Some good news for racing fans

[Sodemo]

Originally Posted by Glen

For 2007 though it seems we will have less mechanical grip and hence longer braking distances.

With the teams running more aero, it would seem logical to assume that the braking forces will be more or less the same at the start of the braking zone, but as the downforce bleeds away the latter part of the braking zone will be the hardest as then mechanical grip takes over. With harder tyres and less "bite" this part would be trickier.

I doubt we will see better racing however because of these "longer braking distances" simply because the teams will be running more aero, and have less mechanical grip in corners, a real nasty situation if you want to see cars following closely.

What drivers will find however, is that they get a much bigger "tow" when in a car's slipstream, however whether you think this is a good thing or not is open to question, I think a bigger "tow" is not whats required, and I would like to see the effects of a slipstream reduced, but cars following closer. As it stands at the moment, if a car gets in another cars slipstream, its an almost guaranteed pass, if the cars followed closer, but had less of a slipstream, you would have great situations like Schu on Berger at Imola and Schu on Berger at Hockenheim in 1994, where Schu sat behind the Ferrari very close for lap after lap, but could not get past, yet the cars were side by side into alot of the braking zones.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by The Monster

With greater mechanical grip, and wider rear tyres, the cars could slide more, and still be "quick", a bit like DTM cars or F1 cars from the 80's.

The 2009 regs, if ever enforced, would be a godsend for racing.

I've some DVD's with races from the 1980's. And from 1987 Walker and Hunt complained about that overtaking had become too difficult.

[safc_fan89]

Originally Posted by martyn bott

Fisi and Massa say that braking with the new tyres is a whole new ball game.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/56094

Trulli and Ralf said the tyres worked well, didn't they?

I also recall from videos I have of past F1 coverage that there have been rule changes for MANY years that have been intended to improve overtaking...it never works!

[Sodemo]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

I've some DVD's with races from the 1980's. And from 1987 Walker and Hunt complained about that overtaking had become too difficult.

But they are probably comparing it against racing from the 70's. Im sure drivers in the 70's said that overtaking in the 60's was easier... and so on.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by The Monster

But they are probably comparing it against racing from the 70's. Im sure drivers in the 70's said that overtaking in the 60's was easier... and so on.

It's becoming fairly obvious that the advent of downforce (in all its guises) is the bain of F1.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by The Monster

But they are probably comparing it against racing from the 70's. Im sure drivers in the 70's said that overtaking in the 60's was easier... and so on.

Even in the early 1980's overtaking was considered difficult, but due the track lay-out and/or skills of the defending driver.

Originally Posted by martyn bott

It's becoming fairly obvious that the advent of downforce (in all its guises) is the bain of F1.

Well, overtaking wasn't really a problem until the mid-1980's. And I think that it's practically impossible to ban downforce.

[JohnSSC]

Short of re-writing rules to promote "Aerodynamic Upforce" there really are no alternatives.

No matter what the series has been, from sports racers to open wheel, the rules have always been behind the engineers as far as aerodynamics.

Not sure if the solution is to ban aerodynamic engineers...

[luke]

We all have this feeling that F1 was better, ten, twenty years ago. Looking back at old DVDs of races, there was just as much or less overtaking back then. 1996, a boring year. 1992 boring. Most have been. But when you watch the races live, you have a different tension then what you do when you watch races not live.
F1 tends to be exciting when kayos happens, usually after a safety car has jumbled up the field, or a wet qualifying with a Topsy turvy grid. Or a wet race.
Every year there are exciting, and boring races and average races, fortunately the last two years the average and exciting races have out weighed the boring ones.

[Bononi]

Originally Posted by luke

We all have this feeling that F1 was better, ten, twenty years ago. Looking back at old DVDs of races, there was just as much or less overtaking back then. 1996, a boring year. 1992 boring. Most have been. But when you watch the races live, you have a different tension then what you do when you watch races not live.
F1 tends to be exciting when kayos happens, usually after a safety car has jumbled up the field, or a wet qualifying with a Topsy turvy grid. Or a wet race.
Every year there are exciting, and boring races and average races, fortunately the last two years the average and exciting races have out weighed the boring ones.

Actually a good comparision would be from the 60's to the early 80's...