By non-contested do you mean things like lapped cars/passing cars on pit road?
By non-contested do you mean things like lapped cars/passing cars on pit road?
(N I K I)
DELETED
by N I K I : wth post duplicated itself :D
@Mustafur and co: It really sounds to me like you guys want every race to look like Valencia 2011? when 24 cars finished in exactly the same order they started in. 
No i just want to see racing, i understand it wasnt good before this all im asking for is a middle ground.
Nah, faster cars passing slower cars who are told they are not in the same race as the car passing them.
This is racing that we always craved for to see on our television, for years and years this is what we shouted and envisioned for.
Imperfection, struggle and generally new things are mother of all chaos and chaos is mother of all extreme emotions. This is what we as fans want to experience. The middle ground does not exist in F1, it never did and it never will exist. Extremes is what F1 is about.
It only so seems to me like people who are rather not very competitive in LFS are the ones who don't understand this new F1 game that tires are providing. Here it goes, I'm going to give you an explanation as simple as possibly I can do to make you realize a few things.
Since a lot of us are familiar with GTR racing (be it endurance or 1hour sprint) we defenetially know that our slick model tire behaves very differently with different cambers. Hence you use somewhat 1 entire degree of camber more for qualifying than for race and completely different tire compound. Now, envision that you have to start the race in GT1 car on R2 tire and those exact qualifying cambers with full tank brother. Of course you were to burn your tires in matter of laps. This is why I think it's the stupidest thing anyone can do in F1 is build a car as Mercedes did. There is a difference. They don't run that extreme camber/tire pressures, they blow exhaust gasses into rear wheels, which then gives extra grip, which basically only works in 1 lap if you overdo it since it melts the rear tires to the ground.
If you know all this you are obviously going to build a car that is solely made for race with race cambers and race pressures and race exhaust blown diffuser. Of course you are not to have the ultimate pace in qualifying, because as already mentioned in comparison that we can experience in LFS, qualifying setup is very much different, and tire settings are only the top of the iceberg.
Then go look out and see that RedBull has always made the car for qualifying and always was on defensive strategy in race. This is why they are hated. They aren't racing, they aren't taking on a challenge, they are avoiding it with few tricks. So, now when tires are finally demanding the entirely race setup teams like Ferrari, Lotus, Force India are profiting because they have understood the game from the start and took on with it, whilst RedBull and Mercedes always looked for a way around it. FIA's role and tire suppliers role is to command the situation that everyone has to take on the challenge, not avoid it and that is what is happening right now.
And for McLaren, Sauber and Williams, tires have nothing to do with them, they changed concept of car design in final year of this sort of car design when everyone else perfected their old designs and of course the new design is doomed to struggle before it gets to grips with the things. It might be a clever thing those three teams are doing if they will have big use of it next year.
That is what is happening in this whole tire drama and I'm glad RedBull seems to be finally cought out with it. RedBull drivers are the one who are driving 8/10's, just as you would have to if you were to run hotlap setup in GTR/F1 car in race condition in LFS. RedBull drivers are the only ones to make such statements along with displeasure Mercedes drivers show. I'm just sorry for Mercedes that they didn't recognize earlier what it's all this about since they're even further on this spectrum. Any complaints from McLaren/Sauber/Williams driver about tires is ridicule since it's simply their car being in baby phase of development.
This is exactly why this season is interesting. Because two teams are cought out with stone age thinking, and other three with new car designs. This has nothing to do with the tires! Drivers always tend to make excuses, don't buy too much into them!
Looks like a hyper-inflation graph from Zimbabwe. More isn't necessarily better. Sure you get a brief economic boost for a few years, then BAM no one gives a shit anymore and it all goes to shit
I happen to think from a commercial standpoint Pirelli and DRS have worked. But the FIA and Bernie have to be careful that this doesn't go too far that these 'races' suddenly become valueless as a spectacle.
What bothers me about the tyre thing is that it's completely dependant on what Pirelli do how teams fortune's go. So mercedes are being heavy on their tyres, therefore they have relied on Pirelli making their tyres at least somewhat durable. Ferrari and Lotus seemingly the other way but Pirelli, who appear to be just playing this by ear a little too much could have quite easily made a tyre more durable than they meant too for teh Spanish grand prix and this would have favoured Red Bull and Mercedes, nobody has actual time to prepare and they just seem to be some sort of lottery of design your car a certain way and hope Pirelli makes tyres that favour your design. It's stupid.
I'd much rather than they limit the amount fuel they can use, at least that would be tactical and encourage some form of coherent technology advance.
I'd much rather than they limit the amount fuel they can use, at least that would be tactical and encourage some form of coherent technology advance.
@Bingo Wings: Mercedes design never really worked, for 3 years. And Pirelli's / FIA's / Bernies / who-else? tendency was obvious from a mile up.
Barcelona was always extreme on tires. We should be hearing a whole lot less crying from Monaco / Canada! And Mercedes should be better in Monaco, since it's no overtake track.
And Pirelli's / FIA's / Bernies / who-else? tendency was obvious from a mile up. Barcelona was always extreme on tires. We should be hearing a whole lot less crying from Monaco / Canada! And Mercedes should be better in Monaco, since it's no overtake track.
Just remove the F1 car completly and make GP2 the new F1, seenas they have no problem to race with the same tires.
Make tyres free of choice, engines free of choice, displacement and aspiration free of choice..
Yeah i see the money piling up again to watch it become 'F1'
Yeah i see the money piling up again to watch it become 'F1'
i dont give a flying f about whether a team is struggling or not because of this or that, what i care about is racing, and we are not seeing it.
F1 should be more then having one key aspect it should be a combination, drivers should be pushed to there mental edge and shouldn't have to think twice about whether to defend their position when challenged.
Mustafur, for or against DRS?
Depends on the implementation of DRS. I don't mind an openable rear wing at all, in fact it's a good thing. Same downforce in corners, less downforce on straights, it's a win-win situation. What sucks balls is its stupid implementation as a passing device only. DRS should be available to be used at all times except under yellows, wet conditions and perhaps the in first few laps of the race. The same applies to KERS in endurance racing, having zones where the system can be charged and used is nonsensical. Either it's a good system and its use should be unrestricted, or it isn't and it shouldn't be in racing.
For a long time there's been complaints of it being difficult to follow close to another car, and that it hurts the tyres a lot. If this is due to reliance on overbody downforce, then loosen up the regulations on ground effect designs. Of course there's no need to go all out and allow anything, but changing the balance of over- and underbody aerodynamics could help here. I find it hard to believe that any progress (even a little) couldn't be done more safely than in the 1980s. Perhaps this could also mean more interesting diffusers too.
There's such a thing as too many pit stops, but also such a thing as too few. Using five sets of tyres in a 1.5-2h race seems wasteful and unnecessary, but tyres that last the entire race are meh too. Aim somewhere in between. If there was only one stop for tyres, there would be some leeway (5-10 laps?), but perhaps still the need to pass on the track outside of that window. The same goes for fuel strategies. None is boring, too many mean forever waiting for the guy in front to pit. Personally, I feel that more than two stops is a lot, and causes situations where passes are calculated to be done mostly in the pits. Less means more passes have to be attempted on track. I wouldn't be entirely opposed to mostly one stoppers if there was a way to have a window, rather than everyone pitting within the same two laps, I guess.
A further random thought: give significant points for qualification performance, but reverse top 6 (or some other number) for the race. Potentially change the format to 2x 30 minute sessions, give extra sets of tyres that won't be used in the race, allocate X number of gearboxes and engines for the overall year, instead of applying grid penalties before they're used up.
Also a note on pit stop safety. If pit stops are becoming so fast and dangerous that mishaps keep creeping up, simply add a three second rule. The car must stay stationary in the box for three seconds starting from the moment the last pit crew member stops touching any part of the car. Can't be too hard to have some light or a lolly man react to that. It would allow pit crew efficiency to count, while allowing some margin for error.
For a long time there's been complaints of it being difficult to follow close to another car, and that it hurts the tyres a lot. If this is due to reliance on overbody downforce, then loosen up the regulations on ground effect designs. Of course there's no need to go all out and allow anything, but changing the balance of over- and underbody aerodynamics could help here. I find it hard to believe that any progress (even a little) couldn't be done more safely than in the 1980s. Perhaps this could also mean more interesting diffusers too.
There's such a thing as too many pit stops, but also such a thing as too few. Using five sets of tyres in a 1.5-2h race seems wasteful and unnecessary, but tyres that last the entire race are meh too. Aim somewhere in between. If there was only one stop for tyres, there would be some leeway (5-10 laps?), but perhaps still the need to pass on the track outside of that window. The same goes for fuel strategies. None is boring, too many mean forever waiting for the guy in front to pit. Personally, I feel that more than two stops is a lot, and causes situations where passes are calculated to be done mostly in the pits. Less means more passes have to be attempted on track. I wouldn't be entirely opposed to mostly one stoppers if there was a way to have a window, rather than everyone pitting within the same two laps, I guess.
A further random thought: give significant points for qualification performance, but reverse top 6 (or some other number) for the race. Potentially change the format to 2x 30 minute sessions, give extra sets of tyres that won't be used in the race, allocate X number of gearboxes and engines for the overall year, instead of applying grid penalties before they're used up.
Also a note on pit stop safety. If pit stops are becoming so fast and dangerous that mishaps keep creeping up, simply add a three second rule. The car must stay stationary in the box for three seconds starting from the moment the last pit crew member stops touching any part of the car. Can't be too hard to have some light or a lolly man react to that. It would allow pit crew efficiency to count, while allowing some margin for error.
Against, whilst it does allow passing that may or not be possible before, its giving one car the ability to walk past the other without giving the other driver a chance to defend.
Of course its not the case at every track but there should be another option, maybe make a regulation for teams to abide by design regulations that reduce rear turbulance, and make it easier for cars to stay behind others, which in turn can provide a whole new aero design platform with new innovations.
You're just being ignorant, you know that right. It's a goddamn drivers problem that he is trying to make it to stop one less time than the other people around him. If you're doing that, you have some prices to pay and I sure as hell am not going to be held up by you who are two seconds a lap slower than me. Long live DRS!
P.S. And if you're so ignorant that you can't distinguish situations like that from proper racing situations such were Hamilton vs Webber in Bahrainy last quoter of the race, or Rosberg vs di Resta last laps of Barcelona to recall few from very recent times we have nothing to talk about.
Yes, because wanting to see side by side racing and drivers fighting tooth and nail being exhuasted after a race means im ignorant.
Put it this way in the last stint of that race, drivers where lapping around 4 seconds a lap slower then they would of in 2010 in the same scenario, aka they were crawling.
Pretty much the only driver related thing in their hands is how they did the first stint, then its tyre conservation till the end.
I think every single driver was soaked with sweat after the race. What was your point that drivers are having it easy, dude open your eyes already. I explained exactly why some people are struggling. I'm not going to do that again for you. This is not an argument. When you're two seconds slower than me it's not a fight, it's annihilation as it should be.
To show you how obviously lost to this all you are just watch replay of Barcelona race and watch Massa/Alonso/Ricciardo overtakes. Beautiful racing.
If it so happens that for variety of strategy we witness lets say a drastic 40% of annihilation passes without fighting to see other 60% a proper racing that we would never see in first place, then so be it.
Long live DRS!
To show you how obviously lost to this all you are just watch replay of Barcelona race and watch Massa/Alonso/Ricciardo overtakes. Beautiful racing.
If it so happens that for variety of strategy we witness lets say a drastic 40% of annihilation passes without fighting to see other 60% a proper racing that we would never see in first place, then so be it.
Long live DRS!
I have opened my eyes, im past the stage of: "WOW overtaking is possible!!!!" and now im looking into detail whats really happening, i know it takes some people longer then others to see some things but damn if you dont get it now i dont think you ever will.
Im looking at this from a drivers point of view, the only point of view that matters when talking about actual racing, the defending car at best really only gets one move to stake their claim to defend but tyre management will always come before defending.
Ok then tell me what you're talking. I haven't seen you say a word about it.
Wait I think I understand your point. You want to completely erase all this : BBC's best overtakes of 2012 (some in early laps, some DRS, some out of DRS zones but helped by DRS enabling chaser to stay close) just to see someone who is two seconds slower than he should be have a chance at defending his position. Yea, makes sense since you're probably 2 seconds off pace in LFS too. I know, compassion right. 
Im not going to continue any further, your nose is too far up your own you know what to understand anything apart from what your View is.
I have said countless times I didn't like how it was before the pirelli nonsense but typical of someone with your kind of argument you dont see that, all i have ever asked was for a middle ground that removes overtaking aids and allows the driver to fight without overly advantaging them so they can actually race, that is all.
You are entertained by that just like a kid is entertained by wrestling. It's ok...it doesn't make it any less fun...but the point Mustafur is trying to make is that something is fundamentally wrong under all of this.
The drivers know it, the engineers know it, some fans are just starting to see it.
What you guys seem to argue about is personal opinions, some like how it is, some don't. There's no facts that can change ones view on what he enjoys or not.
What is entertainment is personal opinon, what is racing is not.
Then again a Time trial is a form of racing but I guess it all comes down to whatever floats your entertained boat.
I would love to see a free engine formula again.
Something special about some cars running V6, some V10 and others running V12 or even inline 4 with crazy amounts of peak power.
There's nothing more 'road relevant' than allowing the manufacturers to race the engines that are relevant to THEM.
Ferrari are an exception, but in the case of Mercedes or Honda and Toyota when they were in F1, what benefit do they have from building a 2.4L crossplane crank V8 that will never find its way into any of their road cars?
If they allowed open engine format you would have Honda and Toyota with a V6/I4 and possibly Audi/Lamborghini with a V10.
Anyway.. this is just a dream.
Apparently all people wanna see is every car that passes the pitlane to sound exactly the same as the next one.
But surprisingly I agree with NIKI's mentality completely on this issue. I still find it utterly confusing that people still believe that F1 was a balls to the wall sport on every race lap...
2013 Spanish Grand Prix
(178 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG