[Official] Monaco Grand Prix 2024: Grand Prix Weekend Thread - Round 8 of 24

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Rusty Nail

BT23C?
Wouldn't work, the FIA and other vested interests would never agree to a spaceframe car in anything other than the junior formulae. Think Formula Ford etc.

Mind you it's a great idea, but these days H & S kills all sorts of enterprise, not just in motorsport but in life in general.

WRT FF some of the best racing I watch is FF. How about a world championship for FF as an undercard to F1?

I know, I know, will never work, too many vested interests...

So we're stuffed, we just have to put up with what we've got or switch off...

No amount of great ideas or pontificating on here will make one iota of difference.

Yes, BT23C (F2 development of the BT23 for 68/69).

I know, health and safety, FIA, Insurance, blah blah blah.
It is OK for historic racers to risk their lives but not F1 drivers....

Am I being harsh?

Not about the drivers but the great Max M, after Imola 1994 decreed no one should ever die in a racing car when justifying the radical revamp regarding safety which led to everything we have today, directly or indirectly.

However, Max had seen a few of his contemporaries lose their lives when he was racing the very space frame F2 cars I was talking about, so I understand where he was coming from.

And if you looked at the number of accidents in space frame cars where the drivers were not injured, or the percentage of serious injury in comparison with the sheer number of entries in competition over the last 7 decades the accident/injury rate is relatively low.

All the ideas wont change a thing so in that much you are correct, but I did notice a comment on Racer magazine who suggested they use F. Atlantic/2 cars from the late 80'/90/s, so I'm not alone in my general thinking.

A simpler car, cheaper to build, run, and repair could make an alternative to running small trucks around Monaco.

[P38 in workshop]

While I am in complete agreement with the description of the current generation of cars as small trucks,we are stuck with them until the next rule change.Daydreams about a grid full of spaceframe cars don't seem to be coming from the increasingly scarce community of people who have design knowledge of them.It must be about thirty years since anti-intrusion links were mandated for Formula 3 and the idea (which worked) was that the presence of a link that was joined to each leg of a wishbone would bear against the side of a monocoque in a big crash and thus prevent the drivers leg becoming a part of a kebab.There is no structure of note between the elements of a spaceframe that would perform the same function and top level drivers are an expensive commodity.


It might just be simpler to reduce the race distance by 20% in the interests of saving fuel.Not that it would save even a tiny percentage of that expended in getting the whole circus,plus private jets and trucks,not to mention spectators to the event.It would allow a slight shortening of the tub as less fuel would be needed and the cars might,just possibly,shrink a bit.

[NaBUru38]

Or just allow refuelling and shrink fuel tanks to 80 liters or something.

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by NaBUru38

Or just allow refuelling and shrink fuel tanks to 80 liters or something.

No thank you. It was unnecessarily dangerous and made for even less overtaking on track

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by P38 in workshop

While I am in complete agreement with the description of the current generation of cars as small trucks,we are stuck with them until the next rule change.Daydreams about a grid full of spaceframe cars don't seem to be coming from the increasingly scarce community of people who have design knowledge of them.It must be about thirty years since anti-intrusion links were mandated for Formula 3 and the idea (which worked) was that the presence of a link that was joined to each leg of a wishbone would bear against the side of a monocoque in a big crash and thus prevent the drivers leg becoming a part of a kebab.There is no structure of note between the elements of a spaceframe that would perform the same function and top level drivers are an expensive commodity.


It might just be simpler to reduce the race distance by 20% in the interests of saving fuel.Not that it would save even a tiny percentage of that expended in getting the whole circus,plus private jets and trucks,not to mention spectators to the event.It would allow a slight shortening of the tub as less fuel would be needed and the cars might,just possibly,shrink a bit.

Im aware of all of this. Just an idea on a whim when I saw a pic of Clark opp-locking his way to pole in 1966.
So yeah, a dream in real terms, but I actually like the idea.
The expense of F1 drivers? Only because they are paid so much....
How many others would take their place if they decided to vacate the seat in spite of the WDC points....

[GT6]

Just an idea but why no cancel the race completly and just have a parade of the cars past the palace and then a vote on which looks best. That is what monaco is all about.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by GT6

Just an idea but why no cancel the race completly and just have a parade of the cars past the palace and then a vote on which looks best. That is what monaco is all about.

I thought that's what they did on Sunday?

Oh.... my mistake.......

[NaBUru38]

Originally Posted by S griffin

No thank you. It was unnecessarily dangerous and made for even less overtaking on track

IndyCar does fine.

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by NaBUru38

IndyCar does fine.

Apples and oranges. It's better regulated and less volatile in Indycars.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by NaBUru38

IndyCar does fine.

This isn't the same thing. IndyCar strategies and fueling are different as the risk of multiple Safety Car is to high that it moves everyone onto the same strategy and they all back time the race.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

This isn't the same thing. IndyCar strategies and fueling are different as the risk of multiple Safety Car is to high that it moves everyone onto the same strategy and they all back time the race.

It doesn't always move everyone on to the same strategy. The big difference is the size of the pit crew and the way the pits are layed out. F1 would have to make significant changes to both, in order to include refueling and I don't see that happening.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

It doesn't always move everyone on to the same strategy.

It usually does. And when it doesn't it creates 2 massive groups that are entertaining. It isn't a bad thing. But it's different to how F1 fuel strategies work.

Sometimes it's 3 strategies if Tim Cindric is on the funky stuff that weekend.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

It usually does. And when it doesn't it creates 2 massive groups that are entertaining. It isn't a bad thing. But it's different to how F1 fuel strategies work.

Sometimes it's 3 strategies if Tim Cindric is on the funky stuff that weekend.

Actually, the strategies are different.
Everyone is trying to get to the same end but when there are Full Course Yellows on ovals, or there are multiple safety cars because of incidents then things get really interesting.
In Detroit this weekend Herta and Dixon were together shadowing each other early on but when a safety car incident occurred there was a play to benefit and Dixon got the good end.
His teammate Armstrong went to the front, then to 20th then back to second through strategy and only ended up third because of low fuel (running out on the slow down lap).

That doesn't happen in F1, so strategy can play a much more significant role in IndyCar then it does in F1.