Formula 1 talk.

[sk47]

Agreed. But who in the AM pit ever imaged Seb would be battling for a race win. They knew what they were doing. They took their chances and lost. I give them a “gold“ for effort.

Hello; That drivers/teams have to "race" with fuel economy in mind seems a farce in a way. I use to watch a lot of NASCAR for every second from start to finish. Now the racing starts about 50 miles from the end. ( The newer stage wins may have changed this a bit, but to throw a caution flag at each stage seems to mess with that concept. I favored stage wins, but did not want a yellow flag. Let them keep on racing under green at the end of a stage.)( but this has nothing to do withF1.)

I have followed F1 since the 1960's. Early on by way of Road & Track magazine. The way I recall the races was they all started with enough fuel and raced with one set of tires. Only went into pits when something went wrong. At least that is my recall.

Get rid of the power units and go back to the engines. There are E races now for those who want to watch a glorified golf cart. Make the transmissions manual so the drivers have to be masters of a skill. Keep the brakes as is. That was a good move when antilock brakes and traction control were taken out of the cars. I did not want to watch a computer drive a car, I want the more skilled driver to have to master the car.
Not sure about the aero packages. The cars cannot get too close without losing downforce so wind up following each other around a lot. I have wondered if making the tires more narrow and/or doing away with some aero might make the racing better.

Sponsored

 

[Bikeman315]

Get rid of the power units and go back to the engines. There are E races now for those who want to watch a glorified golf cart. Make the transmissions manual so the drivers have to be masters of a skill. Keep the brakes as is. That was a good move when antilock brakes and traction control were taken out of the cars. I did not want to watch a computer drive a car, I want the more skilled driver to have to master the car.
Not sure about the aero packages. The cars cannot get too close without losing downforce so wind up following each other around a lot. I have wondered if making the tires more narrow and/or doing away with some aero might make the racing better.

What you are asking for is the antithesis of what F1 is all about. You cannot go backwards. Full ICE motors and manual transmissions are dead. F1 is about the latest technology available and going forward. That's what the hybrids are all about.

Also the new 2022 cars are all about tires/wheels and aero. We will need to wait until next year to see how that effects the actual racing.

 

[sk47]

What you are asking for is the antithesis of what F1 is all about. You cannot go backwards. Full ICE motors and manual transmissions are dead. F1 is about the latest technology available and going forward. That's what the hybrids are all about.

Also the new 2022 cars are all about tires/wheels and aero. We will need to wait until next year to see how that effects the actual racing.

Hello; I guess you missed my comments about how they took away the antilock brakes and took away the traction control some years ago. Maybe in the 90's. So F1 has "gone backwards" before.
They took away turbos for a time as well and brought them back.
I can buy a soccer mom car with traction control, antilock brakes, lane control, automatic braking, an automatic trans and even more of the latest technology. It that the sort of race car we should have?

It would be a hoot if manuals were put back and some F1 drivers had to quit because they cannot drive a manual. ( yes they could learn.)
The thing about F1 , to me, has been about going the fastest on a road course with a small displacement engine and figuring out how to make the parts as light as possible without failure. Again I ask what the power units on an F1 car has spun off for the general public. From the moon space race we got teflon (sp) and ink pens that write in zero gravity. ( we got much more of course.)

But yes I am old school. Bet you can guess which side of the manual vs. auto debate I am on.

 

[Bikeman315]

Hello; I guess you missed my comments about how they took away the antilock brakes and took away the traction control some years ago. Maybe in the 90's. So F1 has "gone backwards" before. They took away turbos for a time as well and brought them back.

Yes, I agree that they have taken a step back on technology when said technology hurt the racing and/or gave the tops teams a clear advantage. But today's F1 is not F1 from Bernie's day's. Things change.

I can buy a soccer mom car with traction control, antilock brakes, lane control, automatic braking, an automatic trans and even more of the latest technology. It that the sort of race car we should have?

Let's not mix up street cars and racing cars. A lot of today's soccer mom tech comes directly from racing. That doesn't mean that race cars in street tech.

Again I ask what the power units on an F1 car has spun off for the general public.

All the top F1 engine manufactures have used F1 technology in their street cars.

But yes I am old school. Bet you can guess which side of the manual vs. auto debate I am on.

DCT's

 

[sk47]

All the top F1 engine manufactures have used F1 technology in their street cars.

Hello; For some reason I am thinking the hybrids cam along first in street cars. Sure car makers who race have hybrid street cars, as do car makers who never raced in F1 or never race at all.

I may be wrong but seem to recall F1 adopted hybrid power units long after they were in street engines. Same for fuel mass limits. A nod to green ideas as social norms changed. Not necessarily a virtue signaling thing, I guess. Not clear to me how the change has helped F1.

 

[Caballus]

Appears to be symbiotic. Very end of the video sheds particular light on the F1 : Production Car relationship.

 

[Gregs24]

Hello; Yes the amount as measured in mass. Some years ago teams were mixing up exotic fuel mixes. A special mix for qualifying for example. Best as I recall the fuel is supposed to be standardized now. May be mass is the simpler way to check the fuel. May be that since weight/mass is so critical is all other areas of F1 they just think in mass.

Vettel must have used fuel at a burn rate too high to stay in second place.

They don't run standardised fuel, but do have to comply with certain standards, as in they can have different fuels for different circumstances such as weather, altitude, circuit type, engine characteristics etc. The fuel 'fingerprint' at the end of the race has to match the supplied sample before the race.

Mass is used because volume changes with temperature

 

[Gregs24]

Hello; For some reason I am thinking the hybrids cam along first in street cars. Sure car makers who race have hybrid street cars, as do car makers who never raced in F1 or never race at all.

I may be wrong but seem to recall F1 adopted hybrid power units long after they were in street engines. Same for fuel mass limits. A nod to green ideas as social norms changed. Not necessarily a virtue signaling thing, I guess. Not clear to me how the change has helped F1.

The current engine makers would not have remained in F1 without some road relevance. That is one of the reasons why the regulations changed to turbo hybrids. There is some technology transfer.

The best road car tech that was born in Formula One - Car Keys

 

[Gregs24]

Agreed. But who in the AM pit ever imaged Seb would be battling for a race win. They knew what they were doing. They took their chances and lost. I give them a “gold“ for effort.

There was a calibration issue. They thought they had 1.44 litres left. Nobody takes a chance as all cars have to provide a 1 litre sample at the end.

 

[Gregs24]

Hello; That drivers/teams have to "race" with fuel economy in mind seems a farce in a way. I use to watch a lot of NASCAR for every second from start to finish. Now the racing starts about 50 miles from the end. ( The newer stage wins may have changed this a bit, but to throw a caution flag at each stage seems to mess with that concept. I favored stage wins, but did not want a yellow flag. Let them keep on racing under green at the end of a stage.)( but this has nothing to do withF1.)

I have followed F1 since the 1960's. Early on by way of Road & Track magazine. The way I recall the races was they all started with enough fuel and raced with one set of tires. Only went into pits when something went wrong. At least that is my recall.

Get rid of the power units and go back to the engines. There are E races now for those who want to watch a glorified golf cart. Make the transmissions manual so the drivers have to be masters of a skill. Keep the brakes as is. That was a good move when antilock brakes and traction control were taken out of the cars. I did not want to watch a computer drive a car, I want the more skilled driver to have to master the car.
Not sure about the aero packages. The cars cannot get too close without losing downforce so wind up following each other around a lot. I have wondered if making the tires more narrow and/or doing away with some aero might make the racing better.

Big changes next year to address some of this. F1 teams have always minimised fuel, there is no point finishing a race with fuel left in the tank (other than the sample)

 

[Bikeman315]

There was a calibration issue. They thought they had 1.44 litres left. Nobody takes a chance as all cars have to provide a 1 litre sample at the end.

They knew what was happening.

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/aston-martin-vettel-hungarian-gp-fuel-analysis/6641069/

 

[Gregs24]

They knew what was happening.

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/aston-martin-vettel-hungarian-gp-fuel-analysis/6641069/

Well they say there is another 1.44 litres of fuel in the car. Is there ? Has the lift pump failed? We shall no doubt find out is a while.

Pretty sure nobody would run it that tight as the risks far outweigh the benefit of 0.7 litres of fuel. It is either in there, or not. If it isn't they just got it wrong, if it is then they have to try and argue a case for why it cannot be extracted.

 

[sk47]

Big changes next year to address some of this. F1 teams have always minimised fuel, there is no point finishing a race with fuel left in the tank (other than the sample)

Hello; Of course they use the least amount needed to keep the weight down. What I was speaking of is the need to turn down the power for sections of the race because running at full power will use up the fuel available by rule. There is a difference between how the fuel rule is currently and a team putting just enough fuel in the tank to save weight. The teams do the same for all the parts of the cars. They run the lightest parts they can get away with. If a part breaks too much they make it stronger.

Let the teams run the engines at full song and calculate the fuel needed for them selves is the way I think it ought to be. If a team has an engine that can make good power and can stand the weight penalty, let them add an extra few kilos of fuel.
Some sorts of races lend themselves to fuel economy strategy. In an endurance race of 6, 12,or 24 hours having fewer pit stops can make a difference.

Thing is the F1 races have become a bore most of the races. This last race was of more interest because the usual domination by two teams was knocked out. That the current fuel rule may take away a second place from AM is part of what is wrong.

 

[Gregs24]

Hello; Of course they use the least amount needed to keep the weight down. What I was speaking of is the need to turn down the power for sections of the race because running at full power will use up the fuel available by rule. There is a difference between how the fuel rule is currently and a team putting just enough fuel in the tank to save weight. The teams do the same for all the parts of the cars. They run the lightest parts they can get away with. If a part breaks too much they make it stronger.

Let the teams run the engines at full song and calculate the fuel needed for them selves is the way I think it ought to be. If a team has an engine that can make good power and can stand the weight penalty, let them add an extra few kilos of fuel.
Some sorts of races lend themselves to fuel economy strategy. In an endurance race of 6, 12,or 24 hours having fewer pit stops can make a difference.

Thing is the F1 races have become a bore most of the races. This last race was of more interest because the usual domination by two teams was knocked out. That the current fuel rule may take away a second place from AM is part of what is wrong.

Pretty sure you will find none of the teams actually start the race with enough fuel to run at full pace to the end. The tyres will not take it either.

Sponsored