2014 Random F1 Discussion

codename_47 · PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 1:35 am

momo1911 wrote:

Scotty wrote:

When I started watching F1, and grew up with it from 2002, through to around 2007 only have, collectively, around 7-8 races which were really exciting. This year alone, I'd call 5-6 races exciting, and we are only half way home. Only 2-3 races were disappointing, and still they were miles better than a typical 2004 era boring race.

Yes the cars have lost their sound, that makes them great. But there is no doubt the racing has improved by a mile. DRS and even KERS maybe gimmicks, but it's made F1 awesome.

You are forgetting that drivers used to be allowed to do whatever they wanted on track because they respected each other. Now, you can't block an opponent, and you don't even have to really work hard to make passes with DRS. There is still a lot of great overtakes, don't get me wrong, but there are serious problems that affect even the casual fan. For one, the cars are ugly. Race cars shouldn't be ugly. When NASCAR stopped racing boxes with wings, people suddenly seemed more interested in it. (I know I was) There's a reason Indycar didn't choose to run the Deltawing and it has nothing to do with economics. Secondly, the cars are not powerful or mechanically impressive of their own accord. The engines have little to no character, and not enough power. They are shoehorning hybrid/regen technology into purpose built race cars. This is Formula One, not endurance racing. Nothing on a Formula One car will ever trickle down to streetcars. They don't use regular brakes, they don't use reasonable tires, and their hybrid technology is purpose-built to do one thing and that's win races. Therefore, the sport is less pure in my honest opinion. At least back in 1998-2007, drivers had to keep it on track. They had to work hard to set up and complete a pass. And nobody pretended that these cars are some kind of direct analog with street machinery.

Pure Vs Dull is better than slightly less pure but much more exciting?

I remember back then how exciting qualifying was, mainly because if you were on pole you had a huge shot of winning the race and if you weren't the the top 5, forget it.
Entire races would go by without any passes taking place anywhere but the pit lane (at least, that's what we saw on TV)

Yeah, the drivers were racing flat out, but to what end? Due to the ridiculous aerodynamic appendages that sprouted they couldn't do anything about their opponents on track so it was all just sprinting between pitstops, great for the drivers and teams, but not for anyone who wants to watch.

If you want that type of racing now, there is WEC, where to be fair it looks like they do push at 100% and for much longer distances than a 2 hour (max) F1 race.
Not being negative about that comparison either, but if that's the style of racing you want to see, you are catered for.
F1 has been something else for a long time now, and is all the better for it IMO

momo1911 · PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 2:07 am

Quote:

Pure Vs Dull is better than slightly less pure but much more exciting?

I remember back then how exciting qualifying was, mainly because if you were on pole you had a huge shot of winning the race and if you weren't the the top 5, forget it.
Entire races would go by without any passes taking place anywhere but the pit lane (at least, that's what we saw on TV)

Yeah, the drivers were racing flat out, but to what end? Due to the ridiculous aerodynamic appendages that sprouted they couldn't do anything about their opponents on track so it was all just sprinting between pitstops, great for the drivers and teams, but not for anyone who wants to watch.

If you want that type of racing now, there is WEC, where to be fair it looks like they do push at 100% and for much longer distances than a 2 hour (max) F1 race.
Not being negative about that comparison either, but if that's the style of racing you want to see, you are catered for.
F1 has been something else for a long time now, and is all the better for it IMO

Very true and you have valid points. Especially toward the end of the grooved tires, the aero factor was extreme. But is Formula One still the most challenging drive on Earth? To me, that crown... kinda has to go to Indycar!

StefMeister · PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 10:35 am

Bernie seems to be saying that the Standing restarts will not go ahead next year:
http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 97159.html

Quote:

A rule that was planned for 2015, it will probably not even create in the blue FIA book. "There will be no standing start after a safety car phase," promises Ecclestone. "What we have seen in Budapest, was good enough."

kals · PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 12:44 pm

momo1911 wrote:

But is Formula One still the most challenging drive on Earth? To me, that crown... kinda has to go to Indycar!

Really? For what reasons?

ellis · PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 12:51 pm

Wouldn't say modern IndyCar is particularly challenging. It's not easy, but challenging? Well maybe when it was CART with 950hp turbo charged monsters.

I'd say current WEC LMP1 Hybrids and modern F1 cars with the turbos are the most challenging.

micha · PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 1:50 pm

Are we looking at the car in specific or the overall picture?

Looking solely at the cars, don't ask me. Probably F1 and Indycars. I recon a LMP1 isn't that hard to drive (for experienced drivers, not the average joe) as the races are longer and you don't want your driver exhausted after 90 minutes. They have driver-swaps but in the longer races they're back in the car within 4 to 6 hours. So no real rest.

Looking at the overal picture I'd probably pick NASCAR. The schedule is brutal. 36 races, not counting the All-star race or the Dual's at Daytona. Mostly back to back races across the USA.
I don't think there is any racing schedule with more races.

Антон · PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 2:07 pm

A line-up of 20 iconic Formula 1 cars will race on the 2014 Singapore Grand Prix support bill this season.
https://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/news/sin ... 2--f1.html
This will be an expensive race :roll:

kals · PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 2:37 pm

Антон wrote:

This will be an expensive race :roll:

Huh? What?

Fish88 · PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 3:44 pm

I assume he points at the classic cars on a street course, with amateurs behind the wheel. That will end in some tears.

LucasWheldon · PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 3:45 pm

micha wrote:

Looking at the overal picture I'd probably pick NASCAR. The schedule is brutal. 36 races, not counting the All-star race or the Dual's at Daytona. Mostly back to back races across the USA.
I don't think there is any racing schedule with more races.

don't forget the drivers that race for the 3 national series in the same weekeng like Kyle Busch, Joey Logano, Carl Edwards and Brad Keselowski, driving heavier cars with difficult handling in longer races

kals · PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 3:53 pm

Fish88 wrote:

I assume he points at the classic cars on a street course, with amateurs behind the wheel. That will end in some tears.

That's what I thought too. But let's give these guys some credit. There are some amateurs but typically these cars are driven by seasoned professionals, plus it's not as if every historic F1 race ends in multiple crashes. That attitude is amateur.

Fish88 · PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 4:08 pm

kals wrote:

Fish88 wrote:

I assume he points at the classic cars on a street course, with amateurs behind the wheel. That will end in some tears.

That's what I thought too. But let's give these guys some credit. There are some amateurs but typically these cars are driven by seasoned professionals, plus it's not as if every historic F1 race ends in multiple crashes. That attitude is amateur.

True, but going by Monaco this year a lot of classics will end up in damage.

kals · PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 5:00 pm

Yes because contemporary racing cars aren't expensive neither do they crash regularly.

A few crashes at Monaco doesn't mean all historic racers are amateurs who can't navigate a race circuit and crash all the time. That's idiotic.

Gaara · PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 5:06 pm

Yeaa, just because they crashed a lot at Monaco, doesn't mean it'll be the same in Singapore. Plus they were in different races, qualifying sessions and practices over two days, this is twenty cars in what, one race plus quali/practice?

kals · PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 5:09 pm

Gaara wrote:

Yeaa, just because they crashed a lot at Monaco, doesn't mean it'll be the same in Singapore. Plus they were in different races, qualifying sessions and practices over two days, this is twenty cars in what, one race plus quali/practice?

Correct, it is just that Russian being a spammer again, making no sense nor justifying his silly comments. I wished he'd give it a rest.

cookie · PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 5:51 pm

kals wrote:

momo1911 wrote:

But is Formula One still the most challenging drive on Earth? To me, that crown... kinda has to go to Indycar!

Really? For what reasons?

Power steering, those Indycar drivers really need to work on the road and street courses. Compare one of those onboard laps to an F1 onboard lap. When I watch the F1 drivers, they seem in control most of the time and just drive smooth, managing tyres and fuel. But when I watch Indycar the drivers just seem to barely hang on to the car. It looks more difficult to me than F1.

momo1911 · PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 6:47 pm

It's this,

Quote:

Power steering, those Indycar drivers really need to work on the road and street courses. Compare one of those onboard laps to an F1 onboard lap. When I watch the F1 drivers, they seem in control most of the time and just drive smooth, managing tyres and fuel. But when I watch Indycar the drivers just seem to barely hang on to the car. It looks more difficult to me than F1.

combined with the variance in tracks. Street tracks, small ovals, big ovals, Indy, sweeping roadies, tight roadies, etc. F1 now is literally three or four cool tracks and then the rest are forgettable.

Scotty wrote:

Bullshit. Everything on your road car, from a performance to a safety perspective came from Formula 1, why will it change? The reason F1 updated the rules were due to road car relevance, if anything, these current cars will trickle more technology than ever into road cars.

Yeah because watching someone set up a pass (being stuck behind someone) for 30 laps behind another car was fucking thrilling (uhhh it wasn't).

So you believe F1 should have kept the NA V8's from last year? Naturally aspirated engines have been around for 130 years. It's been done. Turbochargers and hybrid regen technology is the future. Why stay stuck in the past?

Indycar more challenging than F1? You're having a laugh mate. Only thing that makes them more challenging isn't the cars, they're the sub-par tracks they drive on and the amateur drivers. The same sub-par tracks that send drivers into crash fences.

I would love to see turbo engines in F1. Engines bigger and louder cause this sport is put out there as the world's premier racing series.

Also, do you really think the drivers are going to say, "yeah the new cars are less powerful and easier to drive"? Obviously not, because that's not in the best interest of the sport. Look, all I know is I don't watch F1 near as much as I used to. There's more to racing than simply passing.

Also, I find it ironic that nobody addressed my comments about racecar tech. Really? Your street car uses carbon ceramic brakes? Good luck stopping when you go for a quick spin to the store! You have push to pass? Dang, I wish my car had that. Oh, you use purpose built racing slicks too? Treaded tires don't relate very much to F1 slicks. (compound of rubber used for F1 is completely different on a chemical level from what is used in even track DOT radials.) Wait, shouldn't F1 cars have ABS, traction, and stability control then? What about airbags? Did those come from Formula One racing? I think people are just enamored with the sport because they love it. I'm guilty of this with NASCAR. But I don't run around saying people are stupid or ignorant for thinking the racing isn't quite as real as it used to be.

Антон · PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 7:31 pm

kals wrote:

Correct, it is just that Russian being a spammer again, making no sense nor justifying his silly comments. I wished he'd give it a rest.

it`s a my topic

De Cesaris fan · PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 7:32 pm

I think the cars this year are the hardest they've been to drive for a while. In Hungary alone we saw at least 4 incidents with drivers putting the power down too hard and losing the back end.

I've had my moans at F1 over the last few years, and I've made it clear that my interest has been declining. However, I've enjoyed quite a few races this year and I'm really liking how challenging the cars look to drive. I'd still rather see ground effects to reduce clean air/aero dependency, rather than relying on DRS, and I'd still rather see better circuit designs and classic tracks rather than the big wide boring identical new circuits with five miles of run off. Having said all this, my interest in F1 has really come back over the last few races, so they must be doing something right.

As for Indycar, I'm not sure if the cars are any harder to drive. I think the drivers have to work harder on some of the bumpy street circuits (I'm sure we've seen some drivers with some pretty bad blisters on their hands?), and they certainly have to be diverse to switch from ovals to road courses, but I think the current F1 cars would be equally difficult to drive on some of those street circuits.

momo1911 · PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 7:42 pm

De Cesaris fan wrote:

I think the cars this year are the hardest they've been to drive for a while. In Hungary alone we saw at least 4 incidents with drivers putting the power down too hard and losing the back end.

I've had my moans at F1 over the last few years, and I've made it clear that my interest has been declining. However, I've enjoyed quite a few races this year and I'm really liking how challenging the cars look to drive. I'd still rather see ground effects to reduce clean air/aero dependency, rather than relying on DRS, and I'd still rather see better circuit designs and classic tracks rather than the big wide boring identical new circuits with five miles of run off. Having said all this, my interest in F1 has really come back over the last few races, so they must be doing something right.

You know what, I can relate to this. I stopped watching F1 for the most part from around 2010 until just this year. Part of the reason for my renewed interest is that the sport is making a concerted effort to make the racing more enjoyable for the fans. As a fan, I can always appreciate that. I just feel that, along the way, grand prix racing (from a business, sociological, and aesthetic perspective) took a turn. The sport changed from this artistic, cutting edge version of car racing with a "no-holds-barred" attitude, more towards a stick-and-ball sport where anybody on Earth is supposed to be able to tune in for 5 seconds and see something that grabs their attention. Corners are cut during that process, and I truly believe the character and aesthetic appeal of the cars, as well as the pure power and torque output of the engines themselves, should have been last on the list.

Quote:

As for Indycar, I'm not sure if the cars are any harder to drive. I think the drivers have to work harder on some of the bumpy street circuits, and they certainly have to be diverse to switch from ovals to road courses, but I think the current F1 cars would be equally difficult to drive on some of those street circuits.

Understandable. I tend to give the nod to Indycar just because of aforementioned... moving hazards!

TBK-Light.com

2014 Random F1 Discussion

Who is online