I just read on the F1 Web-site that tire warmers, and refueling will be banned in 2010 in order to cut down on costs of the equipment. This is in addition to the rules requiring KERS, and the new budget cap options. Toyota said that if they go ahead with the budget caps, they will pull out.
My biggest problem is that the sport is getting way to complicated to follow. If I were a new fan just coming to the sport I would have such a tough time trying to figure out what the hell is going on. I wish they would at least put off any more changes for a little while, I'm still getting used to the massive changes issued this year, let alone all the new stuff next year. Maybe if everyone wrote letters to the FIA they would listen to the fans, unfortunatley it would have to be such a massive campaign to get them to stop, I don't think we could do it.
Full Version: 2010
we are a few races into this season and i still don't understand some of the rules. KERS is boost right? if it is, when did F1 become a NFS game?
KERS is a hybrid battery system where, just like in, say, a Toyota Prius, energy is stored in a battery that is connected to an electric motor. The trick is that drivers can only use it 6.6 seconds per lap with a "push for KERS" button, which gives them roughly 80 HP.
I too agree it would be nice to see them not make any major rule changes for 2010. You forgot to mention the no-more-refueling rule, they're going to have to run heavy with fuel to make it through the race next year.
I too agree it would be nice to see them not make any major rule changes for 2010. You forgot to mention the no-more-refueling rule, they're going to have to run heavy with fuel to make it through the race next year.
QUOTE(Zenix13 @ May 11 2009, 11:31 AM) 
we are a few races into this season and i still don't understand some of the rules. KERS is boost right? if it is, when did F1 become a NFS game?
They weren't trying to implement this technology in the rules to necessarily provide BOOST to cars, but to showcase "greener" technology by recovering, storing, and re-using energy that certain components of the car give off, i.e. brakes.
I also heard that they want to implement the "he who wins the most races wins" rule.
I was thinking about that, and as a sponsor I would be pissed off. There are what...17 races this year. Say that button wins more and gets to nine well before the end of the season...I would bet a lot of people would just stop watching, like in the good old days when MS would wrap up an insurmountable lead well before the end.
I was thinking about that, and as a sponsor I would be pissed off. There are what...17 races this year. Say that button wins more and gets to nine well before the end of the season...I would bet a lot of people would just stop watching, like in the good old days when MS would wrap up an insurmountable lead well before the end.
i enjoyed watching Schumacher battle Hakkenen and dominate the seasons. he was great. the car was great. F1 in its current state is becoming so compromising with its weird rule changes to appease environmental concerns. it is really easy to understand why they want to cut costs, they showed a good example of excessive spending at the Spanish GP. The team trailer/motor home/colossus things that they were showing were insane!
I wish it was just easier to understand. some cars use KERS, other cars don't use KERS at all. Ferrari and McLaren both suck right now. BrawnGP is kicking ass. Red Bull is actually doing something lol.
I wish it was just easier to understand. some cars use KERS, other cars don't use KERS at all. Ferrari and McLaren both suck right now. BrawnGP is kicking ass. Red Bull is actually doing something lol.
Banning refueling can make F1 more interesting because a) the drivers have to look after their fuel, b) car handling will change more drastically over the course of a race due to higher weight and c) the braking zones will get longer, also because of higher weight. All those points will help overtaking and something like Vettel being stuck behind Massa for nearly the whole race is more unlikely to happen.
I think race wins should be made more important but the medal system is, frankly, a stupid idea. Better give 11 or 12 points for the race win instead of 10. 2 points difference between first and second place as it currently is is too little.
To introduce KERS was idiotic in the first place, especially when you are on the cost cutting trip like Max Spank-My-Ass Mosley but now that they have it it should be free for the teams to use it. But what can you expect from a lawyer?
I think race wins should be made more important but the medal system is, frankly, a stupid idea. Better give 11 or 12 points for the race win instead of 10. 2 points difference between first and second place as it currently is is too little.
To introduce KERS was idiotic in the first place, especially when you are on the cost cutting trip like Max Spank-My-Ass Mosley but now that they have it it should be free for the teams to use it. But what can you expect from a lawyer?
Yeah manditory KERS next season is silly. If everyone has it then there is no real variation - if it was more like A1GP where you have a certain amount of boost during the race rather than per lap, then how a driver spends it would make it more interesting.
With drivers having such problems handling a car on cold tyres, surely banning tyre warmers is a bit unsafe?
With no refuelling won't this increase the size of the cars, due to larger fuel tanks, which surely will be difficult for designers when they have new regulations to fit around already?
With drivers having such problems handling a car on cold tyres, surely banning tyre warmers is a bit unsafe?
With no refuelling won't this increase the size of the cars, due to larger fuel tanks, which surely will be difficult for designers when they have new regulations to fit around already?
QUOTE(tune @ May 12 2009, 11:39 AM)
With drivers having such problems handling a car on cold tyres, surely banning tyre warmers is a bit unsafe?
With no refuelling won't this increase the size of the cars, due to larger fuel tanks, which surely will be difficult for designers when they have new regulations to fit around already?
With no refuelling won't this increase the size of the cars, due to larger fuel tanks, which surely will be difficult for designers when they have new regulations to fit around already?
Banning tyre warmers is for sure no cost cutting measure. I can buy a tyre warmer with temperature control for around 550 EUR which is peanuts in comparison to the team's budgets. Spank-ass wants the ban to make races more interesting because someone who has just changed tyres can easily be overtaken. IMHO it doesn't make a race unsafe because everyone knows he has less grip available and should adapt his driving then but TBH I haven't really thought over it.
Tank sizes will increase but prior to 1994 refuelling was banned as well so I don't see difficulties with that.
I guess if I'm honest, fuel strategy kinda takes the spotlight in a lot of the races I watch, but I also like that aspect of racing.
Who is strictly the fastest seems kinda boring to me, although thats what Q2 is all about, and that can be one of the most exciting parts of qualifying.
Who is strictly the fastest seems kinda boring to me, although thats what Q2 is all about, and that can be one of the most exciting parts of qualifying.
The question is, "What is F1 for?"
I would like it to be a place where the results depended to the greatest extent on the skill displayed by the most talented driver, so that the champion was usually the best.
But that is a very naîve stance. F1 is more about advertising than anything else. In the end, it is about (indirectly) generating money, not spending it!
I hate the fact that the racing is interrupted to see which pit crew can work quicker – position changes being often dictated by this. Not good in my book.
At present, the race strategy – as worked out by the tactical staff (light fuel load, three stoops/ heavier load, two stops / come in now to come out in front of driver X/ etc.) – and the abilities of the pit crew (changing a set of rubber more quickly than the opponents) can make more of a difference than nearly two hours of flat-out driving at the limit by two contenders.
I realise that some think that all this adds interest – but I think it spoils the fight for position between the drivers and is not about racing wheel to wheel. If you like tactical games try chess!
My wish list:
Ban pit stops for any reason other than emergency repairs such as puncture, torn-off spoiler, etc. –just to make that quite clear, that means:
Ban tyre changes (apart from when punctured)
Ban re-fuelling
Ban in-car radio
From when the lights turn to green , they should be out there alone, racing each other – none of this teamwork in the race nonsense. The team should do its best before the race to provide an optimal car for the driver to show what he can do and not be involved during the race!
To eliminate other variables than driver ability, it could be argued that a one-make race with equal cars supplied to each driver randomly would be best. But that would favour the guys who preferred the supplied set-up. Another option would be a one-make series where again the standard cars are all provided randomly at the start of the race weekend and the teams could adjust suspension settings, wings etc, to suit their driver. But these options would be of no interest to the majority of the current teams who have a vested interest in their product (Ferrari, Toyota, etc.) or to the technology freaks – and I must admit that the imaginative ideas of the constructors to get the best out of the regulations is something that has a certain appeal too so, on balance, I would say keep the open field.
Even with an open field – in fact with 2 completely different cars (one turbo, one normally aspirated) you can still have fantastic wheel-to-wheel racing if you just let the drivers get on with it and don't mess the positions about with re-fuelling, tyre changes, etc. - as this video shows!
I would like it to be a place where the results depended to the greatest extent on the skill displayed by the most talented driver, so that the champion was usually the best.
But that is a very naîve stance. F1 is more about advertising than anything else. In the end, it is about (indirectly) generating money, not spending it!
I hate the fact that the racing is interrupted to see which pit crew can work quicker – position changes being often dictated by this. Not good in my book.
At present, the race strategy – as worked out by the tactical staff (light fuel load, three stoops/ heavier load, two stops / come in now to come out in front of driver X/ etc.) – and the abilities of the pit crew (changing a set of rubber more quickly than the opponents) can make more of a difference than nearly two hours of flat-out driving at the limit by two contenders.
I realise that some think that all this adds interest – but I think it spoils the fight for position between the drivers and is not about racing wheel to wheel. If you like tactical games try chess!
My wish list:
Ban pit stops for any reason other than emergency repairs such as puncture, torn-off spoiler, etc. –just to make that quite clear, that means:
Ban tyre changes (apart from when punctured)
Ban re-fuelling
Ban in-car radio
From when the lights turn to green , they should be out there alone, racing each other – none of this teamwork in the race nonsense. The team should do its best before the race to provide an optimal car for the driver to show what he can do and not be involved during the race!
To eliminate other variables than driver ability, it could be argued that a one-make race with equal cars supplied to each driver randomly would be best. But that would favour the guys who preferred the supplied set-up. Another option would be a one-make series where again the standard cars are all provided randomly at the start of the race weekend and the teams could adjust suspension settings, wings etc, to suit their driver. But these options would be of no interest to the majority of the current teams who have a vested interest in their product (Ferrari, Toyota, etc.) or to the technology freaks – and I must admit that the imaginative ideas of the constructors to get the best out of the regulations is something that has a certain appeal too so, on balance, I would say keep the open field.
Even with an open field – in fact with 2 completely different cars (one turbo, one normally aspirated) you can still have fantastic wheel-to-wheel racing if you just let the drivers get on with it and don't mess the positions about with re-fuelling, tyre changes, etc. - as this video shows!
radio's a safety issue. no reason to ban that
There will always be a debate about what excites you in motorsport. I'm more concerned about the budget cap more than anything, now that Ferrari threatened to not race in F1 for 2010 if the budget cap matters are not resolved. Not that I'm a fan of Ferrari, but more bigger budget teams seem more than willing to follow suit, because of the budget crisis.
Edit:
I think that it's the clever technology that excites me the most about F1. IF I wanted to watch a series where it was based purely on the driver, I would watch something like A1GP, GP2, or any touring series.
Edit:
I think that it's the clever technology that excites me the most about F1. IF I wanted to watch a series where it was based purely on the driver, I would watch something like A1GP, GP2, or any touring series.
Just to pitch in, I wandered back and forth to F1 simply because of all these damn rules. I know for sure if the FIA keeps up with these strict rules, everybody is gonna want out.
Racing where it's down to the driver to show his skill, is the most exciting racing really - I know this can never really happen in F1, because all the cars would need to be at the same level, which can't really be done and is not the spirit of F1 - but the regulations in FIA GT3 series are great and it works really well, even though there are different cars they all have the performance to win the race and it's down to the drivers.
Put them all into highpowered Caterhams and let 'em battle it out.
Introduce land mines on the racing track. That will make the entire season a whole lot more fun to watch.
Do I sense a calling for some Mario Kart action? Couple of turtle shells, bananas, and boost mushrooms wouldn't hurt.
Ferrari, Renault, and Toyota have all officially threatened to pull out in light of the 2010 regs. Add to that list if you know of anymore. I've been busy, so I haven't been keeping up with F1 news.
Also, it seems Mercedes wants to give Brawn some official backing. Well at least, Haug said so.
Also, it seems Mercedes wants to give Brawn some official backing. Well at least, Haug said so.
QUOTE(moe @ May 13 2009, 10:36 PM)
it seems Mercedes wants to give Brawn some official backing.
Why am I not surprised?
Saw that one coming from a mile off!
Video
Max Mosley tells BBC Sport editor Mihir Bose that Formula 1 can survive without Ferrari after talks between the FIA and the teams concerning a proposed budget cap ended in stalemate.
Max Mosley tells BBC Sport editor Mihir Bose that Formula 1 can survive without Ferrari after talks between the FIA and the teams concerning a proposed budget cap ended in stalemate.
I don;t know about you guys, but I would be a lot less interested in F1 when Ferrari isn't there. I'll probably still watch, but this is not the direction F1 needs to go. I don't care about Prodrive or Lola, I love Ferrari.
Personally I don't care about Ferrari, so their absence wouldn't really change anything for me. Though there are so many ferrari fans that the sport would lose a lot of fans due to them leaving, but I think a huge shakeup would bring in a new viewership as well.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.