[Rules] DRS: Is it time for it to go?

[Aysedasi]

Yes, as (hopefully) a precursor to dumping it into the 'things we really should never have done' pit I agree testing without it or in a limited guise would be a good idea.

[JHamilton]

DRS should have been dropped with the introduction of the new cars. It could have been added back if they thought it was necessary.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

tires that last the whole race will still lead to a lot of marbles. perhaps not as much as there is currently but you go to some of these narrow tracks (more so the city course/ones with barriers that reflect the marbles back onto the track surface) and you will run into the same problem as you do now...there is only one clean racing line so all anyone can really do is follow.

the other issue would be all these long straights followed by sharp corners...there is going to be hard breaking and thus a lot of flat spotted tires and when you combine the risk of a flat spot and an increased penalty of a tire stop (due to a race distance tire) you are only encouraging drivers to be less aggressive and that cannot be good for encouraging overtaking..

i dont think things have changed enough since 2005 to justify trying a race distance tire again.

Drivers would be forced to manage tyre wear and the tactics would be on the track and not in the pits. Maybe if everyone wants tyre changes then the pit stop should have a minimum time to avoid a car being able to pit and resume racing in the position they were in. All this stuff could be done but it is artificial and gimmicky so my approach would be no pit stops and let the drivers work it out. If they stuff it up then they have the option to pit stop but it would put them out of position and they would have to fight their way back through the field and doing that would negate the tactical pit stop to get an advantage.

[Sodemo]

Whatever happened to the notion of cockpit adjustable aero on the fly? I seem to recall that being mentioned a while back so that drivers could adjust the front or rear wing to add or remove more angle of attack...?

[Casper]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

Whatever happened to the notion of cockpit adjustable aero on the fly? I seem to recall that being mentioned a while back so that drivers could adjust the front or rear wing to add or remove more angle of attack...?

There is too much adjustability and coaching from the pits now, the only button on the steering wheel should be a horn!

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by Casper

There is too much adjustability and coaching from the pits now, the only button on the steering wheel should be a horn!

With indicator stalks!

[steve_r]

Originally Posted by Greem

Give all the drivers a limited duration of DRS.

You know, like push to pass in IndyCar. It works amazingly well there, and nobody moans about it.

Which means it'll never catch on on F1, of course, because of Not Invented Here syndrome. Like the VSC, which instead of "drive on the limiter" is "drive to the delta".

Just catching up with this thread now. No disrespect to the rest of the thoughts and suggestions, but the above for me is the best solution.

DRS is a necessary evil, even with these current cars. But if you could only use it for a limited number of times, that would work - and you would be unlikely to have the "DRS Train" for the whole race that we saw last time.

[Taxi645]

From the man himself:
https://www.racefans.net/2022/04/29/...drs-if-we-can/


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQI3-F70Bmk

[Sodemo]

Slingshot passes where the car in front has no chance to defend do nothing for me. I would much rather watch a car nose to gearbox with another car like Monaco 1992 than a hundred undefendable DRS passes. Its not the pass that is nessesarily the exciting thing, but the possibility of a pass.

[BTCC frog]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

Slingshot passes where the car in front has no chance to defend do nothing for me. I would much rather watch a car nose to gearbox with another car like Monaco 1992 than a hundred undefendable DRS passes. Its not the pass that is nessesarily the exciting thing, but the possibility of a pass.

Yes exactly. A great defence is far more exciting than an easy DRS pass, and great passes will probably also be more likely if the drivers can’t just wait for the next straight to use DRS. The main thing that is important is for there to be more on-track battles, and although last year I think DRS was essential to have any on-track battles at all, next year (when teams have had time to prepare for it), I think we will get more on-track battles without DRS.

[Taxi645]

I would especially be curious how Monza would turn out without DRS. Closing in on the straight before parabolica, then much closer through parabolica itself perhaps just close enough to get enough tow to make a try braking into the schicane. That I would love to see.

[BTCC frog]

I have written a longer explanation about why I believe it is time to scrap DRS:

https://f1frogblog.wordpress.com/202...-to-scrap-drs/

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

Slingshot passes where the car in front has no chance to defend do nothing for me. I would much rather watch a car nose to gearbox with another car like Monaco 1992 than a hundred undefendable DRS passes. Its not the pass that is nessesarily the exciting thing, but the possibility of a pass.

I agree 100%.

[S griffin]

If we had cars that could actually overtake in the first place, DRS would never have happened.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by S griffin

If we had cars that could actually overtake in the first place, DRS would never have happened.

When did cars enter the can't overtake phase?

[Adam43]

It became more and more apparent as reliability improved (reliability of the cars overall and reliability of setup performance during a race). As well as aero becoming more important. So let’s say the early ‘90s. But realistically before that too.

So in terms of the modern viewer, practically always.

[S griffin]

Reliability has improved a lot, although it’s not perfect. And setups are easier to find. And yes, aero became too much for too long. To be fair the racing was good in the early 90s, before they bought back refuelling, when races were more dependent on strategy due to the amount of stops. Overtaking was a lot easier in the 80s

[Greem]

Do you know what? I don't often do this, but I'm going to use [citation needed] on "overtaking was easier in the 80s" comment.

Was it?

I started watching F1 in 1982. Whilst I do not have unfeasibly accurate encyclopaedic knowledge of things like the number of overtakes per race, I don't recall it being a passing fest like (say) the Indy 500 can be/has been in the past.

[Woolley]

I hate it with a passion. It prevents a good driver in a slower car from holding off someone in a better car. It's too often undefendable. And it doesn't work when there's a train - if anything I suspect it makes it worse, so you just get groups of cars running around completely unable to pass.

[TrapezeArtist]

Originally Posted by Casper

Get rid of the rear wing and the DRS goes with it....I wish!

Exactly!

Wings are the most artificial things in motor racing. But it seems unthinkable that they should be got rid of. It's time to think the unthinkable.

[Matador]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Personally - I think it is too early to make a decision on DRS in the context of the current rules.

However - if the conclusion is reached that overtaking is still too difficult (car design, track layout etc) then DRS should remain. The application of it I would change though.

Based on previous seasons, I would change the DRS rules along the lines of:
DRS is only available to pass cars on the same lap as you.
DRS is available when you are within 1 second of the car in front at the time you cross the start/finish line - and for the remainder of that entire lap.
You only get a 'DRS lap' ten times during a normal race distance.


That way:
Drivers have to decide which of their ten laps they use DRS on.
You won't get a cat and mouse situation trying to catch a DRS (such as Jeddah).
The car passing (with a whole lap of DRS) is likely to break the one second gap straight away. But, if they are not quicker over an extended period, the car behind will catch up and gain a DRS opportunity.
DRS trains are likely to be broken quickly.

I think this is a pretty good perspective and solution set.

[S griffin]

The thing is, you need to have overtaking done by skill, so you can marvel at it. DRS doesn’t do that

[Aysedasi]

DRS is the bit of fluff under the other guys car contacts in Scalextric...... It doesn't create or enhance 'racing', it merely provides an illusion that something worth watching is happening.....

[S griffin]

BTCC Frog makes a good point in his blog that drivers are less willing to pass in other places without DRS. Part of that problem is if they passed before a DRS zone, they would likely be immediately repassed in the DRS

Really the DRS zones are another problem. Why should the rulemakers decide where they should pass? I’m tired of arguments about whether the DRS zone is in the right place or if it’s the right length. The thing is, you can’t perfect DRS. Just have cars that can follow closely and let the drivers decide where to pass

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by S griffin

The thing is, you can’t perfect DRS. Just have cars that can follow closely and let the drivers decide where to pass

And sadly that now seems to be quite a novel concept.....