planetf1.com

It is currently Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:06 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2017 10:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 12:36 pm
Posts: 22
Why can't they just handicap the cars? Use qualy to set the weights, from 1kg on pole down to 0 for last. Before all the silly grid penalties are applied, btw. The weight stays there all season, and gets added to race by race.

After half a dozen races the field should bunch up nicely.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2017 11:48 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 7:24 am
Posts: 625
Stable regulations year after year will result in the field closing up as there are ever diminishing returns on R&D. Whenever there is a step change in the regulations we see the field open up massively.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2017 11:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 9680
Location: Ireland
2012 was fantastic but too many people complained at the time. It was "too random", it was "too confusing", "the tyres had too much of an impact". No matter what version of F1 is produced you'll get people complaining

Personally I loved 2012. It was a modern classic

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost



FA#14


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2017 12:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 9:20 pm
Posts: 1749
2012 is the best season of F1 I've ever watched.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2017 3:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 1701
mcdo wrote:
2012 was fantastic but too many people complained at the time. It was "too random", it was "too confusing", "the tyres had too much of an impact".

If only these people could have foreseen the next 5 years, perhaps they would have been more grateful with what they had.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2017 4:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7773
angrypirate wrote:
Stable regulations year after year will result in the field closing up as there are ever diminishing returns on R&D. Whenever there is a step change in the regulations we see the field open up massively.



Stable regs will always do it. Even if the big teams spend 5 times as much as the small teams, each year they get less and less per buck, and although still ahead the gap gets smaller and smaller. (diminishing ret's)

The down side of this is that the factory teams get no useful development so go elsewhere.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2017 4:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 11:24 am
Posts: 2103
oz_karter wrote:
In the first 7 races in 2012, 7 different drivers won from 5 different teams.

The V8 engines provided a level of parity not seen in many many years (maybe ever).

The 4 years of Red Bull dominance, I believe, is not comparable to the 2014-2016 dominance of Mercedes. Whilst Red Bull ultimately came out on top from 2010-2013, there were many teams in the mix and very close championships (in some years).

2012 was a great year for F1. Even Maldonado won a race!

Renault were well known for having a weaker engine than Mercedes and Ferrari, but better efficiency (and lower weight) made it competitive. This can't be done now.

Whilst the rules restricting numbers of engines, gearboxes etc. were aimed at cutting costs, in my opinion this has stifled development and reduced parity as the engine manufacturers focus much more on reliability and reduce the number of possible upgrades.

When the 2021 rules come, the power units need to be simpler. It is possible to have hybrids without them being as expensive and complicated as the current units.

Dominance will happen at times, but 2014-16 can't happen again.


Red Bull wasn't even dominant in 2010 or 2012. The Ferrari, McLaren and Lotus were all pretty close to their pace over the course of the season. It was Webber not really being up to it which gave Vettel 4 titles as he won the lions share of races when Red Bull were quickest, whilst Button and Hamilton were taking points off each other.

_________________
I remember when this website was all fields.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2017 5:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3555
They were pretty dominant in 2010, they had nearly half a second over the Ferrari's on avg in Q.

2012 was a bit different because the McLaren could be quicker on it's day and we had the tyre situation in the early season.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2017 9:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 9:20 pm
Posts: 1749
Lotus49 wrote:
They were pretty dominant in 2010, they had nearly half a second over the Ferrari's on avg in Q.

2012 was a bit different because the McLaren could be quicker on it's day and we had the tyre situation in the early season.

McLaren took points off Alonso which cost him the title in 2010.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 15, 2017 3:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20902
mcdo wrote:
2012 was fantastic but too many people complained at the time. It was "too random", it was "too confusing", "the tyres had too much of an impact". No matter what version of F1 is produced you'll get people complaining

Personally I loved 2012. It was a modern classic

I would agree it's a pretty good example of how what makes good F1 is different for so many people. Personally, I didn't like 2012 and in general much prefer the seasons with what I would call proper racing tyres over any of the ones with Pirelli's comedy efforts. But everyone's tastes are different!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 15, 2017 4:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 4:06 pm
Posts: 834
Remove all driver aids.

The last driver aid I know of is gear shifting using clutch assistance. Make the drivers shift manually using a clutch pedal. It will definitely expose some of them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 15, 2017 6:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1551
Location: Miami, Florida
jimmyj wrote:
I would love it if the gap between teams was smaller. It would be so exciting!

As would we all.

I however feel that it should NEVER be artificially imposed via making anything spec because we have PLENTY of those types of series and quite frankly, that's why feeder series exist. It allows teams in the elite series to assess talent they can sign and place in their cars to best manage the capabilities of the equipment they produce. To make anything in F1 spec would be pointless because it would lead to many top drivers duking it out along with the rich boy pay drivers and it'd be a tier 1 vs tier 2 series with good, not great cars.

F1 teams should be able to sign whomever they wish and they should be allowed to innovate literally everywhere and anywhere they can think of so long as the wheelbase, width and minimum ride height are static. If they wish to impose a maximum fuel consumption limit for the duration of a race, I wouldn't be a fan of it, but so long as they allow teams to come up with unique systems to better maximize power and performance, I could live with it. Do away with DRS and ERS altogether and allow straight up Turbo V6's or bring back V10's or allow any configuration you prefer so long as it doesn't exceed a maximum HP figure the way it was in the early 90's. That was truly a special time in the sport and so many innovative discoveries were born during that time that are in use today it's crazy.

_________________
HAMILTON :: VETTEL :: ROSBERG :: RAIKKONEN :: VERSTAPPEN :: SAINZ :: MASSA :: BOTTAS :: NASR
ALONSO :: BUTTON :: PEREZ :: RICCIARDO :: GROSJEAN :: KVYAT :: HULKENBERG :: MALDONADO
THE REST… THERE ARE FAR BETTER DRIVERS THAT SHOULD BE IN FORMULA 1


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 15, 2017 6:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1551
Location: Miami, Florida
trento wrote:
Remove all driver aids.

The last driver aid I know of is gear shifting using clutch assistance. Make the drivers shift manually using a clutch pedal. It will definitely expose some of them.

Not really because it would still be sequential and if you practice enough you won't even need to touch the clutch. If anything a sequential tiptronic stick like in the ChampCars in the 90's is the best of both worlds. Cars have become so complex that drivers need to keep their hands on the wheel, but all the nicknacks came about because drivers no longer had to take their hands off the wheel once the modern electronic assisted shifting arrived, so that's a catch 22 conundrum of sorts.

_________________
HAMILTON :: VETTEL :: ROSBERG :: RAIKKONEN :: VERSTAPPEN :: SAINZ :: MASSA :: BOTTAS :: NASR
ALONSO :: BUTTON :: PEREZ :: RICCIARDO :: GROSJEAN :: KVYAT :: HULKENBERG :: MALDONADO
THE REST… THERE ARE FAR BETTER DRIVERS THAT SHOULD BE IN FORMULA 1


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 15, 2017 7:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2003 1:36 pm
Posts: 2236
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
jimmyj wrote:
I would love it if the gap between teams was smaller. It would be so exciting!

As would we all.

I however feel that it should NEVER be artificially imposed via making anything spec because we have PLENTY of those types of series and quite frankly, that's why feeder series exist. It allows teams in the elite series to assess talent they can sign and place in their cars to best manage the capabilities of the equipment they produce. To make anything in F1 spec would be pointless because it would lead to many top drivers duking it out along with the rich boy pay drivers and it'd be a tier 1 vs tier 2 series with good, not great cars.

F1 teams should be able to sign whomever they wish and they should be allowed to innovate literally everywhere and anywhere they can think of so long as the wheelbase, width and minimum ride height are static. If they wish to impose a maximum fuel consumption limit for the duration of a race, I wouldn't be a fan of it, but so long as they allow teams to come up with unique systems to better maximize power and performance, I could live with it. Do away with DRS and ERS altogether and allow straight up Turbo V6's or bring back V10's or allow any configuration you prefer so long as it doesn't exceed a maximum HP figure the way it was in the early 90's. That was truly a special time in the sport and so many innovative discoveries were born during that time that are in use today it's crazy.


I'm all for innovation, the problem is that now that we have limits on everything, if someone innovates too well the season is over before it begins. It would be great to see a season where the teams brought new things to races every weekend and the advantage moved back and forth... but sadly I don't see it happening.

_________________
Shoot999: "And anyone who puts a Y on the end of his name as a nickname should be punched in the face repeatedly."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 15, 2017 7:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4271
ALESI wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
jimmyj wrote:
I would love it if the gap between teams was smaller. It would be so exciting!

As would we all.

I however feel that it should NEVER be artificially imposed via making anything spec because we have PLENTY of those types of series and quite frankly, that's why feeder series exist. It allows teams in the elite series to assess talent they can sign and place in their cars to best manage the capabilities of the equipment they produce. To make anything in F1 spec would be pointless because it would lead to many top drivers duking it out along with the rich boy pay drivers and it'd be a tier 1 vs tier 2 series with good, not great cars.

F1 teams should be able to sign whomever they wish and they should be allowed to innovate literally everywhere and anywhere they can think of so long as the wheelbase, width and minimum ride height are static. If they wish to impose a maximum fuel consumption limit for the duration of a race, I wouldn't be a fan of it, but so long as they allow teams to come up with unique systems to better maximize power and performance, I could live with it. Do away with DRS and ERS altogether and allow straight up Turbo V6's or bring back V10's or allow any configuration you prefer so long as it doesn't exceed a maximum HP figure the way it was in the early 90's. That was truly a special time in the sport and so many innovative discoveries were born during that time that are in use today it's crazy.


I'm all for innovation, the problem is that now that we have limits on everything, if someone innovates too well the season is over before it begins. It would be great to see a season where the teams brought new things to races every weekend and the advantage moved back and forth... but sadly I don't see it happening.

So true. That's why they say championships are won during the winter now...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 15, 2017 7:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2003 8:25 pm
Posts: 387
If the cars and their drivers are EQUAL - what you have is the definition of a parade. Nobody has the skill or car benefit to come up with the 3 car length advantage necessary to make an overtake.

Nobody wants F1 to be a SPEC series - the regulations are much to restrictive as they exist today.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: P-F1 Mod and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group