2016 Pirelli

[Sakae 0]

After thousand considerations and chain of their endless variants over past a few years "how to fix the F1" (to my liking, of course), I came to realization that dinosaurs like me are dying, and the youngsters do not know any better, thus they are happy.  To paraphrase B. Russell, the evils of this world are due to moral defects, as much as lack of intelligence. Intelligence is easily improved by methods known to competent educators. The human race has not hitherto discovered any means eradicating moral defects, a factor - I suspect - so prevalent in this (formerly) sporting body. I've concluded therefore for F1 to be saved, it is not possible to be overhauled and success waits at the end, but it must be first burned down to ashes, and reborn again in different form, and with different actors.

[Unknown? 0]

That's a good point.. if you don't know F1 is broken, does it need to be fixed? I was happy with it when I was a kid, but at only 26 years old, even though I've watched F1 my entire life, what I may consider the good old days would be not be considered as such by someone older, who was watching decades before I was even born.

I agree there is no easy fix and it may make more sense to burn it down and start again.. I'd hate to lose the history though. 

[Emmcee 0]

Some theories have to be taken with a grain of salt as some have the intelligence to propose good ideas, the rest of the way they see the sport is rediculous.

[Sakae 0]

11 hours ago, Unknown? said:

That's a good point.. if you don't know F1 is broken, does it need to be fixed? I was happy with it when I was a kid, but at only 26 years old, even though I've watched F1 my entire life, what I may consider the good old days would be not be considered as such by someone older, who was watching decades before I was even born.

I agree there is no easy fix and it may make more sense to burn it down and start again.. I'd hate to lose the history though. 

Quote

Ecclestone is adamant that the FIA’s Charlie Whiting – the man responsible for writing the rules – should start afresh.

“You can’t repair an old house, better to pull it down and start again. He’s got enough people. We don’t need to wait.”

In todays's news - someone must be reading some forums... (LOL)

[Emmcee 0]

They simply need to make the cars more challenging to drive in the sense of pushing the driver to the limit. More mechanical grip, refuelling to add another strategy element, remove fuel flow limit and one thing they should implement is the ability to run to different compounds in front and rear like they do in Moto GP. They banned refuelling due to carrying the excess weight from race to race but seriously, have they saved anything? Nope. If these rules get changed, drivers MUST have a say and allow them to decide on what works best for the driver and the show in general. How would Charlie know what it's like to drive these cars today? It just blows my mind with how technology is available and they can't use it to its full capabilities, if they want to control fuel flow to an extent, why not make it mandatory that they must run rich and lean mixtures throughout the race and it has to be at designated times so if you want to short fill your car but must run a rich mixture, your dicing with retirement. That to me is a much better solution than a stupid fuel flow limit.

[Unknown? 0]

More mechanical grip with less fragile tyres I absolutely agree with. A fuel flow limit I don't really like but I fully understand the thinking behind it. As I've said in a previous post elsewhere the longer we have this v6 formula the more efficient the engines will get and therefore the less of a hindrance the fuel flow limit will be. I don't have the data but I'd bet a 2016 Mercedes engine is capable of running much richer for much longer than a 2014 spec. 

Interesting idea differing compounds front and rear. Why not? Refuelling I'm all for, it would spice up the races and make the cars faster through a gp in general as they wouldn't be carrying full tanks. 

[Sakae 0]

Tires related regulations are rather overcooked. Teams are forced to change tires whether they want to or not, just as they cannot change tires for a race on Sunday according to real ambient pre-race conditions. I gather forced pit stops were supposed to mix up a grid and drivers to mingle. Is artificially create racing excitement working? I have my doubts. There are number of elements in the play which are out of synch with each other, and all of this is happening on sterile tracks of the old design, lagging badly behind current technology. Fast cars are still in the front, and slow cars are not. I find myself agreeing with BE less and less lately, but he might have a point about taking a play book, and chucking it (per article linked above).

[Emmcee 0]

1 hour ago, Sakae said:

Tires related regulations are rather overcooked. Teams are forced to change tires whether they want to or not, just as they cannot change tires for a race on Sunday according to real ambient pre-race conditions. I gather forced pit stops were supposed to mix up a grid and drivers to mingle. Is artificially create racing excitement working? I have my doubts. There are number of elements in the play which are out of synch with each other, and all of this is happening on sterile tracks of the old design, lagging badly behind current technology. Fast cars are still in the front, and slow cars are not. I find myself agreeing with BE less and less lately, but he might have a point about taking a play book, and chucking it (per article linked above).

Yeah I agree 100%, having teams forced to pit is rediculous. Different if your forced to pit because you need fuel and this again can add another strategy element, we will never ever see the masterful drive like schumi put in at Hungary  1998 on a three stop strategy as some circuits were faster with more pitstops under certain conditions. Let them run whatever compounds they like front and rear but IMO, refuelling is a must if they want to at least level the playing field to some extent.

[Unknown? 0]

I think it would spice up the racing a bit more - imagine Force India and Toro Rosso on a racey three-stop vs Ferrari and Williams on a conservative two-stop. Things would be tasty throughout the race! Mercedes and probably Red Bull have the legs to be out front regardless though. Not their problem I guess, they've built solid racing cars.

[Emmcee 0]

Exactly my point, if you haven't already seen schumis drive in the 98 Hungarian GP I suggest you look it up on YouTube and watch it. Both mclarens that day were two stopping but schumi did 3 therefore short filling him on each stop to make his car lighter and faster and after two stops, schumi had to find something like 21 seconds in 19 laps to be able to pull of the third stop to win and he did that superbly and IMO one of if not the greatest drive I have ever whitnessed. 19 qualifying laps,That is no way possible in today's sport and I tell you what, those 19 laps he had me on the edge of my seat and I guarantee I wasn't the only one. Of course Schumacher was capable of doing it but if it was able to be done today, Iam sure we would see drivers we normally didn't know had such ability. Not to mention it put a twist on the whole race as the mclarens were faster all weekend.

[Unknown? 0]

I've seen it but definitely worth another watch! Another good example of fuel strategy is the 2004 Italian Grand Prix won by Barrichello followed by Schumacher, where both demonstrated incredible pace on low fuel to pull out an unlikely, but crushing one-two.

Although to be fair the F2004 was probably the best Formula One car ever built..

[Emmcee 0]

True but that was when Williams was very strong at monza to wasn't it? So Ferrari's advantage wasn't so great as it was on other circuits that year but yes another display on how refuelling can blow a race wide open.