Formula 1 2021 - General Discussion Thread (Read 1st post rules)

TheQ_Man

[Deleted User] wrote: »

And 7 of them were in the last 10 years. The other 3 were Indianapolis 2005 (lol), Italy 2005 and Holland 1961

Indianapolis? How the hell did they class that as having no retirements? Because most of the field withdrew after the formation lap?

TheQ_Man

TheQ_Man wrote: »

Indianapolis? How the hell did they class that as having no retirements? Because most of the field withdrew after the formation lap?

Yeah 14 DNSes, no DNFs :P

donspeekinglesh

TheQ_Man wrote: »

Indianapolis? How the hell did they class that as having no retirements? Because most of the field withdrew after the formation lap?

If you don't take the start it's a DNS and not a DNF.

Although, for I'm guessing political reasons, they were sometimes recorded as DNF for that race.

Cool_CM

TheQ_Man wrote: »

Indianapolis? How the hell did they class that as having no retirements? Because most of the field withdrew after the formation lap?

Haha, that podium meme was made for Tiago Monteiro :pac:

Cool_CM

Cool_CM wrote: »

Haha, that podium meme was made for Tiago Monteiro :pac:

I knew I knew it from somewhere! :pac:

quokula

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

The evidence for my "conspiracy theory" is growing, I've even got Hamilton here talking about it:
"As you know every weekend, whenever there is a failure, they always put the pressures up - so that tells you something," he said.

"More often than not, [it's] that the tyres are not being run at the pressures that are being asked. We didn't have a problem with our tyres".
Motorsport.com: Hamilton: Pirelli not to blame for Baku tyre blowouts.
http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-pirelli-not-to-blame-for-baku-tyre-blowouts/6577971/amp/
Plus the fact that Pirelli's solution to the problem is to increase the recommended tyre pressure and another rooster said they're going to test the tyres when cold to control for temperature changes to tyre pressure.

"However, a swift response from the FIA to ramp up tyre pressure and temperature checks for this weekend's French Grand Prix, has offered answers about teams potentially trying to get around limits being a factor."

And here's Pirelli saying RB and AM wer running the tyres at low pressures during the race - but didn't break the rules because they complied with the checks at the start - isn't that exactly what I said?

"And while Pirelli confirmed that both Red Bull and Aston Martin had followed the regulations with the minimum starting pressures and maximum blanket temperatures, it says that things deviated from what it expected once the cars were running."

Motorsport.com: Pirelli: Red Bull and Aston Martin were running with lower pressures.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/red-bull-and-aston-martin-were-running-with-lower-pressures-says-pirelli/6579071/amp/

Pirelli investigation into Pirelli finds in favour of Pirelli. What a shock. Still zero evidence. The fact that Hamilton is out spreading conspiracy theories against his rivals is hardly anything new - heck he even did it against his own team back when Rosberg was beating him, not to mention his history of deliberately lying to stewards in order to get people penalised.

There is still zero evidence that anyone wasn't running the required PSI. All data was provided by Aston Martin and Red Bull and it was all within the required parameters.

Pirelli upped the PSI requirement for the following race - that doesn't mean people were disobeying, in fact it implies quite the opposite, as there would be no point in changing the requirement if it wasn't being adhered to.

quokula

Harika wrote: »

I would say the constructor's championship is something either takes en passent. Nice to have, driver championship is what has priority and in majority of cases both is won together. Without Google I won't be able to tell you when it happened.

It's an interesting question. For an old fashioned pure F1 team like McLaren or Williams the constructors is probably more important. For a corporation like Mercedes or Red Bull who just use F1 as a marketing tool, the prestige of the driver's title is probably worth more.

If you look at the evidence, you'd have to say Merc are all-in on the drivers with their refusal to replace Bottas on the basis they don't want a repeat of having a second competitive driver like Rosberg, and prefer instead to have someone who's race they will happily completely sacrifice on a whim if there's any way he can help Lewis, whether it's using him as a tow truck in Baku, or as a mobile chicane in France.

Red Bull on the other hand have consistently been even handed with their two drivers for as long as I can remember, whoever those drivers have been. And they have little time for an underperforming second driver, showing no hesitation in replacing them if they think they can find someone who could give their faster driver a harder time. So from that POV you'd think Red Bull perhaps value the constructors more.

El_Duderino 09

quokula wrote: »

Pirelli investigation into Pirelli finds in favour of Pirelli. What a shock. Still zero evidence. The fact that Hamilton is out spreading conspiracy theories against his rivals is hardly anything new - heck he even did it against his own team back when Rosberg was beating him, not to mention his history of deliberately lying to stewards in order to get people penalised.

There is still zero evidence that anyone wasn't running the required PSI. All data was provided by Aston Martin and Red Bull and it was all within the required parameters.

Pirelli upped the PSI requirement for the following race - that doesn't mean people were disobeying, in fact it implies quite the opposite, as there would be no point in changing the requirement if it wasn't being adhered to.

Lol. Now I think your in the realm of conspiracy theory at this stage. It was discussed all weekend, on the coverage I heard anyway, as being a case of cat and mouse. Teams work to test compliant and they run the pressures as low as possible subsequently in the race.

Not to worry. I don't expect you to admit you were wrong. It's not how these things work. Just checking you were still sticking to your guns even after the weekend. Thanks.

ElisaAtWar

I do love F1. So here is a daft question, but how come the likes of Audi, Lamborghini don't challenge in this area. I know both of these suppliers are very different but does F1 not have any attraction to them. And if so I would really like to understand why not

mickdw

ElisaAtWar wrote: »

I do love F1. So here is a daft question, but how come the likes of Audi, Lamborghini don't challenge in this area. I know both of these suppliers are very different but does F1 not have any attraction to them. And if so I would really like to understand why not

There was talk of it. I think the emissions scandal costs put it to bed for a few years.
I think you need to time your entry to f1 too.
The last 7 ir so years have been locked down solid by mercedes. Audi are not going to throw a billion at it only to be guaranteed to be behind mercedes. Hopefully, over the next few years we will see another german brand in f1.
Bmw came in and failed for the most part.
Toyota came and promised a championship - they achieved nothing and those 2 were years ago. Its even more impossible now to come and succeed.

flazio

These turbo hybrids are very complicated and expensive to develop from scratch. Remember Honda spent 3 years being very uncompetitive in the back of a McLaren before Toro Rosso took them on followed by Red Bull.

eviltimeban

BMW and Toyota just so happened to enter the sport when Ferrari and Schumacher were dominant - there wasn't much anyone could do to topple them.

I don't have the results at hand, but I remember BMW Williams doing pretty well with Montoya. Toyota had the money but they were never more than a midfield team (they needed a star driver).

But we're seeing now that big budgets etc don't make for race winning teams - Ferrari, McLaren, Renault are a case in point.

MadYaker

Do Alpine have a huge budget? I guess Alonso probably doesn't come cheap but I would've thought of them as one of the smaller teams.

Joeface

Alpine , A Renault in blue mount dress . Alpine when doing poorly , Alpine Powered by RENAULT when doing well . The great chameleon

eviltimeban

F1 2022 car style revealed:

https://twitter.com/Burgrid16/status/1407061601220431872?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1407062437862457344%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es2_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.planetf1.com%2Fnews%2Ff1-2022-car-first-images%2F

AMKC

Who is Burgrid? It still looks like quiet a big car. Is that a floor at the side now or is it for channeling the air for ground effects?
It will be interesting to see how many different takes on the design of this there will be. Hopefully they will all look a bit different to give some variety to the cars.

El_Duderino 09

mickdw wrote: »

There was talk of it. I think the emissions scandal costs put it to bed for a few years.
I think you need to time your entry to f1 too.
The last 7 ir so years have been locked down solid by mercedes. Audi are not going to throw a billion at it only to be guaranteed to be behind mercedes. Hopefully, over the next few years we will see another german brand in f1.
Bmw came in and failed for the most part.
Toyota came and promised a championship - they achieved nothing and those 2 were years ago. Its even more impossible now to come and succeed.

VW has looked at F1 in a few ways and it's such a shame the emissions scandal ruined their prospects of entering. I think they were looking at entering under the Audi brand at that stage and Porsche and Lamborghini have been mentioned at other times too.

And you're right about how timing is so important too. VW was one of the group who helped develop the current engine regulations (I think, but I'm not sure) so they could join during the formula. They wanted to be involved to make sure the engine technology is relevant and we ended up with a compromise engine regulation that nobody really wanted and then they pulled out anyway.

The current manufacturers want to make sure that the engines have relevance to future technology, otherwise what's the point? And an established manufacturer like Mercedes wants the engines to be technologically difficult and future looking (and they have already invested a lot of money in cracking the technology and making it work) where a new manufacturer would prefer a simpler engine which they wouldn't need to invest so much in becoming competitive.

Truth is that Formula E has more relevance to the future technology than F1 at the moment and is much cheaper - much more bang for their buck. They have no trouble enticing manufacturers. Mercedes, Jaguar, Audi, Porsche, Nissan and BMW. F1 is back down to 3 manufacturers next year and bringing in an engine freeze. Technology freeze is the opposite to future technology innovation.

Hijpo

AMKC wrote: »

Who is Burgrid? It still looks like quiet a big car. Is that a floor at the side now or is it for channeling the air for ground effects?
It will be interesting to see how many different takes on the design of this there will be. Hopefully they will all look a bit different to give some variety to the cars.

Venturi tunnels making a comeback for ground effect

quokula

ElisaAtWar wrote: »

I do love F1. So here is a daft question, but how come the likes of Audi, Lamborghini don't challenge in this area. I know both of these suppliers are very different but does F1 not have any attraction to them. And if so I would really like to understand why not

The current engine formula locks anyone out of being competitive. Mercedes were working for years - reportedly since 2007 - to prepare their 2014 engine, which they have evolved ever since. There are extremely strict rules on testing and development which makes it very difficult to catch up.

Honda suffered a huge amount of reputational damage and are only now finally in a position where they can compete for the first time, and they've actually already committed to pulling out of the sport. Renault suffered huge damage too, and they were very close to pulling out a couple of years ago but decided to commit to the Alpine rebrand instead.

There is just zero reason for a manufacturer to enter the sport while the regulations require crazy amounts of spending on mega-complex engines, with very little chance of a return on that.

It's very different to 10-20 years ago when the likes of BMW, Ford, Toyota, Peugeot and even smaller independent manufacturers like Cosworth could afford to jump in and get involved and they didn't have to guarantee success to justify the costs involved.

The whole "road relevance" argument is little more than smoke and mirrors. The current cars are not in any way road relevant. The rules were formulated to serve two purposes - one was that the word "hybrid" was a good marketing term for the manufacturers, and the second was that the manufacturers most heavily involved in forcing the rules through knew it would give them a competitive advantage and create huge barriers for others to compete with them.

Other series feature far more road relevant tech and have far fewer issues attracting manufacturers. Formula 1 never was, and shouldn't be, about road relevance, as it was always about building the fastest racing cars possible, which is in no way related to the daily commute. Unfortunately the current rules make it much, much more expensive to build a fast racing car - the all conquering Mercedes from the start of the hybrid era was slower around most tracks than a Minardi on 5% of the budget 10 years earlier for example. They've made up some of that lost pace now of course with ever more advanced aero, but at a cost of billions across all the teams.

quokula

eviltimeban wrote: »

F1 2022 car style revealed:

https://twitter.com/Burgrid16/status/1407061601220431872?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1407062437862457344%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es2_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.planetf1.com%2Fnews%2Ff1-2022-car-first-images%2F

The intended style - it will be interesting to see what loopholes the teams find to technically match the required dimensions while optimising for performance - every time we get major changes we end up with some cars looking like this:

Harika

The V10, V8 engine was something most manufacturers had already developed or could outsource it to e.g Hart, mecachrome, mugen
Those were able to develop an engine what is now unthinkable.

AMKC

quokula wrote: »

The intended style - it will be interesting to see what loopholes the teams find to technically match the required dimensions while optimising for performance - every time we get major changes we end up with some cars looking like this:

While that was bad it was no where near as bad the Lego Ferrari or the Hoover nosed Ferrari. Also don't forget the double nosed Lotus with one side shorter than the other for safety regulations.
I hope we get lots of interesting designs next year and not just more of the same just with a different name pu and colour on them as we have had fir most of the last decade.

quokula

quokula wrote: »

The current engine formula locks anyone out of being competitive. Mercedes were working for years - reportedly since 2007 - to prepare their 2014 engine, which they have evolved ever since. There are extremely strict rules on testing and development which makes it very difficult to catch up.

Honda suffered a huge amount of reputational damage and are only now finally in a position where they can compete for the first time, and they've actually already committed to pulling out of the sport. Renault suffered huge damage too, and they were very close to pulling out a couple of years ago but decided to commit to the Alpine rebrand instead.

There is just zero reason for a manufacturer to enter the sport while the regulations require crazy amounts of spending on mega-complex engines, with very little chance of a return on that.

It's very different to 10-20 years ago when the likes of BMW, Ford, Toyota, Peugeot and even smaller independent manufacturers like Cosworth could afford to jump in and get involved and they didn't have to guarantee success to justify the costs involved.

The whole "road relevance" argument is little more than smoke and mirrors. The current cars are not in any way road relevant. The rules were formulated to serve two purposes - one was that the word "hybrid" was a good marketing term for the manufacturers, and the second was that the manufacturers most heavily involved in forcing the rules through knew it would give them a competitive advantage and create huge barriers for others to compete with them.

Other series feature far more road relevant tech and have far fewer issues attracting manufacturers. Formula 1 never was, and shouldn't be, about road relevance, as it was always about building the fastest racing cars possible, which is in no way related to the daily commute. Unfortunately the current rules make it much, much more expensive to build a fast racing car - the all conquering Mercedes from the start of the hybrid era was slower around most tracks than a Minardi on 5% of the budget 10 years earlier for example. They've made up some of that lost pace now of course with ever more advanced aero, but at a cost of billions across all the teams.

All this.

On the Minardi point, they FIA pretty much turned everything around a few years ago to allow stupid levels of downforce again in order to allow times to not be stupidly slow any more. Between the increased aero and the teams not wanting to run in traffic to protect tyres we're been seeing a lot less on-track following and passing without DRS compared to the start of the Hybrid era as well.

The way they've allowed the aero clawback has also been bad for competition. It's all iterative and additive. Creating Vortices to seal an area and then figure out what to do from there. It must take 6-8 races to manage to fully create something new that'll be a decent step forward.


But yeah, hard to disagree with much of your post. I'd sum it up really as this time the manufacturers were allowed to take over. In the past they'd come in, have mixed success, throw a strop at some point and **** off. This time around Mercedes has been allowed to partly takeover with the others basically becoming pseudo-manufacturers and nothing like independent teams of the past.

AMKC

Some interesting designs here some I had never seen before.
I wonder will any of the teams take inspiration from the past for there cars next year.

https://youtu.be/ulmvzzRcZt0

A good watch.

pjohnson

Formula E is loosing Audi and BMW after this year.

Pen Rua

pjohnson wrote: »

Formula E is loosing Audi and BMW after this year.

Both of whom moving back to top level endurance racing with LMDh programmes in 2023, with a focus on IMSA (US based endurance), but with scope for European races (Le Mans) insofar as I understand.

duploelabs

Pen Rua wrote: »

Both of whom moving back to top level endurance racing with LMDh programmes in 2023, with a focus on IMSA (US based endurance), but with scope for European races (Le Mans) insofar as I understand.

this is the timeline for entries into the WEC

quokula

AMKC wrote: »

While that was bad it was no where near as bad the Lego Ferrari or the Hoover nosed Ferrari. Also don't forget the double nosed Lotus with one side shorter than the other for safety regulations.
I hope we get lots of interesting designs next year and not just more of the same just with a different name pu and colour on them as we have had fir most of the last decade.

Yeah I wouldn't mind at all if we see some ugly cars, as long as there are some interesting differences between teams.

Frank Bullitt

quokula wrote: »

The current engine formula locks anyone out of being competitive. Mercedes were working for years - reportedly since 2007 - to prepare their 2014 engine, which they have evolved ever since. There are extremely strict rules on testing and development which makes it very difficult to catch up.

Honda suffered a huge amount of reputational damage and are only now finally in a position where they can compete for the first time, and they've actually already committed to pulling out of the sport. Renault suffered huge damage too, and they were very close to pulling out a couple of years ago but decided to commit to the Alpine rebrand instead.

There is just zero reason for a manufacturer to enter the sport while the regulations require crazy amounts of spending on mega-complex engines, with very little chance of a return on that.

It's very different to 10-20 years ago when the likes of BMW, Ford, Toyota, Peugeot and even smaller independent manufacturers like Cosworth could afford to jump in and get involved and they didn't have to guarantee success to justify the costs involved.

The whole "road relevance" argument is little more than smoke and mirrors. The current cars are not in any way road relevant. The rules were formulated to serve two purposes - one was that the word "hybrid" was a good marketing term for the manufacturers, and the second was that the manufacturers most heavily involved in forcing the rules through knew it would give them a competitive advantage and create huge barriers for others to compete with them.

Other series feature far more road relevant tech and have far fewer issues attracting manufacturers. Formula 1 never was, and shouldn't be, about road relevance, as it was always about building the fastest racing cars possible, which is in no way related to the daily commute. Unfortunately the current rules make it much, much more expensive to build a fast racing car - the all conquering Mercedes from the start of the hybrid era was slower around most tracks than a Minardi on 5% of the budget 10 years earlier for example. They've made up some of that lost pace now of course with ever more advanced aero, but at a cost of billions across all the teams.

This.

LMP is more road relevant IMO, that is reflected a bit as well in seeing the manufacturers going back to the series as well due to the new rules coming in.

As for F1 being road relevant, aside from a few things that have trickled down, overall it really isn't road relevant at all. The idea that Hybrid and a 1.6 ICU will help with marketing is a joke, people watch F1 for entertainment, not because it has a similar engine to the car int he driveway.

Look at the reactions to when the v10s did some show and tell last year, people stopped in their tracks to watch and listen. I must have watched the laps Alonso did about 15 times in one day for that beautiful sound.

As you have pointed out as well, the current regs just double up as marketing for Mercedes. They threatened to leave had it not gone to their satisfaction and the result is the past few years of utter crap on the track, both in entertainment and noise.

Glico Man

I'd wonder if the new regulations coming in next season will we see any further interest from Manufacturers or private teams looking to come in.

I remember reading something a year or two ago about Campos Racing trying to get back in. They'd a bid the same year Haas did, with the latter getting the nod. Wonder if Dave Richards and Prodrive still be interested too. More moving chicanes or not, I would like to see more cars on the grid.

The budget cap will certainly make it a bit more of an attractive prospect.