less on deathwatch. The rules are good on paper but the current field gives zero indication whether they'd work properly in practice.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 17:14
|
|
|
1500quidporsche posted:It always baffles me that LMP1 is held up as a great success when in reality its more or less on deathwatch. The rules are good on paper but the current field gives zero indication whether they'd work properly in practice. 2016 Le Mans entries LMP1: 9 (2 Audi, 2 Porsche (4 VAG), 2 Toyota, 2 Rebellion, and 1 ByKolles) LMP2: 23 (24 if you count Garage 56 as LMP2 this year) LMGTE: 27 Last year had 13 LMP1, 20 LMP2, 23 LMGTE. Nissan pulled out (-2) and both Audi and Porsche dropped a car between 2015 and 2016.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 17:22
|
|
|
Norns posted:And the other Schumacher 
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 17:24
|
|
|
MZ posted:It all depends if the drivers are still tip-toeing around the track trying to conserve tyres for most of the race and if we're still racing on tracks where all the drivers say it's "impossible to overtake". Yup, this is getting silly. How about... and hear me out here, before going apoplectic... sprint races? I think the general consensus on Mondays seems to be "watch the first 10 minutes and you're good". So if they would race a couple of short races, we'd have twice the start grid entertainment with less of the tire and fuel savings. Reverse the finishing order of the first race for the start of the second, and it's even more entertaining. Maybe even just make 2 or 3 races on the calendar sprint weekends or something, to try it out. At least it would add some variety.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 17:24
|
|
|
Ban engines. Keep radios.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 17:33
|
|
|
Kilmers Elbow posted:Ban engines. Formula E then?  Engineering joke: electric motors are not engines, and gas engines are not motors
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 17:37
|
|
|
Human Grand Prix posted:LMP1 has 2.5 manufacturers. I'd argue that that's due to the somewhat limited exposure of sportscar racing. The engine rules set a megajoule limit for the hybrid unit. How you get there is the manufacturers choice. At one point, there was a V6 diesel, V4 turbo, and an N/A V8 on the grid. Now at that time they had different MJ classes, but for F1 you could just set a hard limit and possibly get a similar variety.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 17:39
|
|
|
Kilmers Elbow posted:Ban engines. Ban racing, just have an hour long show of our favorite drivers quipping into a camera in different locations. Haha now Kimi is having a poo poo in Baku
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 17:42
|
|
|
Norns posted:And the other Schumacher I would be okay with this
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 17:48
|
|
I can't get enough of are Dan
|
1500quidporsche posted:It always baffles me that LMP1 is held up as a great success when in reality its more or less on deathwatch. The rules are good on paper but the current field gives zero indication whether they'd work properly in practice. How so?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 18:00
|
|
|
It's a lot easier to just blow it all up and start over than to fix F1. Auto Racing is in serious decline here in the USA anyway, so why not try something totally new? Anyway, ban wings.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 18:05
|
|
|
sportscars are constantly in a boom-bust cycle though
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 18:13
|
|
|
iospace posted:Formula E then? Excuse me what? I belive you are talking about power units?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 11:32 |
|
|
GramCracker posted:How so? ByKolles and Rebellion are a joke and should really be LMP2 teams. You're left with Toyota (who admit they're doing this to a budget) and VAG who run two teams with cars approximately as technologically sophisticated as an F1 car. I already think VAG are more or less benchmarking their performance to what Toyota does but if that's a bit too  the series is going to become a farce if any one manufacturer leaves. Imagine if it's just Audi and Porsche, or even if VAG pulls the plug altogether and it's loving Toyota running round Lemans by itself.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 18:19
|
|