Formula 1 2014: General Discussion Thread

Jordan 191 wrote: »

F1 Racing. I didn't read that publication in ages :eek:

Some good interviews in it; I subscribe on my iPad and get all the issues delivered automatically.

If Brawn did it would be interesting because then you would have Jean Todt and Ross Brawn working together again. Doesn't feel that long ago since they headed up Ferrari together.

I'd far rather more cars than more noise tbh.

Infoanon wrote: »

It looks like there is some substance to the rumours that Lotus, Sauber and Force India would boycott tomorrow's race, Lotus appear to be back on side.

Perhaps thats where Bernies talk of 14 cars came from ? With the promoter saying that numbers dont matter , imho the noise of the engines is a complete red herring being put out there by Bernie.

I really really hope the boycott doesn't happen. The last race to be boycotted was in 2005...at the USGP. It took a while for America to come around to F1 after that race, and I don't want a repeat of that. Had it been somewhere like India or Korea that would be fine, but not Austin.

Infoanon wrote: »

It looks like there is some substance to the rumours that Lotus, Sauber and Force India would boycott tomorrow's race, Lotus appear to be back on side.

Perhaps thats where Bernies talk of 14 cars came from ? With the promoter saying that numbers dont matter , imho the noise of the engines is a complete red herring being put out there by Bernie.

The promoter, Bobby Epstein, when speaking to the BBC earlier (before Sky),called onF1 to find a way to get more cars in the grid ! And suggested 3 car teams.

All talk of a Las Vegas race has disappeared at the same time !

Did watch the team principle type press conference yesterday, talking about losing the two teams mostly. Some good arguments for cutting costs or making it more sustainable for smaller teams. But they need to find away to make it balance out so that teams like ferrari and mclaren don't have their business damaged and manufactures want to stay in the sport. Think F1 does need the independent teams that will stick around in the sport. Governing body really do need to make it possible for smaller and midfield teams to at least survive and try and compete, otherwise could just keep getting worse, and shouldn't have to be at the expense of the big teams

Going Strong wrote: »

Lopez' comment about spending 300m just to be six seconds faster than a GP2 car said it all. It's grand for Toto Wolff to claim that he's spending within his own budget but all he has to do is pop along to Stuttgart and ask for some more money off Mercedes head office. The likes of Lotus and Force India will have no such luck getting more money out of their decreasing amount of sponsors.

yes, I think since marrusia and catterham had survived through last season their businesses must have been somewhat sustainable, I doubt their work force number changed since last year. New rule changes shouldn't have been allowed to destroy that and that people in charge or big players make the decisions without looking at the effects on the sport or protecting the competitors somewhat is a big failing.

HighLine wrote: »

It totally baffles me how people would think it's more important to have a few more mobile chicanes rather than restore F1's noise. To each their own.

Noise has nothing to do with racing, sure it's a nice feeling but a basic knowledge of physics would say that noise = inefficiency. IA 100% efficient engine would have to be silent. More noise is good for the spectacle but bad for the racing.

Personally I'll miss the two teams, they didn't get much coverage but there have been many great battles at the back of the field over the last few years.

HighLine wrote: »

Are you serious? Bad for racing? Come on now. Maybe you should watch Formula E then if you have such a great concern for engine and fuel efficiency.

The faster the cars go the better, I don't care about noise if the cars are going faster. It's not about reducing the amount of fuel used but increasing the amount of power delivered from the fuel, noise is lost energy, less noise = more energy. You won't find an engineer that would agree more noise is better, as noise is lost power that could have gone to the wheels.

If you want to make the cars more noisy you will have to implement a device which will waste power that was previously going to the wheels.

I do watch Formula E, or at least have watched the last race and intend to watch the next one.

mickdw wrote: »

Have you ever experienced an f1 car in person.
The noise was astounding with the old engines. Pure violence is the only way I could describe it. That can only lead to it being a major part of the f1 experience.

Yes I have. I did say the loss of noise is a loss of the spectacle. As engines technology is improved they will get quieter, just think of diesel engines over the last 20 years. Personally I'd take being the pinnacle of engineering and faster cars over noisy cars.

mickdw wrote: »

I wouldnt to be honest.
I wouldn't mind quiet cars if the team's went there by choice. For example, if the rules were more open and simply allowed each driver 100 kg of fuel and allowed the team to use it as they saw fit it would be quiet interesting. You would have some going the current route, some going lower tune versions of the old tech to grab an odd point by way of reliability. Some might have a turbo, some might not. The noise variation would be an interesting part of the whole thing then. As it stands, it's a high tech, efficient but dull engine formula.

Any of the teams could make their engine very noisy very easily but they would loose power. I do agree with less rules. Given a choice of a turbo or not every team would take it, even with open rules every team would go for the fastest solution. A lot of the constructors are only interested because it is high tech. I disagree about it being dull.

Thats Sauber safe so.

mickdw wrote: »

Have you ever experienced an f1 car in person.
The noise was astounding with the old engines. Pure violence is the only way I could describe it. That can only lead to it being a major part of the f1 experience.

A lot of people attending race meetings wear ear plugs to block out the engine noise and in my experience the engine noise was rather ruined by the rev limiter kicking in.

F1 is basically a television sport and thus the noise is irrelevant - IF the noise was of any relevance then the audio mix could be adjusted by the broadcasters.

mickdw wrote: »

The broadcast audio was well discussed here at the start of the year. I couldn't believe that the world feed had not significantly adjusted the circuit mics for the sound change. After all you would getting better engine sounds on a basic broadcast from mondeo.
Some sounds engineers commented that it was not that simple and that given the pitch of these specific engines, you would get issues of drowning out voices etc . I didn't quite agree myself but this was later confirmed by sky saying that they had issues with increasing the sound volume.

Sounds, accuse the pun, questionable - Sky sticking to the Bernie line.