Your views on F1

[VetteIfan 0]

As we know Formula 1 has received a lot of negative PR this season. Some of it justified, some of it not so much. So I'm kind of curious to know what everyone's individual opinion on here is about it. So there's this poll. And if you happen to have voted for option 2, 3 or 4, please post sharing what you would like fundamentally/specifically changed that you think would improve the show.

[GoldenColt 1]

I don't have the time to answer your question in detail now, so I'll do that later. 

[Max_Whimsy 0]

Ultimately F1 is a constructors championship and the drivers are a means to an end.  I do not want to see the attitude that has invaded other top tier sports where "if the fans like it it is good for the sport" or "whatever we need to do to get more fans".  I've stopped watching baseball, football (north american) hockey and basketball because they have degenerated into "entertainment" loosely based on the sport.  F1 remains, I hope a place where the "envelope" can still be pushed.  Cost saving measures are fine in as much as they provide another area of competition.  Maybe I'm just old and cynical. On a more positive note, I am glad to see some "glamour" back, I miss the 70's. (told you I was old - first F1 race live: Mosport Park Canada 1973)

[f1since08 60]

This is a topic that I focus on a lot because it interests me. Yes, I'm sad like that. I think that the weekend format is fine the way it is, but there are a lot of changes needed. For a start the cash has to be redistributed fairly. I'd also give all the teams a say in what goes on. Bernie needs to go; as do most of the Tilkedromes. I'd give the fans greater access to the pitlane/paddock, or maybe do more events where they can get close to the action. As for the racing side, I'd go with more ground effect and less surface downforce to improve overtaking/let the cars follow each other. That will allow DRS to be scrapped. I'd then scrap the fuel flow/limit regs and introduce a minimum amount of fuel, then bring in harder tyres that can be pushed on. Increase the power of the cars and maybe the noise too, then I'd be happy.

[Chadwick8505 0]

I was somewhere between the middle two choices.

I think in general F1 is going in the right direction; they're just doing a terrible job of getting there. For me F1 is about the technology involved, so the push towards the current power units, imo, is where F1 should be headed. The fact that Merc got it really right isn't exactly F1's fault, but not allowing a better method of other teams developing and catching up is. So I would rather a system that allows for more open development (especially at the beginning of a brand new regulation). By putting such strict conditions on development at the beginning of a new regulation, F1 has essentially locked in the running order from the first race. If you want to rein in development down the road, that's fine, but at the beginning you need to be less strict.

The other issue is aero. I love aero it makes cars go fast. Aero is one of the reasons that the 2004-2008 cars were some of the fastest F1 cars ever. But it tended to make it difficult to wheel to wheel race. So ground effect seems to be a viable solution, although not a guaranteed solution, as the air will still be channeled and will still create turbulence causing difficulty in following. So I think F1 should look into bringing some sort of ground effect back in lieu of the elaborate wings we have now.

In general I think the teams should be allowed to develop innovation better. They seem stifled in a formula that isn't amenable to close competition.

[GoldenColt 1]

Chadwick8505 said:

I was somewhere between the middle two choices.

I think in general F1 is going in the right direction; they're just doing a terrible job of getting there. For me F1 is about the technology involved, so the push towards the current power units, imo, is where F1 should be headed. The fact that Merc got it really right isn't exactly F1's fault, but not allowing a better method of other teams developing and catching up is. So I would rather a system that allows for more open development (especially at the beginning of a brand new regulation). By putting such strict conditions on development at the beginning of a new regulation, F1 has essentially locked in the running order from the first race. If you want to rein in development down the road, that's fine, but at the beginning you need to be less strict.

The other issue is aero. I love aero it makes cars go fast. Aero is one of the reasons that the 2004-2008 cars were some of the fastest F1 cars ever. But it tended to make it difficult to wheel to wheel race. So ground effect seems to be a viable solution, although not a guaranteed solution, as the air will still be channeled and will still create turbulence causing difficulty in following. So I think F1 should look into bringing some sort of ground effect back in lieu of the elaborate wings we have now.

In general I think the teams should be allowed to develop innovation better. They seem stifled in a formula that isn't amenable to close competition.

I was about to write a more detailed answer when I found your comment. +1 to that. 

Ow yeah, and DRS sucks. Plus I would like proper tyres back. 

[Liaveil 137]

Yeah I think Chad has just voiced my opinions too. The limits on testing, design and amount of components they can use is no good. Drivers should not be penalised because their car broke down and needs a replacement engine, that isn't fair to them. The penalty, surely, is the extra cost of a new engine so by that the penalty is taken is it not?
A bit more leniency on racing penalties should also be considered. Drivers shouldn't be constrained to driving on eggshells in case they get a penalty for trying to race. Say what you will about Maldonado, but at least he goes for it and it makes it entertaining.
Goes with the first point but engines should be allowed to be developed at will as well. The token system is ridiculous. The manufacturers should be allowed to do as much as they want to the engine. Looking at Honda and Renault's situation is enough to put any new manufacturers from wanting to join which is simply wrong.
Get rid of those awful tracks that no one likes. It was refreshing to see the atmosphere at Mexico. That is exactly the sort of venues that should be on the F1 calendar, full of fans of the sport. Somehow, I doubt we'll get the same sort of atmosphere when they go to Azerbaijan next season....
I'm also a bit 50/50 on these green "engines". Yes F1 should be the pinnacle of engineering, absolutely. But I also believe it should be the fastest it can possibly be. If V8/V10 or V12 is faster then they should still be using those. When hybrids actually start being quicker than engines in general, that's when F1 should have made the switch in my opinion. Plus that old argument about the noise...It adds to the atmosphere and glamour of the sport which is definitely lacking these days compared to 70/80's etc.

[f1since08 60]

Wynterdust said:

Yeah I think Chad has just voiced my opinions too. The limits on testing, design and amount of components they can use is no good. Drivers should not be penalised because their car broke down and needs a replacement engine, that isn't fair to them. The penalty, surely, is the extra cost of a new engine so by that the penalty is taken is it not?
A bit more leniency on racing penalties should also be considered. Drivers shouldn't be constrained to driving on eggshells in case they get a penalty for trying to race. Say what you will about Maldonado, but at least he goes for it and it makes it entertaining.
Goes with the first point but engines should be allowed to be developed at will as well. The token system is ridiculous. The manufacturers should be allowed to do as much as they want to the engine. Looking at Honda and Renault's situation is enough to put any new manufacturers from wanting to join which is simply wrong.
Get rid of those awful tracks that no one likes. It was refreshing to see the atmosphere at Mexico. That is exactly the sort of venues that should be on the F1 calendar, full of fans of the sport. Somehow, I doubt we'll get the same sort of atmosphere when they go to Azerbaijan next season....
I'm also a bit 50/50 on these green "engines". Yes F1 should be the pinnacle of engineering, absolutely. But I also believe it should be the fastest it can possibly be. If V8/V10 or V12 is faster then they should still be using those. When hybrids actually start being quicker than engines in general, that's when F1 should have made the switch in my opinion. Plus that old argument about the noise...It adds to the atmosphere and glamour of the sport which is definitely lacking these days compared to 70/80's etc.

I get what you're saying, but think of the cost involved in unlimited testing, free engines reigns and so on. It'd be an absolute fortune! On the point of the engine penalties, the cost of the new engine is fairly insignificant for the big teams. They'd be able to fit a new engine at every race, where as the smaller teams can't afford it. Does that sound fair?

As for the current engines, they can be made faster simply by changing the aero - as we'll see in 2017. The engines - Mercedes in particular - are producing near enough the same power as the V8s and in a few years will be nearing V10 power levels.

I'd also like to point out that Porsche use a V4 hybrid in WEC and that makes quite a bit of noise :p 

[VetteIfan 0]

Wynterdust said:

I'm also a bit 50/50 on these green "engines". Yes F1 should be the pinnacle of engineering, absolutely. But I also believe it should be the fastest it can possibly be. If V8/V10 or V12 is faster then they should still be using those. When hybrids actually start being quicker than engines in general, that's when F1 should have made the switch in my opinion. Plus that old argument about the noise...It adds to the atmosphere and glamour of the sport which is definitely lacking these days compared to 70/80's etc.

The power unit in the Mercedes with the ICE and all the hybrid tech at full tilt is around 900bhp now. Ferrari not far behind. The V8's were at 750hp. And some manufacturers at the end of the V10 era were touching 1000hp. The cars have got heavier as a result of the new PU's but generally I don't believe engine performance is a problem. As Chris points out, the cars are relatively "slow" nowadays mainly due to limits on aero.  

Completley agree on the noise issue though. 

[Platy 6]

Wynterdust said:

Yeah I think Chad has just voiced my opinions too. The limits on testing, design and amount of components they can use is no good. Drivers should not be penalised because their car broke down and needs a replacement engine, that isn't fair to them. The penalty, surely, is the extra cost of a new engine so by that the penalty is taken is it not?
A bit more leniency on racing penalties should also be considered. Drivers shouldn't be constrained to driving on eggshells in case they get a penalty for trying to race. Say what you will about Maldonado, but at least he goes for it and it makes it entertaining.
Goes with the first point but engines should be allowed to be developed at will as well. The token system is ridiculous. The manufacturers should be allowed to do as much as they want to the engine. Looking at Honda and Renault's situation is enough to put any new manufacturers from wanting to join which is simply wrong.
Get rid of those awful tracks that no one likes. It was refreshing to see the atmosphere at Mexico. That is exactly the sort of venues that should be on the F1 calendar, full of fans of the sport. Somehow, I doubt we'll get the same sort of atmosphere when they go to Azerbaijan next season....
I'm also a bit 50/50 on these green "engines". Yes F1 should be the pinnacle of engineering, absolutely. But I also believe it should be the fastest it can possibly be. If V8/V10 or V12 is faster then they should still be using those. When hybrids actually start being quicker than engines in general, that's when F1 should have made the switch in my opinion. Plus that old argument about the noise...It adds to the atmosphere and glamour of the sport which is definitely lacking these days compared to 70/80's etc.

Just picking up on that bit. McLaren P1, The Ferrari The Ferrari, Porsche 918. Hybrid technology is quicker than engines, its one of the times F1 has made the move to the future before its gotten here.

The biggest problem F1 is suffering is that the rules keep changing, 2017 is going to bring a new team to beat until they change rules again in 2020. They really need to just stick to a set of design/engine rules and make subtle tweaks, but F1 is as subtle as a wrecking ball. Also fuck DRS.

[Liaveil 137]

Hmm, well I can't argue with any of you on that. Apparantly I'm still living in a few years ago! Although on the subject of freedom of engine/component use, it would only really be a problem now because of how much these hybrids cost. Another reason I'm a bit 50/50. With the older engines, it could probably have been possible. Aero freedom and in season testing should certainly be allowed though as well as the manufacturers being allowed freedom on engine development.
That's probably what it all comes down to though is the ever changing rules. A consistent set of rules are certainly what F1 needs.

[MBKF1 91]

In a way I would have voted for the second option, so 'generally on the right track, but does requires a number of refinements to make it even better. Evolution over revolution.'

However, why not go for the one I have, and make a load of significant changes. I don't have the time right now to make a massively detailed post about it, but F1 can learn a lot from the way Formula E and WEC have done things differently. Especially on the publicity and social side of things, they are just streaks ahead of F1. And the racing is often better than Formula 1 as well in both series.

[AMSKRR 3]

What @Chadwick8505 said.

Characters blah blah blah