Changes you'd like to see in F1

What i'd love to see in F1 is:

Changes to Qualifying
More or less as it used to be:
- only Saturday counts
- drivers can go out whenever they damn want to.

If Bernard is really hell-bent on changing things in quali, i suggest:
- cars should be weighed before they go out, so the public can understand whats happening instead of guessing, which i personally havent found so much fun.
- 2 flying laps

Other changes
- removal of traction control
- manually operated gearchanges (paddles are ok)
- teams allowed to bring slicks, intermediates and full rains to each track

Feel free to tear these suggestions apart, or suggest your own.


cheers,
jay

I agree with all of your suggestions! :eek:

Can't really think of anything else at the moment.

Thought of something:

I want the regs to be less restrictive. Take engine configuration as an example. If someone wants to build V12, V10, V8, W18, I4, 1-cylinder, whatever - let them do that. Just not over 3 litres in displacement. And the same in other areas as well.

And I'd like to see cars that don't spoil the air behind them so much. At the moment overtaing in a much faster car is very hard because of the aerodynamic configuration of cars. Quite frustrating when "your" guy is behind and can't pass :)

Agree with one but not the other :)

I kinda like the fact that all engines have to have the same cylinder count, i dont really know why, i guess its "fairer" comparison

as for the second one, i agree with the idea but not the means of getting there. Cars should be as aerodynamic as possible irrespective of how much turbulence they create. it would spoil things for me if you capped that aspect of aerodynamics development in F1. However, you are completely right that there does need to be more overtaking. I think one answer to that is track design, i.e. not getting rid of glorious circuits like Spa. Bernie really is an ignoramus :rolleyes:

Originally posted by crayzayjay
Agree with one but not the other :)

I kinda like the fact that all engines have to have the same cylinder count, i dont really know why, i guess its "fairer" comparison


Not only that, but everyone having the same engine configuration means all the teams start on the same drawing board, at least you do know they all started the same place there.

The rest of the comments about rule changes all make sense to me.

I say make a standard safety car..

like a Mclaren F1, or a Pagani Zonda, or even a ferrari enzo..

that would be cool.

Actually the AMG whatever (I think cl500???) they had in brazil was mad!

Get rid of Bernie.
Get rid of Max.
Get rid of cigarette and advertising money.
Get rid of the restrictive technical regs.
Get rid of all the socialite hangers on.
Get rid of PR and PC.
Get rid of the safety car.
Get rid of grooved tyres.
Get rid of the flat bottom rule.
Get rid of mickey mouse tracks and their chicanes.

Basically lets go back to the late sixties/early seventies!

Originally posted by RallyRaider
Get rid of Bernie.
Get rid of Max.
Get rid of cigarette and advertising money.
Get rid of the restrictive technical regs.
Get rid of all the socialite hangers on.
Get rid of PR and PC.
Get rid of the safety car.
Get rid of grooved tyres.
Get rid of the flat bottom rule.
Get rid of mickey mouse tracks and their chicanes.

Basically lets go back to the late sixties/early seventies!

:hehe: I agree completely, except for the safety car thing. They really need to get rid of the flat bottoms and grooved tires!

Originally posted by RallyRaider
Get rid of Bernie.
Get rid of Max.
Get rid of cigarette and advertising money.
Get rid of the restrictive technical regs.
Get rid of all the socialite hangers on.
Get rid of PR and PC.
Get rid of the safety car.
Get rid of grooved tyres.
Get rid of the flat bottom rule.
Get rid of mickey mouse tracks and their chicanes.

Basically lets go back to the late sixties/early seventies!

Great summary! :D

Originally posted by RallyRaider
Get rid of Bernie.
Get rid of Max.
Get rid of cigarette and advertising money.
Get rid of the restrictive technical regs.
Get rid of all the socialite hangers on.
Get rid of PR and PC.
Get rid of the safety car.
Get rid of grooved tyres.
Get rid of the flat bottom rule.
Get rid of mickey mouse tracks and their chicanes.

Basically lets go back to the late sixties/early seventies!

I disagree on everything except the tabacco. Do you know how many drivers died in the 60 and 70s? Look how safe F1 is today, with that accident with Webber and the Alonso crash.

The rules are fine, these new restrictions for this year are making F1 more interesting, last year got so predictable just watching Schumacher drive away and win constantly. Ferrari doesn't like the new rules but the rules apply to everyone.

Hehe, I knew somebody would come back on the safety issue.

I agree completely. I didn't suggest we get rid of all the modern advancements in safety and technology. Just the safety car that is used way too often, including sometimes when races should be stopped but won't because it will muck up the TV schedule.

Rather lets see a field of cars that actually look different to each other, can run close together, in all conditions, drivers that say what they think, no concessions to the corporate dollar, on tracks that allow racing.

Doesn't sound like much like Formula One of today.

I mean look at it from a different angle. If Formula one is supposed to be so safe why allow a situation to arise when wet weather tyres are not available for wet weather? Or race on a track that has a small stream flowing over it? Or force drivers to use a 'safety' device that hasn't been fitted properly and paralyses their arms during a race? That is modern F1, don't sound too safe to me!

and how the heck can they say that they care about safety when they forced groves on slicks. Can anyone tell me how making a car lose traction help improve its safety. their stupid argument that thei'll go slower in corners is stupid. If want to make it go slower put a parachute in the back of the car don't destroy the tires.


also what i would like to see back in F1 is ----TURBO:D ;)

Originally posted by RallyRaider

Basically lets go back to the late sixties/early seventies!

Well ok then, off you go into your sixties/seventies era!

And don't come back here anymore :finger: :finger:

j/k ;)

Originally posted by RallyRaider
Get rid of Bernie.
Get rid of Max.
Get rid of cigarette and advertising money.
Get rid of the restrictive technical regs.
Get rid of all the socialite hangers on.
Get rid of PR and PC.
Get rid of the safety car.
Get rid of grooved tyres.
Get rid of the flat bottom rule.
Get rid of mickey mouse tracks and their chicanes.



Get rid of all the guys on this forum who can't stand their hero not being on top of the game and keep on blaming the new rulings for that.


Now you all can shoot me! :finger: :finger: :finger:

j/k

Originally posted by Neutrino
and how the heck can they say that they care about safety when they forced groves on slicks. Can anyone tell me how making a car lose traction help improve its safety. their stupid argument that thei'll go slower in corners is stupid. If want to make it go slower put a parachute in the back of the car don't destroy the tires.


also what i would like to see back in F1 is ----TURBO:D ;)

1. Webber and Alonso escaping nearly unhurt those wrecks sounds like pretty safe to me :rolleyes:
2. Rules are what they are and it's the same for all drivers, soo
3. Turbo's: aha, that's what I called pretty unsafe...

Get rid of all the guys on this forum who can't stand their hero not being on top of the game and keep on blaming the new rulings for that.

That's not what I'm about! I like seeing a battle, and like I sad, may the best team win. We all know that McLaren didn't suddenly make up all the ground they had to to catch Ferrari, so why the seeming flip flop in performance? I'll tell you why, it's the rules artificially manipulating strategies etc. We all know that under the old rules Ferrari would still be out front, so why penalize them for all the work they done to get on top after years of struggling? Let the other teams catch them by working hard like they did, not silly lottery games. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Veyron


That's not what I'm about! I like seeing a battle, and like I sad, may the best team win. We all know that McLaren didn't suddenly make up all the ground they had to to catch Ferrari, so why the seeming flip flop in performance? I'll tell you why, it's the rules artificially manipulating strategies etc. We all know that under the old rules Ferrari would still be out front, so why penalize them for all the work they done to get on top after years of struggling? Let the other teams catch them by working hard like they did, not silly lottery games. :rolleyes:

Let me ask something....
Why do you believe that it could not be a case of Mclaren working really hard over the last year to increase their performance.

How about I put this notion on the table....

After the 2002 season, Ferrari grew over-confident of their performance and are now seeing the consequence of their neglect to keep developing the 2002 car in the interim.

Respectfully Veyron, the continually blaming of the rules for one team putting together a better race than another is getting ridiculous.
Can't anyone acredit they fact that other teams have worked hard in the off season so they could actually be competitive with Ferrari.

We all knew last season that the other teams on the grid would have to do a LOT of work to catch up with Ferrari, is it not possible that some of the teams have actually done this?

I agree, the new rules come into play in the matter, but to blame them solely on one teamss lack-lustre performance and another team's stellar performance is, in my opinion, unrealistic.

I didn't see anyone blaming the rules solely, especially blaming the rules for the performance of Ferrari, Ray :confused: Besides, performance is still there, but the results are lacking ... but never mind.

I think you'll find that all of us, including you and Guido were against the rules, the majority of them, from the moment they were announced? Why the sudden change in heart? :huh:

Yes, McLaren worked hard over the winter and have the results to show, but wouldn't it have been much sweeter if it had been done without the help of the FIA? Then I'd truly take my hat off, as I did in 98 (as frustrating as it was).

The thing we're opposing is the same thing that caused an outcry from non-Ferrari supprters as well as some Ferrari fans (not me!) after Austria - the aritficial manipulation of the results. It's interesting to watch most of the time, but I was as interested, or even more interested last few seasons. In fact, all of the seasons.

One thing you can be sure of is that Ferrari will work they arses off to try to remedy the situation and fight till the end, something other teams failed miserably to do last season (Williams are still dead slow even with the 2003 car with all the latest developments). This is the main ingredient of an interesting season, which you can be sure you'll get if Ferrari of the present is trailing behind at the beginning of the season.

Originally posted by ales

I think you'll find that all of us, including you and Guido were against the rules, the majority of them, from the moment they were announced? Why the sudden change in heart? :huh:



Alex, I still don't agree with the new rules, but like the teams, I have to live with them.....not so?

There is no change of heart, I am just tired of hearing the excuses and whinging.....instead of crying about the new rules, can't we just accept they are there(as I have done), and get on with watching our favorite teams and drivers compete?

Do you think I agreed with the rule that took the victory away from Giancarlo any more than you?
NO, I do not (I have had the same thing happen to me, a victory stolen by the rules, it is part of racing), my heart sank for him, but this is racing and the rules must be there for a reason, right?

What you see as whigning I see as normal discussion. The fact that the rules are there we cannot change and have accepted (I certainly have), but I don't see why I or anyone should stop voicing their opinion of the rules or voicing the personal thoughts on how the thing we call Formula 1 can be made better. Not so? :p

go post something interesting in the rally forum, it has been dead for weeks! :bloated:

Originally posted by ales
What you see as whigning I see as normal discussion.

You're a Brit?:eek:

I'm not going into the long debates that guys are running here. Just this:

1) I was only joking! You guys are way to serious about this. It's entertainment right?
2) The change of heard? I still think some of the rules are ridiculous. But like I already said, now that we are on the way, I've stopped complaining about it and am just watching the show. Regardless the outcome. I've never complained about anything McLaren did do wrong in the past. Remeber 94 till 97 or 2000 till 2002. It is what it is, right? And if bad luck or what ever reason strikes hard, I keep my head down and wait for better times. :D

I feel very strong about McLaren, have tons of merchandising at home and am a proud member of the official fan club since the club was created about 8 years ago. But debating and arguing as if my life is at stake to get my oppinion accepted by the others involved. No, I'm to humble for that. And sometimes I have the impression that people on here - regardless the colour they wear - are just doing that.

It's just a game, a very expensive one, but just a game. Like football/soccer where you can debate and argue the refs behavior etc. etc. Most F-1 guys say soccer is crap but when FIFA or UEFA are impossing new rules - sometimes ridiculous too, the acceptance there is a lot greater then here.

Originally posted by ales

go post something interesting in the rally forum, it has been dead for weeks! :bloated:

hihihi, says the mod!! ;)

jokin' Alex, jokin' :D

Originally posted by freakray


You're a Brit?:eek:

:lol2: Good one!

Now, really, go post something useful and interesting in the rally forum. Take the Mercitroen guy with you as well! :p :silly:

Originally posted by ales




Now, really, go post something useful and interesting in the rally forum. Take the Mercitroen guy with you as well! :p :silly:

:lol2:

Is that an order Sir? Cause I don't take orders! :lol2:

Wonder what you wife might say about that last comment :D

Originally posted by ales
Wonder what you wife might say about that last comment :D

Anyway, go check the rallypages. I've just posted something :finger: :devil:

Originally posted by ales


:lol2: Good one!

Now, really, go post something useful and interesting in the rally forum. Take the Mercitroen guy with you as well! :p :silly:

Don't you have somewhere you are meant to be?? :finger:


Posted one in there too....got to keep you busy....sir......:p

Originally posted by huudo


1. Webber and Alonso escaping nearly unhurt those wrecks sounds like pretty safe to me :rolleyes:


could you have missed any more the point of my statement??? the point of proper tires is to avoid accidents all togheder.

Originally posted by Neutrino



could you have missed any more the point of my statement??? the point of proper tires is to avoid accidents all togheder.

You will NEVER avoid accidents altogether.....so how are the tyres going to help avoid accidents altogether?

More grip may reduce the likelihood of accidents, but they will never be avoided. Even before the introduction of grooved tyres, there were wrecks......

Wrecks can be caused by many things, from suspension failure to driver error.... (Did you see Firman's wreck? That was suspension failure, not tyre failure).

Wet weather tyres in wet weather doesn't even stop the chance of a wreck, significantly reduce the chance, yes, but not eliminate.

BTW, I think Alonso's wreck was more driver error(not slowing down sufficiently for a yellow flag) than a tyre failure.......

Originally posted by Neutrino



could you have missed any more the point of my statement??? the point of proper tires is to avoid accidents all togheder.

Well my answer was maybe not so clear, but Ray did most of the explanation and that's what I meant. Tyres de facto don't aviod accidents, they will only increase grip, but not improve safety. The monocoque cells, throurgouly tested, make modern F-1 racing safe. And a lot has gone into that after 1994 for obvious reasons. Sure the cars are handling a lot more nervous now then on slicks. I've been lucky enough to witness those changes while visiting F-1 test sessions over the years. You can nearly go on to the tarmac when they fly by and boy is there a difference? YES THERE IS. But it's for everybody the same. And I think the driver should adapt his style to that.

Oh well, just my 2 cents.

:confused:

How can you possibly arguing in favour of one wet tyre specification rule? This is a stupid rule, and full wts on a profoundly wet track are indeed safer, all other things being equal, than the intermetiates. What the heck are you arguing about?

Though I do agree that Alonso's crash was evenmore stupid than the tyre rule, and I blame the marshalls if they weren't fast enough with yellow flags, the team for not informing him on the radio, and Alonso himself. I'm very glad that he's ok, but when you see yellow flags you slow the hell down! Wasn't it he who got a driverthrough penalty for passing under yellows a bit earlier? If so, the double podium finisher has a thing or two to learn about F1 and learn them fast.

Originally posted by ales
:confused:

How can you possibly arguing in favour of one wet tyre specification rule? This is a stupid rule, and full wts on a profoundly wet track are indeed safer, all other things being equal, than the intermetiates. What the heck are you arguing about?



Excuse me if I am sticking my nose in here, but who is argueing in favor of one wet weather tyre?

I was explaining about full slicks compared to grooved slicks and how they will not prevent wrecks completely.....

I have already stated that I agree the one tyre rule is dumb.

OK, me shut up :D :o




Guido was :alien:

Originally posted by ales
:confused:

How can you possibly arguing in favour of one wet tyre specification rule? This is a stupid rule, and full wts on a profoundly wet track are indeed safer, all other things being equal, than the intermetiates. What the heck are you arguing about?



Oops, bad choice of words again? I'm don't mean that at all. I was just trying to say that in general a tyre will not make a car any safer. So many other things are involved as well.

Stupid rule or not. It's a rule and it's in place. Michelin took the right gamble by taking bigger grooved tyres. Remember the pile up in Spa 1998? There they had the choice. The wreckage was even bigger then last sunday. And they all walked away. Not that it is the same thing, but you know what I mean.

OK let's IF a bit further then.

If they had the choice, most likely some teams would have opted for intermediates taking the gamble for improving conditions and the same thing might have happened or even worse, or even better.

Originally posted by freakray


You will NEVER avoid accidents altogether.....so how are the tyres going to help avoid accidents altogether?

More grip may reduce the likelihood of accidents, but they will never be avoided. Even before the introduction of grooved tyres, there were wrecks......

Wrecks can be caused by many things, from suspension failure to driver error.... (Did you see Firman's wreck? That was suspension failure, not tyre failure).

Wet weather tyres in wet weather doesn't even stop the chance of a wreck, significantly reduce the chance, yes, but not eliminate.

BTW, I think Alonso's wreck was more driver error(not slowing down sufficiently for a yellow flag) than a tyre failure.......


of couse the tires won't completely make all accidents avoidable don't take me literaly but tires are a intrinsec part or the cars safety make rules that makes them crappy and you'll have more accidents.


what would you say if i came over your place and force you to use a 275 summer tire in the snow? Then tell me that tires are not important.

i completelly agree with ales the tire rules are stupid.

Originally posted by Neutrino


what would you say if i came over your place and force you to use a 275 summer tire in the snow? Then tell me that tires are not important.



that's what I call a challenge. Sideways all over the place in the snow! :jump:

:lol:

of course tyres are important

Originally posted by ales




Guido was :alien:

I am :alien: !

:lol2:

Originally posted by Neutrino



of couse the tires won't completely make all accidents avoidable don't take me literaly but tires are a intrinsec part or the cars safety make rules that makes them crappy and you'll have more accidents.



We can only read what you type and respond to that, you said:
Originally posted by Neutrino

could you have missed any more the point of my statement??? the point of proper tires is to avoid accidents all togheder.

Which is what I responded to, you did not say "the point of proper tyres is that they will reduce the possibility of accidents".

Do you see what I am saying ;)

I apologise for misunderstanding your original statement, I am certain you see my point about the other aspects that contribute to accidents too though.

BTW, if you're paying for the tyres, I will take you up on that offer of the summer 275's, they would go well on the Subaru ;)
How much snow though? :confused:

Some drivers, like Schumi, wrecked whilst the yellow flag was waving and corner workers were trying to attend to the previous wreckage! Maybe that conduct needs to be looked into, he should have slowed instead of trying to make up time! :eek:

Originally posted by freakray


Which is what I responded to, you did not say "the point of proper tyres is that they will reduce the possibility of accidents".

Do you see what I am saying ;)


yeah i guess you are right i should have been more specific. Is just that i hate all the tire rules they have.

Originally posted by huudo


Well ok then, off you go into your sixties/seventies era!

And don't come back here anymore :finger: :finger:

j/k ;)

Why all the flippas? Back then they had real Mclarens. The fabulous Bruce and Denny show! Even painted them real McLaren Orange - none of this Mercedes Silver rubbish :finger: :finger:

No Joke!





Okay j/k !!! :D

Originally posted by huudo


Get rid of all the guys on this forum who can't stand their hero not being on top of the game and keep on blaming the new rulings for that.


Now you all can shoot me! :finger: :finger: :finger:

j/k

Even if I'm enjoying seeing Schumacher screw up I can categorically state that the new rules do indeed suck!!

I doubt the new rules really have much to do with Schumacher’s current lack of points. Just a case of lady luck belatedly balancing the ledger. Schumacher has heavily overdrawn his account of good luck and is getting some bad stuff for a change.

Even then most of the trouble has been his own silly fault. Unlike Rubino's car breaking down in Brazil - that is bad luck.

Originally posted by huudo


Well my answer was maybe not so clear, but Ray did most of the explanation and that's what I meant. Tyres de facto don't aviod accidents, they will only increase grip, but not improve safety. The monocoque cells, throurgouly tested, make modern F-1 racing safe. And a lot has gone into that after 1994 for obvious reasons. Sure the cars are handling a lot more nervous now then on slicks. I've been lucky enough to witness those changes while visiting F-1 test sessions over the years. You can nearly go on to the tarmac when they fly by and boy is there a difference? YES THERE IS. But it's for everybody the same. And I think the driver should adapt his style to that.

Oh well, just my 2 cents.

Actually there is some argument for reducing grip leading to reduced impact in accidents. Goes something along the line of reduced grip means lower cornering speeds. Therefore if you accept that most accidents occur during cornering then the lower speed at which grip, or control is lost means that the eventual energy of impact must be lower too.

That was Max's spin when the grooved tyres were introduced. Incidentally the teams could have vetoed the rule with a unanimous vote but a single team (Ferrari) chose to vote for grooves. Guess they thought they had the march on the opposition at sorting the new specification. They were in for a nasty surprise when Bridgestone and McLaren were the ones who got it right.

Anyway Max's theory falls down for a number of reasons, just off the top of my head:

Having reduced grip means the cars slow down less before impact, negating the lower initial speed.
The smaller cross section of the 180cm track car results in a faster top velocity down the straights so a blowout at max speed will be worse.
Increased reliance on aerodynamic grip makes the cars more sensitive to wind and turbulence, therefore increasing the likelihood of losing control.

Not to mention they just look damn stupid!.

Originally posted by RallyRaider


Increased reliance on aerodynamic grip makes the cars more sensitive to wind and turbulence, therefore increasing the likelihood of losing control.

Not to mention they just look damn stupid!.


I know, when I first saw them on grooved tyres, I thought they were going off. And was only during testing. You can see how the drivers do have to fight their car on the limit when cornering.

and it looks stupid too.

Originally posted by huudo


I know, when I first saw them on grooved tyres, I thought they were going off. And was only during testing. You can see how the drivers do have to fight their car on the limit when cornering.

and it looks stupid too.

Yet the lap records keep falling. Did anyone mention the tyres look stupid? :)

Originally posted by Veyron
Some drivers, like Schumi, wrecked whilst the yellow flag was waving and corner workers were trying to attend to the previous wreckage! Maybe that conduct needs to be looked into, he should have slowed instead of trying to make up time! :eek:

Its in a driver's nature to not want to lose time. Im positive Schumacher wasnt pushing at that corner, in fact im sure no one was tempting fate whilst crossing "the river", MS was just unlucky that the water got under the tyre and carried him off.
Its the same with all drivers, when they see a yellow they dont take their foot of the gas entirely, they just ease off a tiny amount (which makes all the difference) at the particular corner where they see the wreckage. If the road is clear theyre gonna stay on it, its their nature... sometimes they throw caution to the wind (like Alonso, but he might have been unsighted and thought that section of the track was clean) and thats when its stupid.

Originally posted by Veyron


Yet the lap records keep falling. Did anyone mention the tyres look stupid? :)

euhh, I think RallyRaider was saying something like that yeah...

Originally posted by RallyRaider


Not to mention they just look damn stupid!.



youhooo?!! :flipa:

:lol2:

Originally posted by huudo



youhooo?!! :flipa:

:lol2:

Are you feeling okay Guido? You've been acting a little strange since you returned :p

Originally posted by RallyRaider


Are you feeling okay Guido? You've been acting a little strange since you returned :p

I'm just trying to take it from the easy site now, not so serious about stuff anymore. Cause there are more important things in life. I just thought that Veyron's remark was funny, since he obviously didn't read your remark about it. So, instead of going after him saying:

"If you read the post you'd have seen it and all bla bla bla serious stuff"

I just wanted to put it like that in a light and funny way like:

"hellooo, it was there ;) "

Nothing to worry about though :D

Fair enough, good to see you are enjoying yourself and flipping us all off in the process :D :flipa:

I thought Veyron was joining in the fun of calling the grooved tyres stupid i.e. he knew I said it, then you said it. He as just agreeing in a humerous way - well he gave me a laugh.

Looks like none of us are taking this too seriously. After all it is only Formula one we're talking about, not like it has a fifty year history to live up to or anything... hangon...

We all agree those grooved tyres look stupid right :toothless

I just thought that Veyron's remark was funny, since he obviously didn't read your remark about it.

Hehe, I read all threads, I was just being comedic.:jump: