2016 Random F1 Discussion Thread

LucasWheldon · PostPosted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 4:33 pm

it wouldn't work anyway

Gaara · PostPosted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 5:05 pm

Omega wrote:

LucasWheldon wrote:

instead of a strategy group, they should provide brainstorming with tbk members

Yes, ask 10 members and get 11 different opinions :lol:

Just 11?

JJ · PostPosted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 5:10 pm

Here's a simple solution to satisfy everyone: each race has different rules and cars. A single race represent some year of F1 history. Australia could be 1976, Bahrain 1963, China 1990, Sochi 2002, Barcelona 1984, Monaco 1955 and so on. The adaptability of a driver would be crucial factor for the championship. And no weekend would be predictable.
Teams only need to build 21 different cars (except old teams could use their old cars, with adjusted safety features of course).

Perfect formula for Formula 1, I dare to say. If it works for video games, it works for real

kals · PostPosted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 6:59 pm

JJ wrote:

Here's a simple solution to satisfy everyone: each race has different rules and cars. A single race represent some year of F1 history. Australia could be 1976, Bahrain 1963, China 1990, Sochi 2002, Barcelona 1984, Monaco 1955 and so on. The adaptability of a driver would be crucial factor for the championship. And no weekend would be predictable.
Teams only need to build 21 different cars (except old teams could use their old cars, with adjusted safety features of course).

Perfect formula for Formula 1, I dare to say. If it works for video games, it works for real

Building different cars under slightly different specifications for each event. That's pretty much how WRC used to do it.

LucasWheldon · PostPosted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 7:30 pm

other thing is to create a dissident low cost series that would race at the classic race tracks, with revenues going all to the teams

then some disagreements will happen, costs will rise, competition will die and the series will die like many others

Cheeveer · PostPosted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 10:42 am

Scotty wrote:

You guys are being kinda selfish.

One of the major points of F1 is to improve automotive engineering as a whole.

What most of you guys are saying is restrict and slow to the point where manufacturers won't get any benefit from F1 apart from bragging rights.

But through aero? Aero costs shitloads and are the most specific parts of a racing car.

Scotty wrote:

Some people are even saying it should be like Indycar. No it shouldn't. Indycar should be Indycar. F1 should be the epitome of cars, racing and speed.

I think that Indycar has kind of stumbled upon a neat aero solution that could work in F1. A solidly defined base, which the teams then can spend limited resources on on aero. The emphasis should be on aspects that are more interesting for automotive engineering as a whole. KERS, 4WD, suspension work, fuel efficiency, etc.

alex1369 · PostPosted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 11:49 am

F1 was its best from 2000 - 2005. Then they were the fastest. They only need to go back to that period of cars. It was simple wings etc..
And racing was good no matter if one team dominated..
Get back the V10!! (V8 also good but 3.0) And put gravel and grass on the asphalted runn off areas so there wont be penalties.
and pepole will come back to the tracks and TV.
Not this hybrid crap, and mgu shit. this aint for F1

Fabs · PostPosted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 12:00 pm

If aerodynamics were so important when designing a road car, shouldn't it be more efficient in traffic than out of it?

I don't know what the exact numbers are but I wouldn't be surprised if you spend a lot more time in traffic and behind other cars than in clean air.

Mika Kimi · PostPosted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 2:01 pm

alex1369 wrote:

F1 was its best from 2000 - 2005.

I can see why, judging your avatar. I believe '98/'99 was a lot better.

micha · PostPosted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 2:20 pm

It looks infinitely more sensible than that horrid thing Ferrari ran. I just don't want to lie upside down with either device. But hey, at least it's preventing something very rare from happening right?

In other news, Sauber is close to rock bottom and unless someone steps in I personally doubt they make it to the end of the season
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.ph ... eaves-team

Gaara · PostPosted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 2:25 pm

At the end of the day, what's more likely. Large heavy debris or an upside down car on fire?

kals · PostPosted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 2:29 pm

Gaara wrote:

At the end of the day, what's more likely.

TBK members finding anything and everything to bitch about.

Gaara · PostPosted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 2:37 pm

kals wrote:

Gaara wrote:

At the end of the day, what's more likely.

TBK members finding anything and everything to bitch about.

True.

But I do like it though, much better then what Ferrari ran and Scotty is right, this is the future of F1.

kals · PostPosted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 2:42 pm

Gaara wrote:

kals wrote:

Gaara wrote:

At the end of the day, what's more likely.

TBK members finding anything and everything to bitch about.

True.

But I do like it though, much better then what Ferrari ran and Scotty is right, this is the future of F1.

Agree with you on both points.

However, the HALO that Ferrari ran was FIA's solution which was originally presented to them by Mercedes. Whereas the canopy is entirely Red Bull.

LucasWheldon · PostPosted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 3:51 pm

one thing they must do is grant freedom of design so they could pick the best one

webbsy · PostPosted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 4:10 pm

LucasWheldon wrote:

one thing they must do is grant freedom of design so they could pick the best one

Not gonna happen.

Ian-S · PostPosted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 4:53 pm

New is not always better.

JJ · PostPosted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 4:54 pm

Gaara wrote:

At the end of the day, what's more likely. Large heavy debris or an upside down car on fire?

Due to Murphy's law someone flips it and the car catches fire at Albert Park next year. Hopefully not. On the other hand it can take decades until that happens, but so it can take decades until heavy debris hits the canopy.
The next bad accident probably happens when a wheel hits marshals, someone spins at a straight and gets t-boned, a flip and pileup at Eau Rouge, pole sitter stalls in the start, flipping car lands on the cockpit shattering the canopy etc. There will always be risks, but as long as they are improbable enough, we can live with them. Though, a knee-jerk reaction will always follow after the accident.

LucasWheldon · PostPosted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 5:42 pm

funny that we keep discussing that on the first race in the day of Senna death since the race he actually died

a crash that wouldn't had been prevented by a these solutions, as the suspension arm came from up

Speedworx · PostPosted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 8:48 pm

Scotty wrote:

You might not fathom it yet but every car in 30 years time will be a hybrid. It's technology will have F1 and LMP to thank for it.

....but F1 is supposed to be a sport, therefore it can have whatever engine it wants. It shouldn't be road car technology based (that's sportscar racing)

TBK-Light.com

2016 Random F1 Discussion Thread

Who is online