What Grid Size Would You Want?

[happyhammer]

Originally Posted by Mystery

Personally, I would like 26 car grids, with at least 30 cars trying to get them. But I can dream. 24 would at least be close to that and would be perfectly acceptable. 20 seems not anything like enough to me. .

I have to agree with this sentiment. It would be interesting to see how many teams would actually put themselves forward with the contraints of the current system removed. I don't think there should be more than 26 cars, because of the traffic situation and because my brain struggles to cope with whats going on when the grids are huge. Less than 26 and it reduces a new outfits opportunity to actually get on the grid. (I advocate pre-qualifying).

[SpawnyWhippet]

Who is going to put in the huge investment for a F1 team nowadays if there is a chance they won't qualify though? I certainly wouldn't.

[Mystery]

Originally Posted by Andydickens

Who is going to put in the huge investment for a F1 team nowadays if there is a chance they won't qualify though? I certainly wouldn't.

You're right of course and sadly that is one of the things that is wrong with F1 these days IMO. No-one wants to, or it is simply impossible, to build a team up from scratch anymore. We wont see another Jordan in the current generation of F1 as everyone wants to buy an existing half-decent team and see what they can do with it.

[Marbot]

I'm sure our American friends would be happy to see more than just six.

[chillibowl]

[QUOTE=Dutton]Why would there need to be increased run-off areas?/QUOTE]

no real reason, maybe just to get getting rid of some potential SC periods made necessary when a car gets stuck in the sand and they have to bring out that super slow crane.
the tarmac run offs provide a chance to stay in the race.

i hope thats not too much of a stretch.

[Raglanparade]

I know Albert Park has 36 Garages. Plus maybe 1 or 2 more for scruiteneers and marshalls.

Remember back to 1996 and 1997.

We had a 12th team both years (Forti and for the first race of 1997 Lola) and there was enough room at Albert Park to give each team three garage spaces.

if each team were only given the one garage space... and a smaller paddock area... then the teams would be forced to bring less equipment and staff... thus reducing costs.

[Stargazer7]

In Race day neither would I like to see less than 22 cars nor more than 26.

But in qualifying session I would like to see many cars, even more than thirty, and watch a battle between those who will manage to qualify for the race. Something like the old 107% but in this case always some drivers would be disqualifyed. This would bring interest in the back grid positions too.

Never seem to happen though...

[Fiorentina 1]

Originally Posted by Kicking-back

26 is the "traditional" number.

right on! 26 should be like 33 at indy.....

[SpawnyWhippet]

33 is too many on most F1 circuits - imagine Monaco with 33 cars on it, it'd be chaos, just a large circular traffic jam.

[Dutton]

He/she wasn't arguing for 33 in F1, he/she was saying F1 should be 26 because it somehow "fits" (he/she used the example of 33 used at Indy, as opposed to advocating it for F1).

I think.

[mabs_nsx]

24 to 32

[WebberForWDC]

44 cars, 22 teams would make an excellent size grid.

Allowing old chassis to be sold-whilst McLaren may build say 15 MP4/20s, a low budget privateer could run with one purchased used chassis, control tyres regs, one-season or 8-race engine rule and have a very happy time going F1 racing! Hooray.

As if Spa ain't long enough to fit 44 cars. Ultra-traffic at Monaco what a spectacle, the "greatest show in motor racing" hooray.

(What's really sad is MotoGP, it's not like bikes are "huge"... the grid should be well over 30 not some hopeless 16-20 bikes!!!!)

[cybersdorf]

Anything under 26 cars is a waste of time.

[Gt_R]

If circuits were like the Old Hockenheim and Spa, i'd vote for 26-28 cars. But with most circuits now being in the range of 4.5+km, i'd say that 24-26 cars would strike a good balance.

Of course, the quality of the team is important too..we don't need a field of 30 cars, out of which 20 are back-markers and lapped every 8 laps.

[Mystery]

Originally Posted by WebberForWDC

(What's really sad is MotoGP, it's not like bikes are "huge"... the grid should be well over 30 not some hopeless 16-20 bikes!!!!)

A million miles off topic I guess, but that's the way I fear F1 is headed. Manufacturer teams dominating to the complete exclusion of everyone else, so it's near impossible now for a new rider/driver to enter the elite club. At least MotoGPs have the secondary classes that can feed the top series.

44 cars isnt as wacky an idea as it might sound. I would love to see a "class B" which uses year-old chassis, but sadly I guess it doesnt fit well with Max's chess game mentality

[Mystery]

Originally Posted by Gt_R

Of course, the quality of the team is important too..we don't need a field of 30 cars, out of which 20 are back-markers and lapped every 8 laps.

I disagree here. Back-markers are part of the game and they should be viewed as teams which can improve. And the encouragement to do so would be perhaps the threat of not qualifying.

[davyboy]

I wrote somewhere else before about the number of cars in F1. I think 40 cars should be allowed to enter a GP race weekend with a grid of 25-30. There should be a qualifying session on Saturday morning to determine the top 15 positons and a repechage race [of around 45 minutes] to determine the remaining positions. We would have more excitement and more racing over a weekend. Obviously the current regs would need to be changed to allow people to run second hand cars, not construct their own etc... But wouldn't it be cool from an entertainment perspective ?

[Kicking-back]

F1 is meant to be elitist.

The very best.

Having more than about 26 on the grid would dilute that.

[Gt_R]

Not meaning to be offensive, but while backmarkers are "part of the game", sometimes you cannot help wonder the likes of having Minardi and Jordan trotting around the background, trying their best to get out of the ways of leaders (to the extent of taking the grassy route), and every now and then ignores blue flags and get tangled in a battle. And to make matters worse, unlike the competitive mid-field teams that are lapped (ie Sauber, Red Bull, even Williams last year), the tail running teams rarely show any signs of "improvement" for an extended period of time.

I'd love to see more cars. But it's difficult for private teams to prove their worth against huge manufacturers. It's almost a pointless exercise. Hence, i still hope that with increased number of participants, teams that run year-old chassis, without manufacturers support by individual owners, are allowed to compete under Group B. It would also ensure F1 will survive even if some manufacturers decide to hold F1 ransom and theaten to quit.

[chunterer]

I'd like to see upto 30 cars on the grid! The new regs in a couple of years will get rid of that ridiculous entry bond as well as allow teams to sell equipment to start ups, etc...

With most of the circuits being longer on average than in the past (3 miles upwards?) then a bigger field ought not to make a difference to safety and it's always amusing when a front runner trips over a 'slower' car. (who knows we might end up with more front running entries?)

Only exception probably Monaco where you would need to limit it to 26 max as it's so tight at that place...

With more cars there would likely be more action, more oveertaking, particulalry in a Suzuka scenario, more seats opening up for drivers to a/ stay around longer, or b/ for more youngters to come in...

[BootsOntheSide]

The circuits are being completed in less and less time though, so the cars would be close together more often. 30 cars at Interlagos would only have a 2 1/2 second gap between each one, which would potentially be chaotic. Then again, when Monaco went from 20 cars to 26, was there significantly mroe carnage? I think the realistic problem is that nobody would fund a team or pay for a drive which would always be outside the top 20 for long. The boom years of pre-qualifying were during a rare economic highpoint worldwide.

[chunterer]

True, but more cars means more entertainment by law of averages, so it'll be better for the spectators and TV and might hurry up those sponsors who have constantly been on the outside looking in?

[Jordi]

The more the merrier. Plus, if there were say, 28 cars, you could adopt a points system which better rewarded wins as well as giving points to the first 10 cars.

[Ginetta]

My dad keeps telling me about this pre qualifying.He says that he would have to get out of bed at around 6 to watch the start of it.Is this true

[Adam43]

Surely it depended how far away from the circuit he was staying.