|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
8 Aug 2012, 20:20 (Ref:3117717) | #51 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,983
|
Quote:
anyways you make it sound like F1 is losing billions a year instead of making it. ifs its about solvency for the teams or even a sustainable business model for future teams then achieving a better commercial agreement is more preferable to cost cutting imo. |
|||
|
8 Aug 2012, 23:37 (Ref:3117753) | #52 | |||
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
Quote:
Similar products? Renault are only interested in down-sized petrol turbos, turbo-diesels and electric cars. Probably with the emphasis now shifting to electric vehicles. Ferrari have road cars struggling to reach 20mpg, and that's a British imperial gallon and not a U.S. gallon! Only recently have Ferrari fitted anything like a Hybrid system to one of their cars. Chalk and Cheese. Mercedes are somewhere in the middle, and probably having a good look at the results so far attained, that perhaps still justify further participation. Quote:
Now, what were we.......ah yes, DDRS! |
|||
|
9 Aug 2012, 14:58 (Ref:3117974) | #53 | |
Racer
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 385
|
What does it matter if the teams build the car and/or engine?
If you have your name / brand written in bold letters down the side of the winning car every week then you get big publicity. Likewise if your name is written on losing / underachieving car then you get that publicity too. If the Caterhams have engine failures every week then everybody will associate Caterham with unreliability even though its a Renault engine. How much exposure has a drinks company gotten from f1 over the last 3-5 years? I would be very surprised if they are not seeing any benefit from competing. As for DDRS I see absolutely 0 benefit in banning it. Looks an awful lot like a fduct though (dont think that needed banning either but oh well). |
|
|
10 Aug 2012, 01:22 (Ref:3118150) | #54 | ||||
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
Quote:
Quote:
Red Bull have obviously benefited from F1 a great deal, but Renault insist that it's a V6 turbo for 2014 or they're outa there! NA V8's aren't 'doing it' for them. It doesn't look like Cosworth or pure will be in F1 in 2014, so that's potentially 3 engine manufacturers supplying 12 teams. Quote:
Don't say: 'reduce aero' because you just argued to increase it. |
||||
|
10 Aug 2012, 14:26 (Ref:3118375) | #55 | ||||||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,983
|
Quote:
Quote:
anyways now you are changing the goal posts on this discussion. on one hand you say that allowing them this type of technical freedom will lead to ridiculousness. Quote:
which incidentally would also suggest that Renault, at least, has other motivations of staying in F1 other then just staying in business. Quote:
obviously people see what they want to see and this is what i see in more and more of the decisions being made in F1. maybe its always been this way and it has just reached a tipping point for me. but less variety while increasing profits and limiting competition might make for a great business model but it makes for poor sport. long and short of all this is that your posts confuse me Marbot...as no doubt mine confuse you. so im afraid we must once again settle on agreeing to disagree. on a side note im in favour of less Craig Pollack not more! |
||||||
|
10 Aug 2012, 20:17 (Ref:3118468) | #56 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,229
|
Quote:
If we kept every sort of performance increase since F1 actually began, we would have cars that would absolutely blow our minds relative to what we have now. How do you keep speeds under control? You could wade into all sorts of minutia about aero regs, or you could just cut the allowable fuel way back from what they use now and watch the engineers go into overdrive trying to get the speed back. In other words, it would be great fun! |
|||
|
10 Aug 2012, 23:31 (Ref:3118512) | #57 | |||||||||||
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I said that Cosworth and PURE were likely not to be on the grid in 2014. Cosworth may even leave at the end of this season! That's going to cause problems for a couple of teams that can ill afford to be redesigning a chassis that's already probably half way designed and built for next season. http://totalf1.com/full_story/view/4...liers_in_2014/ Quote:
Quote:
If you read most articles on the subject and if you listen to people like Martin Whitmarsh on the subject. You will find that the biggest deterrent to other manufacturers coming into the sport is that they don't want too much technical variety in F1. "Whitmarsh stated that he was personally against having more than one engine configuration for the Formula 1 teams because manufacturers will have to build more than one configuration to bring out the best." “I've argued for diversity myself in the past. Although the regulations are fixed, they typically evolve, and if you had a range of engines then it would be clear after a year one solution was the right one. At that point a manufacturer would develop the alternate configuration.” http://blogs.bettor.com/Martin-Whitm...-1-news-a79987 Is he wrong? He ought to know best. Quote:
Quote:
Is he really that bad a person? Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by Marbot; 10 Aug 2012 at 23:52. |
|||||||||||
|
11 Aug 2012, 01:10 (Ref:3118523) | #58 | ||
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
Quote:
Ironically, 2014 will see just that very thing happening. Yes, the engine regs are fixed, but downforce has got to be sacrificed because you can no longer carry excess fuel in order to overcome drag. But, as explained by Martin Whitmarsh in the above article, you can't have many different types of engine in F1 at the same time. Not now. As he points out, if there are many different types of engine configuration, then after a year, all manufacturers will develop the most successful engine at a further cost to them with regards R&D, etc. If someone also develops a better engine than those, then the manufacturers are once again going to be asked to spend huge amounts of money on R&D on an engine that may or may not be competitive with a brand new engine that someone else has developed at the same time. Any engine manufacturer is then going to be asking some serious questions about its participation in the sport with regard to these extraordinary costs. They can't just scrap one project and move on to another project without incurring huge financial costs on the project that was scrapped and the new project. There are time frames for these things and you can't just switch from one to another in the blink of an eye. But we're off topic again, so let's try to stick to why it is that DDRS is going to be banned for next season. |
||
|
11 Aug 2012, 04:33 (Ref:3118545) | #59 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,229
|
Quote:
Because banning it protects the status quo. From the article you linked: Whitmarsh added, “So it's about reducing the risk, and I hope in the future we can have four or five automotive manufacturers in the sport at any one time. They're always going to come in and out as it suits them and works for their marketing programme.” Initially, the International Automobile Federation (FIA) decided to bring V4 engines from the 2013 season to cut down the engine cost. Formula 1 teams reacted differently to that suggestion as the lower ranked teams agreed while higher ranked teams opposed the change. The bigger teams want to keep everything just the way it is, thank you very much. Which is why we don't see the innovation we had in the past. If carbon brakes weren't already part of F1 and somebody introduced them tomorrow, the rest of the teams would vote to ban them. |
|||
|
11 Aug 2012, 09:15 (Ref:3118587) | #60 | |
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
Considering that very few wanted it in the first place, I can't understand the sentiment that's now being shown for it.
Cars built to be as light as possible, with no concern for driver safety, bring about things like minimum weight regulations. We don't see six wheeled Tyrell's any more, because, while they may have been novel, it's not something you would like to see on all twenty odd cars. Anyone turning up with wheels and tyres wider than anyone else's is going to bring about wheel and tyre regulations, before wheel and tyre sizes get silly. That's how it works. They might get banned if they made the racing poorer or were found to be of no real relevance to the majority of road cars. Oh, wait..... |
|
|
11 Aug 2012, 18:37 (Ref:3118741) | #61 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,229
|
Quote:
Carbon brakes didn't just happen. There were exploding rotors, drivers not liking the feel of them. There was a development curve. Yes, many of F1's innovations ultimately detracted from the racing. As a kid, I thought the emergence of the wings was pretty cool. Now I realize they messed up the racing. F1 used to be about building a better mousetrap. Now, it's about "the show." |
|||
|
11 Aug 2012, 18:51 (Ref:3118752) | #62 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,016
|
I fully agree with you, currently it's a good product, but I worry they're starting to go a little too far in making the series more for television viewers with lower attention spans and less for innovation.
|
||
|
13 Aug 2012, 17:57 (Ref:3119431) | #63 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 385
|
Quote:
The 2014 regs are nowhere near as radical as you make out. If we allowed all of the performance increases we would probably have much closer racing as there would be none of this "wake" rubbish that stops cars following each other. |
||
|
13 Aug 2012, 18:14 (Ref:3119443) | #64 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 107
|
Quote:
That being said, we'd likely have to introduce G-Suits for the drivers in this series. And the safety cells would have to be rather extraordinary, given the speeds at which the inevitable shunts would occur. Of course, in this Formula One (Libre), double DRS would have to be allowed, now wouldn't they? |
|||
__________________
///M |
13 Aug 2012, 18:40 (Ref:3119457) | #65 | |
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
Drivers following the fan car said that it spat gravel at them! There was also a concern about what would happen to a drivers feet should they run into the back of it. Remember, that a drivers feet were much further forwards, back then. Even today, I think that it would be banned on safety grounds.
Ouch! Last edited by Marbot; 13 Aug 2012 at 18:46. Reason: Too many letters in the alphabet |
|
|
14 Aug 2012, 03:01 (Ref:3119601) | #66 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 11,402
|
I thought this thread was about a double DRS system ?
|
||
|
14 Aug 2012, 03:08 (Ref:3119604) | #67 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 107
|
Quote:
I wonder if the stream from a rear mounted ducted fan would be worse than the turbulence in the wake of a wing, or if the (relatively) high velocity flow of the air would produce a larger low-pressure area behind the car? Maybe some bleed air, if you can really call it that, could be used to stall the wings (however many are present and wherever they are placed) instead of a passive DRS*? And it could be used to preserve laminar flow over the body, as necessary, to help keep the drag down. *See, that was on topic, right? |
|||
__________________
///M |
14 Aug 2012, 08:09 (Ref:3119680) | #68 | ||
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
At best, they are an expensive option on some high end supercars. Possibly a benefit for track days, and of little use elsewhere.
The ability to use the statement: 'My cars got carbon fibre brakes, just like an F1 car' is probably their biggest selling point. They are probably the most open that they have ever been. Quote:
Back to DDRS. I'm not really surprised that something like the DDRS might appear to be an innovative thing, but once everyone has them, it then becomes just another expensive complication to the overall design of an F1 car. P.S. See revived thread for debate about other things not connected to the DDRS thread. |
||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[Tech Issue] DRS ban in Monaco tunnel? | Marbot | Formula One | 21 | 25 May 2011 13:31 |
DRS system, | Peter Ford | Formula One | 2 | 24 May 2011 02:10 |
DRS to be banned.... | Mr V | Formula One | 116 | 9 May 2011 17:05 |
[Tech Issue] Double Diffusers to be banned in 2011 | Fox89 | Formula One | 34 | 10 Jan 2010 00:57 |