[Multi 21] f1 is boring. manufactured for tv.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by Adam43

.... mind numbing coverage and tedious racing.

Heck Adam, that's easily dealt with. I generally do my best snoring during Grand Prix.....

[Greem]

Tch. You're just nitpicking.

[Aysedasi]

No, thankfully I don't have that problem. I use Head & Shoulders.

[FAS33]

it won't happen overnight, but it will happen.

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by Greem

...How many of the regulars on here are *still* following F1 despite several era-defining changes? How many of you hated them, then got used to them, then bemoaned their departure when the next changes came along?

I'll have a fiver on almost everyone.

That's really the key to the whole thing.

It ignores all the people who used to watch and no longer do. That is more of an issue in American open wheel than F1, but even if F1 there has been a transition from the "traditional base" (Europe), to the new fans in new places. If you look at some of the empty stands in those places, there aren't enough of them.

I come here for the 'how could it be better?' threads (like this one), and have no interest in the 'what happened at the race' threads, as I didn't watch the race because I'm one of the people bored by modern F1.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by miatanut

I come here for the 'how could it be better?' threads (like this one), and have no interest in the 'what happened at the race' threads, as I didn't watch the race because I'm one of the people bored by modern F1.

How could it be better?

I'm with Martin Whitmarsh on this:

"I would rather have more durable tyres, but the show we have had for the last two or three years has been better than anything I have seen in 25 years of the sport.



http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/106811

So, it all depends on what you want.

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by Marbot

How could it be better?

I'm with Martin Whitmarsh on this:

"I would rather have more durable tyres, but the show we have had for the last two or three years has been better than anything I have seen in 25 years of the sport.



http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/106811

So, it all depends on what you want.

I want this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpku7CES3sw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqZBJCFS_Ng
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTbXc4_H4Cc

OK, they're from a little more than 25 years ago, so here's less than 25 years ago:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnYY7g_8YBk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FPtU7Vp4EA

Now the rules make all the cars virtual clones, so they have to resort to gimmicks so they can't pass each other, because they don't have cars with naturally different performance envelopes.

But, it would be necessary to considerably tighten up the fuel economy requirements to force much lower downforce, and to open up the technical rules to get that.

The Vettel/Weber deal got a lot of attention because F1 has gotten boring, but that was quite tame compared to Senna/Prost.

[MarkG]

miatanut, thanks for those videos.. awesome!
The older incar stuff, with Patrick Depailler particularly, made me a bit sad really, because you just don't see incar stuff like that nowadays. With the downforce of modern cars, you see drivers just turn the wheel and downforce does it all for them.
Just those few minutes of watching those videos gave me more pleasure than most F1 races of modern times. Nice to see top drivers actually driving.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by miatanut

Now the rules make all the cars virtual clones, so they have to resort to gimmicks so they can't pass each other, because they don't have cars with naturally different performance envelopes.

IIRC correctly, turbo cars dominated the scene when everyone had realised that turbos were the way to go. So, you either had a turbo car, or you didn't win.

And even the likes of Colin Chapman had a lot to do with getting things like the Brabham 'fan car' banned, so 'Getting things banned because you didn't think of it first', was alive and kicking, even back then.

Originally Posted by miatanut

But, it would be necessary to considerably tighten up the fuel economy requirements to force much lower downforce, and to open up the technical rules to get that.

The 2014 regs mean that you have to do the best that you can with 100 kgs of pump petrol. I, at least, will be interested to see how that works. You wouldn't need to open up the technical regulations to get that, you could leave them as they are because you could never use all of the downforce that the current cars have.

Opening up the regs is fine. Getting the teams to agree to a budget cap, or something approaching a budget cap, seems to be nigh on impossible.

Originally Posted by miatanut

The Vettel/Weber deal got a lot of attention because F1 has gotten boring, but that was quite tame compared to Senna/Prost.

Oh well, that's team orders for you.

Originally Posted by MarkG

miatanut, thanks for those videos.. awesome!
The older incar stuff, with Patrick Depailler particularly, made me a bit sad really, because you just don't see incar stuff like that nowadays. With the downforce of modern cars, you see drivers just turn the wheel and downforce does it all for them.
Just those few minutes of watching those videos gave me more pleasure than most F1 races of modern times. Nice to see top drivers actually driving.

Well, even from looking at those videos, it's no surprise that F1 cars had to change. Having your legs crumpled, even in quite mild shunts, can't have been nice.

Oh well, that's health and safety for you.

[MarkG]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Well, even from looking at those videos, it's no surprise that F1 cars had to change. Having your legs crumpled, even in quite mild shunts, can't have been nice.

Oh well, that's health and safety for you.

Changing the cars to make them safer was necessary and I fully support that. They could still have been made them safer and retain the challenge and excitement of driving them though.

All your posts seem to support the downforce era we currently have, and certainly that everything today is better than it was. That's your right of course. I, and some others (or maybe just me? ) also like today, but wish today retained some of yesterday. I wouldn't go so far as to want to see cars with wings on stalks though. Mind you, I bet there was someone like you at the time that argued they were great

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by MarkG

Mind you, I bet there was someone like you at the time that argued they were great

The 60's cars, without the wings.

I was fully supportive of the budget cap proposals of 2009. They proposed a whole number of new technologies that could have seen F1 cars be very, very different to what they are now. However, such as things were, we never really got to hear much about those as it seemed that everyone had got swept along by Ferrari banging on about "stable regulations".

So, as I've said before, I couldn't really give a 'monkeys', now.

[wnut]

There seem to be a lot of unhappy people.

Funny when the on track action has improved from the parades of yore.

http://www.pitpass.com/48865-Talking...A-Step-Too-Far

[wnut]

Sadly we have the drivers but not the cars ...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDkK8a4jHZ8

Hamilton getting the best of Vettel and vd Guarde besting both of them.

[Peralta]

Originally Posted by migliacars

dull and boring manufactured for tv only.
drivers cannot say or do what they want. have to be politicly correct. eddie ervine was kicked out for voicing his opinion.

hold on am i trolling again ive been warned about this already from an administrator

bet ill be kicked out soon enough.


f1 is only there for bernie to make money.

ive been involved in club motorsport for ten years now not on a Hugh scale by any means, just as a hobby been competitive so im not some idiot on here with no idea.

i would say if you speak to the drivers in club motorsport, the backbone of it all. and ask them there opinion on f1 they will have similar views to me.

i have good friends who know nothing about Motorsport. but sit there and speak about f1 as if they are running it. they think its great. but when i ask them to come and watch me or help they are washing there hair or cutting there grass.

get involved and see for yourselves what its about.

and i wasnt joking about the sleeping bit. although the last 2 racers were the best this season.


manufactured for the spectators only.... true



DRS that isnt motorsport.
if there is a faster car it means the team car and driver have got it right so they should be in the lead.

think of it this way.

years ago a man called johney herbert in a slower lotus kept the great micheal shumacher behind him in a flying benneton for nearly half the race,he did this by pure driving talent, placing his slower car in the places were he knew the benneton wanted to be lap after lap. what a race what a driver.
nowadays the faster benneton would flip open his flap pull over and pass very boringly down the straight of into the distance, the slower car would stand no chance.
is that what we want to see??????????? no

if the man behind is faster he will pass if not he isnt good enough.
thats how it is.

if i cannot pass a car on the circuit through my own skills why should i have the right to be gifted an easy pass down the straight.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbC5HhuWU74


we all like close racing but normally there is a runaway leader in all motorsport.

soon it will all be on simulators.

im a hugh lover of exciting Motorsport and f1 could be great again. the cars are to reliant on aerodynamic grip. for better racing mechanical grip is better take some of the downforce from them some how.
free up the regs let engines be free let teams use turbos superchargers v8s v10s v12s, take of the rev limiters and sensors, i wanna see them rods coming out the blocks, smoke all over like they use to be.
cars/engine naturally blow up in Motorsport that's how it is not everyone always finished, engines are very stressed units and on the verge of destruction.

take off the flappy paddles and let the drivers drive the cars.

like this


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_5hAtpDRl2A

listen to the engine listen to the gearbox look how he is fighting the car, this is driving.
look at the comments on there.

surly no one and argue that this isnt better motorsport.



i wasnt on here trying to start and argument but seems i have.

it is boring now compared to how it was.

who agrees.

You know there is such a thing as vintage F1 racing

[MarkG]

Originally Posted by wnut

There seem to be a lot of unhappy people.

Funny when the on track action has improved from the parades of yore.

http://www.pitpass.com/48865-Talking...A-Step-Too-Far

Was interesting to read the stuff on pitpass, I've not been there before.

I think many people who enjoy the F1 of the recent years are those who watched during the Scumacher years of boredom. I too would rather watch the contrived show of today than those dire years.

Strangely though, only a few posts state the massive downforce of today's F1 as the reason we have a contrived F1 show.
Maybe the rule makers haven't addressed the real issue, downforce, because that might not prevent another "Schuey period" whereas squidgy tyres and DRS will. And maybe they're right actually. Without these gimmicks we'd have had Red Bull/Vettel doing exactly the same as Ferrari/Scumacher. Even though those drivers and their supporters point to this domination as demonstration of them being the best drivers and that's what we want in F1, others who see the wood for the trees know different.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by wnut

Sadly we have the drivers but not the cars ...



Hamilton getting the best of Vettel and vd Guarde besting both of them.

Err....the track was wet. You might say that it was akin to racing on worn out Pirelli super soft tyres.

Originally Posted by MarkG

Without these gimmicks we'd have had Red Bull/Vettel doing exactly the same as Ferrari/Scumacher.

I don't think that there are any doubts that Red Bull have the car with the most downforce and are having to restrict that downforce, particularly in qualifying, in order to have decent tyre life for the race.

[luke g28]

Downforce is not the problem.

The way downforce is generated is the problem. Wings and flicky bits are very sensitive to air flow particularly yaw angles and following other cars.

F1 needs to take a leaf out of the deltawings book and go back to underbody aero.

And to head off the response, the teams declined underbody aero because it was a requirement to have the same level of aero as they currently run. Therefore why take the risk and spend the money for very little / no advantage.

[Marbot]

The teams declined the underbody aero regs mainly because of reasons of cost and also of being able to do the same thing with the current regulations. There were also other concerns that the regulations for underbody aero could quite easily create more downforce than was originally intended, which would not be the best way forward for a new era in F1. There was no requirement for the teams to run the 'same' amount of downforce as is currently created by the cars, particularly as it wasn't known how much downforce any underbody aero regulations would actually create.

This article fully explains the reasons for not having underbody aero. This was something that the teams decided to do. The FIA seemed to be pretty much against the teams choice of aero regulations.

Sam Michael: Williams technical director at the time.

"There's the budget effect of doing the tunnelled floor, a shaped undertray, but there's also the fact that it's unknown.
"So you could predict the downforce you'll get from it, but you could easily achieve double. Whereas if we stay with the current floor, you can be controlled where the downforce and drag are going to be."


http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/13412925

[MarkG]

Originally Posted by luke g28

Downforce is not the problem.

The way downforce is generated is the problem. Wings and flicky bits are very sensitive to air flow particularly yaw angles and following other cars.

F1 needs to take a leaf out of the deltawings book and go back to underbody aero.

And to head off the response, the teams declined underbody aero because it was a requirement to have the same level of aero as they currently run. Therefore why take the risk and spend the money for very little / no advantage.

The AMOUNT of downforce IS a problem.
I don't want F1 to pursue under-car downforce. Just make rules regarding the wing dimensions and elements to get downforce back to something like the late 80's early 90's. Front wings particularly are ridiculous, although I'm sure they excite aero engineers.
Watch incar footage of a current car in the dry.. It's steam into a corner, off throttle while downforce gets you through, not much if any wheel correction then apply power at the exit.
Then watch incar footage from late 80's /early 90s cars. I'll leave you to decide what you prefer and what you think would make for better racing and appreciation of driver ability.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by MarkG

Front wings particularly are ridiculous, although I'm sure they excite aero engineers.

The front wings will be smaller for 2014, which will have a knock-on effect on the rest of the car.

But the 2014 cars aren't going to be able to have drag that is anything approaching what the current cars have because they're only going to have 100 kgs of fuel with which to overcome any drag.

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by MarkG

The AMOUNT of downforce IS a problem.
I don't want F1 to pursue under-car downforce. Just make rules regarding the wing dimensions and elements to get downforce back to something like the late 80's early 90's.

I'd go early '80's, but we're generally on the same page.

Originally Posted by Marbot

But the 2014 cars aren't going to be able to have drag that is anything approaching what the current cars have because they're only going to have 100 kgs of fuel with which to overcome any drag.

We'll see.
My experience of F1 is that Priority 1 in rules-making is to not upset the apple cart, so I think they ran simulations ad nauseum to determine a level where they thought the engineers would turn in virtually the same lap times and now so the lap time freaks won't freak-out that F1 has been 'dumbed-down', 'slower than FF', etc. Because they usually under estimate the engineers I think the real result is by the end of next year the cars will be faster than ever and downforce will be greater than now.

But, I'll wait in hope I'm wrong.