To those who need pictures - F1 2011 reg changes

Discussion in 'Motorsports' started by The Drift God, Dec 15, 2010.

  1. #1 The Drift God, Dec 15, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
  2. Great find, Thanx.
  3. srsly, +1. Hopefully this amounts to something on the track.
  4. Good stuff here. Nice to have the visuals.
  5. Excellent find
  7. Then in the race the wing cannot be adjusted for two laps, then race control will send signals to the driver via the steering wheel, such that when they’re 1s or less behind another car at a designated point on the circuit, the rear wing can be trimmed out. The wing returns to the original setting as soon as the brakes are touched.

    F1 is a silly place
  8. Whats going to keep driver from tapping the brakes to keep the wing up?
  9. ugh, F1 has the stupidest rules on the planet.

    Instead of all this complex bullshit with a billion loopholes just give them less sticky tires FFS.
  10. Instead of less sticky tires they should ban tire warmers.
  11. tire warmers only help you until the car gets its tire temps up.

    The whole point is that they keep making petty ass rule changes to slow the cars down and drive dev costs wayyyy up, instead of just hitting the 4 fundamental elements which make the car go fast:

    Mechanical grip (tires, size and stickiness, weight, car size), Aero grip (wing/undertray size/area is easiest to attack), Air, and fuel.

    Regulate those 4 things+safety, and you can make far more interesting cars which actually produce useful technology. Much better than a disastrous patchwork of rules that teams basically just look for loopholes in.
  12. And when a team does find loopholes, they gain an advantage at the beginning of the season, teams complain to the FIA and then push to make copies of the loopholes and apply it to thier design. This creates new development which increases costs tramendously, and la da la da here we #$%#ing go again.

    But agree with you on the four main elements that should be regulated instead of all of these ridiculous rules.
  13. Agree, your four points, But without tire warmers drivers will be forced to go slower for one to two laps after changing tires and that could make things more interesting.
  14. some of the things I wish F1 rules would do:

    greatly reduce aero grip (Raise ride height+smaller wings)
    Increase mechanical grip (wider/softer tires. Induces more pit stops too. also open up active suspension)
    shorten the wheelbase+cars (more slip angle happy cars, less aero dependent)
    Totally open engine regs minus a restrictor+mandatory fuel type (pump gas)

  15. I so agree with this,

    One Change to make the sport better

    Sir Stirling Moss, 16-time grand prix winner: "At the moment drivers have huge run-off areas at most tracks and they can get away with huge mistakes. The best race of the lot is Monaco because they have no margin for error and personally I'd like to see all the circuits lined with Armco. We're talking about drivers who are meant to be the best in the world, so they should be able to stick to the black stuff and face the consequences if they don't. I'd also like to see points awarded for pole position and fastest lap."

    Sam Bird, GP2 driver: "I liked the fuel pit stops because you could play with strategy a bit more. So I'd like to see that return."

    Laurence Edmondson, ESPNF1 Deputy Editor: "Bring back manual gearboxes and foot-operated clutches. The best way to promote overtaking is to make the cars more difficult to drive and increase the chances of a mistake. A missed gear was a vital ingredient to action in the past and sequential paddle-shift boxes put an end to that. What's more, if drivers were happy to operate their F-ducts with just one hand on the steering wheel through Eau Rouge, they shouldn't be any complaints about shifting manually."
  16. Stirling Moss needs to stfu. He's a grumpy old man nowadays who always voices his opinion, valid or not.

    Monaco is a great race, but having Armco line the track does guarantee one thing...if a driver does crash, there's a safety car period. Monaco has extraordinarily skilled marshals who can clear a car away with a crane very quickly. Valencia, Singapore and Korea don't.

    The season we just had does take a little away from Sam Bird's argument.

    As for gearboxes. Going back to manuals with clutches is a step backwards in technology. F1 is meant to be about technology, so going back to manuals just so the drivers have a harder time and create potential for more mistakes while going several seconds slower, all in the name of ludicrous. As for the "if drivers are willing to use an F-duct, they should use a manual" is stupid. For one, a driver doesn't use their f-duct 50-60 times a lap. Secondly, changing gear is a lot more complex than holding your hand over a hole.
  17. I agree with Stirling on this point when it comes to Spa Francorchamps. The La Source corner has been completely ruined this way. Each year drivers abuse this change, especially at the start of the race.
  18. Well, I do agree with him that drivers should be able to stay on the black stuff, So bring back those sand boxes so drivers must slow down in corners or face face the consequences.
    As things are now it's just silly, Driver need not to slow down in some corners because they can always drive beside the track without losing speed or time.
  19. If you look at the rules in F1, theyre nothing BUT kicking technology in the nuts, so this would fit perfectly and be more exciting (not to mention sound better hearing guys row through gears).

    removing dynamic aero, traction control, controllable suspensions, turbos, etc and adding rev caps, development freezes, budgets, etc are all steps backwards in technological advancement.

    and 100% agree with moss, minus the armco part. Put sand pits everywhere.
  20. sand pits, air restrictors, open engine and aero rules.......that would make F1 a lot more interesting AND promote advances in technology, since they could build whatever the hell they would reach new ground in efficiency, since with a given air restriction there is only so much power that can be extracted, and they have to be creative in all other ways.

    not sure how i feel about manual trans coming back.......lots of pros n cons to that.
  21. I know that there have been lots of changes which have been designed to stop teams spending billions on new technologies, preventing the cars from getting too fast, and overall making the sport more exciting.

    Do I agree with those, for the most part no. How many of us actually prefer the V8s over the V10s?

    The gearboxes have been effectively implemented in the sport for 20 years. There isn't a visible difference between the gearbox in a Ferrari and a HRT. Going back to manuals with foot operated clutches is too much of a leap back to make sense. It's akin to banning disk brakes because they allow the cars to stop too quickly and make overtaking hard.

    There's no point in going back to manuals, other than to appease those people who endlessly watch youtube videos of F1 in the 80s and reminisce about the "golden era."
  22. The rules are there to basically slow the cars down and generate passing while keeping it interesting. Manuals would help, I think.

    and to a lesser degree, they do limit brakes all the time. wheel farings and brake ducts and such all have rules. Its not as significant or direct as banning disc brakes, but its the same idea.
  23. Limiting the design parameters is not the same as forcing the reintroduction of a completely inferior and outdated design just for the hell of it.

    That's my point.

    Going back to manuals with foot clutches is like banning disk brakes and forcing teams to use drums. It's a completely unnecessary and over the top rule change.

    Why should they mess with a gearbox formula that works, doesn't have a disparity between teams, doesn't consume vast amounts of development resources, and has been in the sport 20 years?

  24. Banning active aero, powered ground effects, active suspension, traction control, etc are in principle the exact same thing as you're suggesting. They're all clearly better in every way (for performance, ground effect cars were kinda dangerous), and teams that did it were forced to revert back to inferior designs.

    And its a way to level the playing field. Make the cars harder to drive, make the differences between drivers more apparent, make mistakes more common.

    And if you're using tat criteria, manuals would be the exact same way, minus 1 year of development time, and its been in the sport for many times longer than paddles.

Share This Page