Formula 1 2018: General Discussion Thread

Wanderer78 · 11-06-2018 12:42PM

eviltimeban wrote: »

For the first time in about 20 years I didn't bother watching the GP, in fact I skipped Monaco as well. I just looked up the result and saved myself two hours of my life. Shame.

unfortunately, i more or less switched off over 15 years ago, i struggle to watch a full gp live now, more or less havent in over 15 years, finding the politics of the sport far more interesting

El_Duderino 09 · 11-06-2018 01:24PM

I wonder what changes Ross Brawn will be able to make to improve the racing. The teams will have to agree to the changes so it’s much more difficult than identifying solutions and implementing them.

Frank Bullitt · 11-06-2018 01:41PM

They have made aero changes for next year...lipstick on a pig.

muckwarrior · 11-06-2018 01:54PM

Gintonious wrote: »

They have made aero changes for next year...lipstick on a pig.

Not sure why you're so dismissive of this?. Aero is the primary reason why overtaking is so difficult and they've made changes to try to rectify it. Whether or not they're drastic enough only time will tell, but at least they're trying.

El_Duderino 09 · 11-06-2018 02:10PM

Gintonious wrote: »

They have made aero changes for next year...lipstick on a pig.

What kind of changes would it take to make a difference? More ground effect and less front wing downforce?

How radical would the changes need to be?

Frank Bullitt · 11-06-2018 02:23PM

muckwarrior wrote: »

Not sure why you're so dismissive of this?. Aero is the primary reason why overtaking is so difficult and they've made changes to try to rectify it. Whether or not they're drastic enough only time will tell, but at least they're trying.

Because its only slight aero changes, granted they will help. But they also have to address the current crop of tires that just seem to last forever, and the fact that they are still saving lots of fuel so drivers drive in a very conservative manner as well.

These new aero changes are also acting to enhance the DRS, so feels like there is just a swing to the other extreme now as well.

Frank Bullitt · 11-06-2018 02:37PM

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

What kind of changes would it take to make a difference? More ground effect and less front wing downforce?

How radical would the changes need to be?

Ground effect would be top of my list, smaller (narrower) front wings with a limit on elements on it (they are already doing the fewer elements).

Vastly reduced bargeboard area as well, they look insane right now in the current rules.

El_Duderino 09 · 11-06-2018 03:08PM

I also think there’s a compounding effect of weight limit leading to fuel saving, limited engines leading to engine saving and temperature sensitive tyres leading to tyre saving. These three things together mean there are lots of incentives to coast around and manage your pace rather than really push.

I’d love to see them increase the fuel limit so they can drive flat out, increase the engine allowance so they can run the engine at full belt and create tyres that can withstand much greater heat without washing out so they could throw the car around.

I’m not certain any of those things would actually enable them to overtake but it’s a bit mad to think they’re spending so much of the race managing fuel, engine and tyres.

Frank Bullitt · 11-06-2018 03:20PM

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I also think there’s a compounding effect of weight limit leading to fuel saving, limited engines leading to engine saving and temperature sensitive tyres leading to tyre saving. These three things together mean there are lots of incentives to coast around and manage your pace rather than really push.

I’d love to see them increase the fuel limit so they can drive flat out, increase the engine allowance so they can run the engine at full belt and create tyres that can withstand much greater heat without washing out so they could throw the car around.

I’m not certain any of those things would actually enable them to overtake but it’s a bit mad to think they’re spending so much of the race managing fuel, engine and tyres.

The bigger picture with F1 involves more than the aero tweaks, you hit the nail on the head there with fuel saving and fuel flow etc. They have increased the fuel flow already but the teams said that it won't mean that the cars will run at a higher pace, they just have the option to.

I think it was Hulkenberg that said he was surprised that when he did LeMans, he was basically flat out for his stints, he didnt have to save fuel that much or manage tires. And thats endurance racing!

cherryghost · 11-06-2018 04:07PM

I miss the days of loopholes in car designs and we saw so many varied cars on the field, even into the late 90s. Remember those little tall wings some of the cars had before they were banned (I think). I dont think it helped aero of the car but I respected engineers finding ways to stand out from the crowd. These days there's far less wiggle room (externally at least)

muckwarrior · 11-06-2018 04:48PM

cherryghost wrote: »

I miss the days of loopholes in car designs and we saw so many varied cars on the field, even into the late 90s. Remember those little tall wings some of the cars had before they were banned (I think). I dont think it helped aero of the car but I respected engineers finding ways to stand out from the crowd. These days there's far less wiggle room (externally at least)

Regulations are only a part of the reason why cars are so similar now. I recall Adrian Newey talking bout how even if regs were much looser the cars would all still be very similar due to modern technologies such as CFD. Designers and engineers can predict with a fair degree of accuracy how fast a design will be before building it, whereas back in the day they only had trial and error, which led to some mad concepts being tested.

11-06-2018 05:41PM

muckwarrior wrote: »

Regulations are only a part of the reason why cars are so similar now. I recall Adrian Newey talking bout how even if regs were much looser the cars would all still be very similar due to modern technologies such as CFD. Designers and engineers can predict with a fair degree of accuracy how fast a design will be before building it, whereas back in the day they only had trial and error, which led to some mad concepts being tested.

Data, data, data. That's what has it ruined. It's not just car design but tyres, engine modes, fuel flow, power curves, gear ratios, everything. If you gave the teams the running order after the first lap they'll be able to give a good attempt at the full result barring an incident.
Manage, manage, hold back, take it easy, hit this delta, etc. Too much information is the issue along with too much done with it.

skipper_G · 11-06-2018 08:07PM

Adamocovic wrote: »

Delighted Leclerc held onto the points.

That's 3 points finishes this season for him, in his first year, in a car that is really down the field in terms of performance.

I've been banging a drum to anyone who'll listen to me since I first saw him in F3, the guy can drive. Max grabs the headlines but I personally rate Leclerc as a better prospect.

Gintonious wrote: »

Because its only slight aero changes, granted they will help. But they also have to address the current crop of tires that just seem to last forever, and the fact that they are still saving lots of fuel so drivers drive in a very conservative manner as well.

These new aero changes are also acting to enhance the DRS, so feels like there is just a swing to the other extreme now as well.

The notion that if drivers are saving fuel they aren't pushing is a fallacy. A lighter car is a faster car, so teams are always going to put in as little fuel as possible. It's faster to start a race with less fuel and save at different points of the race than it is to fill it to the brim and drive flat out to the finish. They could double the fuel limits and the teams will still under fuel the cars.

skipper_G · 11-06-2018 09:30PM

Saw a stat on reddit, Ericsson has 11 points from 83 starts vs Leclerc with 10 points from 7 starts. Says a lot about their respective abilities

El_Duderino 09 · 11-06-2018 10:18PM

skipper_G wrote: »

The notion that if drivers are saving fuel they aren't pushing is a fallacy. A lighter car is a faster car, so teams are always going to put in as little fuel as possible. It's faster to start a race with less fuel and save at different points of the race than it is to fill it to the brim and drive flat out to the finish. They could double the fuel limits and the teams will still under fuel the cars.

Well that's true, they can still push the braking zone and push through he corner- unless they're also saving the tyres and brakes as get were in Canada. I'd love if they made some parts generic to cut costs and remove am advantage from researching the bejesus out of wheel nuts. Maybe the energy recovery systems for example. But they are being too stingy on engines and fuel. I wonder what way they would need to tweak the car weight or fuel flow rate to get them to drive it flat out.

They definitely need tyres that can handle being driven flat out. Whether the tyres last a full race or only a handful of laps, its surely important that they can hammer the tyres without them washing out.

11-06-2018 10:27PM

If they're managing fuel they're not pushing braking zones.

El_Duderino 09 · 11-06-2018 10:32PM

Deleted User wrote: »

If they're managing fuel they're not pushing braking zones.

They often go hand in hand but there's no reason they couldn't turn down the engine and still break late to make up the time lost due to reduced engine power.

mickdw · 11-06-2018 11:26PM

Bring back refueling. It's a no brained in terms of excitement and will work around some of the issue re fuel saving.
The tyres are tricky. Falling off the cliff is what you want but when we had that pirelli didn't like the public perception of the tyres being crap plus the drivers took tyre saving to new heights.
A tyre war perhaps is the answer. The more variables, the more prospect of excitement so yes tyre war plus refueling.

11-06-2018 11:31PM

I think part of the problem with the tyres is that they all have similar characteristics in how they wear. They pretty much all seem to have an operating window and outside that they just completely burn out. So even the harder tyres can't really be leaned on in the race.

skipper_G · 12-06-2018 12:19AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If they're managing fuel they're not pushing braking zones.

One of the most used techniques for fuel saving is lift and coast. They naturally brake later when doing so, doesn't that qualify as pushing braking zones? They have to find the right balance without going over the limit.

12-06-2018 12:35AM

skipper_G wrote: »

One of the most used techniques for fuel saving is lift and coast. They naturally brake later when doing so, doesn't that qualify as pushing braking zones? They have to find the right balance without going over the limit.

They're cruising into the braking zones. Lift and coast is what it sounds like, it reduces the amount of braking. Also the brakes are going on a lower speeds making it much easier. Have a go on an empty roundabout and see the difference between cruising up so you're doing 40k when you turn onto it or try to brake from 80 to get down to 40 just in time.
Could go on more about kinetic energy (it's a square law blah blah blah). I meant pushing in the braking zones rather than pushing the braking zones. Obviously if you're going slow enough you can eliminate braking zones altogether. :pac:

mickdw · 12-06-2018 10:52AM

skipper_G wrote: »

One of the most used techniques for fuel saving is lift and coast. They naturally brake later when doing so, doesn't that qualify as pushing braking zones? They have to find the right balance without going over the limit.

If they were to try lift and coast on a quali lap, what do you think would happen?
Lift and cost is a fuel saving measure - an efficient way of approaching a corner. It could not be described in any way as the fastest way or pushing the braking zone - yes they will obviously still try to keep the minimum speed through the corner as high as possible but still far easier to do that when having a longer period of deceleration approaching the corner than trying to max out braking at the last moment.

Frank Bullitt · 12-06-2018 11:35AM

skipper_G wrote: »

One of the most used techniques for fuel saving is lift and coast. They naturally brake later when doing so, doesn't that qualify as pushing braking zones? They have to find the right balance without going over the limit.

That is the opposite of pushing a braking zone. If you life off on these things, they slow dramatically due to the drag they have. They are braking later, but from a much slower speed.

Pushing the braking zone is leaving it until the last possible moment you can switch from full throttle to the brake, if you add in some coasting you are just taking it easy.

Adamocovic · 12-06-2018 12:49PM

I know it's a bit early and isn't a big concern but was looking into Autosports Rookie of the Year winners and collecting information about the F1 winners since 2000. Since all racing categories are eligible for a winner, not every year has been F1 but most have.

I wanted to see how the Rookies are fairing this year in comparison. I know it's not just based off points so I've tried to include enough data, obviously drivers at lower teams are expecting less points finishes.

Some notes:
-The black mark is regarding McLarens disqualification that year from Constructor's Championship.
-Also if the car has completed over 90% of the race the result was counted and not marked as a retirement.
-Finally it had to be their first complete year racing in order to qualify as a rookie.

Now this years bunch.

So far safe to say Gasly and Leclerc are dominating the rookie race. Both doing fine jobs and should be considered by Autosport next year. Leclerc has already won for his GP2 performance last year beating out Ocon who had one of the best rookie years in F1! (Felt bad leaving him off the list).

I know some people may not rate Autosport or their awards but they are voted on by a combination of the public and professionals (not sure which one is done for Rookie of the Year).

Will be interesting where they sit at the end of the year. I think we have some talented rookies this season.

cherryghost · 12-06-2018 01:38PM

Sirotkin, Hartley and Ericsson all have no place in F1. They're all useless and the likes of Kvyat and Wehrlein are much more capable with a car under them. Unfortunately 2/3 bring money to the table so I dont think they're going anywhere soon. I think Hartley may be a goner. He needed a good weekend in Canada. Quali was ok but where he positioned his car on lap 1, I don't know.

I would indeed like to see refueling back, or at least 2 tyre changes in the race. Pirelli tyres right now are trash, frankly not helping in giving piss poor races. Nobody wants to go hard on them because they can last a long time and eek out as many laps without burning them out. I don't really recall any racers going completely 'off-a-cliff' in terms of tyre degradation.

muckwarrior · 12-06-2018 01:47PM

cherryghost wrote: »

Pirelli tyres right now are trash

People were saying the exact same thing when they had tyres that degraded quickly, even saying it made races too unpredictable :rolleyes: Refueling however will fix nothing. The early to mid 2000s were probably the worst years in terms of processional F1 races. The era of the short-life tyres had a massive amount of overtaking in comparison.

Frank Bullitt · 12-06-2018 01:53PM

cherryghost wrote: »

Sirotkin, Hartley and Ericsson all have no place in F1. They're all useless and the likes of Kvyat and Wehrlein are much more capable with a car under them. Unfortunately 2/3 bring money to the table so I dont think they're going anywhere soon. I think Hartley may be a goner. He needed a good weekend in Canada. Quali was ok but where he positioned his car on lap 1, I don't know.

I would indeed like to see refueling back, or at least 2 tyre changes in the race. Pirelli tyres right now are trash, frankly not helping in giving piss poor races. Nobody wants to go hard on them because they can last a long time and eek out as many laps without burning them out. I don't really recall any racers going completely 'off-a-cliff' in terms of tyre degradation.

I'd add Stroll into that list as well.

cherryghost · 12-06-2018 02:41PM

muckwarrior wrote: »

People were saying the exact same thing when they had tyres that degraded quickly, even saying it made races too unpredictable :rolleyes:Refueling however will fix nothing. The early to mid 2000s were probably the worst years in terms of processional F1 races. The era of the short-life tyres had a massive amount of overtaking in comparison.

2012 was a great year, and tyre degradation was very high.

skipper_G · 12-06-2018 05:59PM

mickdw wrote: »

If they were to try lift and coast on a quali lap, what do you think would happen?
Lift and cost is a fuel saving measure - an efficient way of approaching a corner. It could not be described in any way as the fastest way or pushing the braking zone - yes they will obviously still try to keep the minimum speed through the corner as high as possible but still far easier to do that when having a longer period of deceleration approaching the corner than trying to max out braking at the last moment.

If you want to see qualy laps, watch qualifying. The two require a different and incredibly varied set of skills. The point I was making is that fuel saving does not equal just coasting around, it's a complete fallacy.

There's lots in F1 that could be better but there's also lots that good. It feels like many people just look for the negatives on here.

ayux4rj6zql2ph · 12-06-2018 07:18PM

This post has been deleted.

Formula 1 2018: General Discussion Thread

Comments