Re: What's fatser Indy 500 or Formula 1

Discussion in '2002 Ferrari F2002' started by ReeK, Aug 9, 2002.

  1. An F1 car would lose to Indy purely on the occassion when you put the present F1 car which is not designed for an , in a Oval just because it will DNF, the F1 engine was never meant to last more 300 kms and the Indy car engine sacrifices it performance to last that monsterous distance. I can claim that Indy car will get toasted if you put it along with drag racer. But running in a straight line is not my definition of racing, or neither is an Oval.
    Why do you need to put F1 v/s Indy in Melbourne? Just because it is twisty, and an F1 is only fast around twisty bits and a tortoise in straight line? Indy car is lousy when it comes to braking or accelerating. Tell you what, put a two corners in the Oval, the Indy will get blown away.
    Aerodynamics? The Indy teams spend a pittance compared to F1 teams when it comes to wind tunnel testing. The F1 car needs to generate enough downforce to keep it sticking to the ground around 250kmph+ corners. While the Indy car will end up in a gravel trap trying to do the same.
    Horsepower? The Ferrari and BMW develope 850 bhp+. In Monza, Montoya became the first guy to do a 260 kmph average. Look at Ferrari's reliability, its rock solid. Do you need anymore?
    Traction control? Ever happen to watch a F1 steering wheel? Does the Indy steering wheel look pale in front of it. F1 has the best traction control, drivers can control the parameters from the cockpit.
    There is no competition for F1. Want to watch an F1 doing 350kmph? Go to Indianapolis GP next year. Sato was doing 350 kmph at the end of the home straight.
     
  2. Well, Schumacher reached 367 kmh at Monza, Italy, this year, I don't know how much that is in miles per hour...
     
  3. wow, so many fun things to choose from in this thread...

    1. F1 top speeds. This is largely governed by the overall requirements of a given circuit. It is possible to setup a car for a higher speed down straights, but you lose time in corners. Its possible to setup cars for better downforce throught corners, but you lose time on the straight. The answer is different for each circuit. Simply put, the speeds achieved are a reflection of the circuit and its demands. Which brings me to oval racing. What kind of circuit is it? Well, you carry high speed through corners which allows you to build up higher speeds on the straights. You dont come out of hairpins, and so dont have to build all this speed up from scratch.

    2. Aerodynamics. What a joke. Ferraris Wind Tunnel budget alone is more than most CART \ IRL team budgets in their entirety.

    3. Braking. F1 cars pull 4g+

    4. Overall budgets. Ferrari spend over $500million dollars annually. How much does a top CART \ IRL team spend?

    As for whether or not an F1 engine will last an oval distance. Well, the only answer to that is that they build the engines for the discipline they are in. If they need to do something different for an oval, guess what, they have the budget to do it.

    BTW, I saw an Interview with Michael Schumacher where the top speed of F1 was discussed. He said "I've spoken with my engineers, and they tell me that 500kph is possible, without a doubt" As seen on Channel 9 in Australia, in the 2002 year season.

    CART \ IRL is a joke. The reality is its somewhere closer to watching a sumo wearing latex trying to ice skate. If it should happen to possess speed, its because it has fallen of the edge of a cliff...
     
  4. I love the sound of F1 racing as well, and BTW they're having a F1 race track constructed in China, right?
     
  5. turbo lag isn't an issue in racing because you are always in the turbo's powerband.
     
  6. BHP (brake horsepower) is the effective engine horsepower, not @ the wheels. Its called brake horsepower because they use a machine called an engine brake to measure the power.
     
  7. Turbo lag was in issue in F1 cars, and they race...
     
  8. The turbo lag problem was huge in 80s when turbos were first introduced in F1, but then things got sorted out. And it was the same issue in roadcars, but today a turbo lag is a thing of the past, read any of the tests of turbo cars like a turbo diesel, its apparent everything has been set right in that engine.
     
  9. Turbo Lag is not a thing of the past, it's still a very real problem for Turboed Drag cars.
     
  10. The f1 car will beat the shit out if a indy car . NASCAR SUCKS
     
  11. You may be right but I thought that cars that don't need to lift off the gas to change gear didn't have that problem. Is that wrong?
     
  12. I can't think of anything else to add.
     
  13. Formula 1
     
  14. Around an F1 circuit the an F1 car would destroy an car. Around CART circuit a f1 car would still win, and around an INDY track, the IRL would win. Remember, each car is built for a certaint kind of course. The exception is that around MOST CART tracks, an F1 car could beat the CART car and with simple effort an INDY car.

    So basically, F1 cars are the BEST cars on the planet, with best referring to road coarses like Monza and places like that.
     
  15. Wehter your lifting off or not, if your revs drop too low, you will drop out of the powerband, this is the same for NA cars, but turbo cars tend to have a narrower powerband.
     
  16. F1 engines are designed to last 600km.
     
  17. Yeah, but under the new regulations, effective 2004, engines will have to last three races, much longer than 600 Km.
     
  18. Yep, which might see a drop in power to preserve reliability, but within a few years they'll be pumping out more than ever...
     
  19. yeh F1 cars are definately faster! last year F1 and CART both raced in montreal and F1 cars were faster about 8 seconds per lap! Mainly because of theire brakes! But they are also lighter then CART cars!
     
  20. Braking, acceleration, less weight, and much more agile than CART.
     
  21. yup! with one word:BETTER!
     
  22. PRAT! The honda engine has the biggest BHP in F1 and it currently runs 910BHP, while the absolute least powerful engine in F1 is the engine in the back of the Minardi it has 830BHP so where does 700BHP come into F1, You #$%#ing idiot
     
  23. F1 cars would beat both IRL and CART cars in a circuit like Imola, Silverstone, Nurburgring, etc. With the right aerodynamics, they will also beat the irl and cart cars on an oval. The facts are that Formula 1 stands for the best cars in the world overall. And as mentioned before, when CART and F1 ran in Montreal, the F1 cars outpaced the Carts by 8-10 seconds. Also, CARTs weigh 800 kg and have 850-900 hp. The F1 cars weigh 600 kg and have pretty much the same 850-900 hp. This obviously means that the F1 cars can accelerate faster, and brake faster, and handling is also better.
     
  24. Im still not sure on one thing. I thought INDY cars 0-100 MPH in under 3 seconds. I know f1 cars are the best around a circuit that they race on but im still not sure about which of the 2 (f1 and indy) accelerate faster to like 0-60 and to 100, and even lets say maybe a 1/4 mile.
     
  25. No, you're the prat... The most powerful F1 engine is the BMW powerplant, pushing nearly 900HP at nearly 20,000RPM, its redline. Minardi is approx 100HP down.
     

Share This Page