A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter do not belong here.
Agree, we need LESS battery, battery is the source of all problems atm. If we have sustainable fuels, I don't even get what batteries are doing in these cars.
The batteries are there because the car industry needs to sell us all hybrids, and convince the population that smaller, turbo hybrids are still a sporty option. What's powering the new F80? a hybrid turbo V6.
So marketing, essentially. But then 'sustainable' fuels are also just marketing, given they aren't a viable mass market solution, or even a good use of energy. It is useful to help with F1's image, along with the batteries, when pitching up in countries, especially the new revenue generating street races, that F1 is green / sustainable / on the road to carbon neutral etc etc.
The problem was chasing a 50/50 split, that, again, is a marketing point rather than any meaningful need, that wouldn't be diminished by being 60/40 or similar. We've moved away from pushing the technology, via the MGU-H, for something easier / less complex, because ultimately the engine makers just want the link to the road cars they need to sell.
It's the same reason I remain to be convinced that F1 would ever return to a pure combustion formula, certainly without risking a lot of manufacturer involvement.
Realistically modern F1 engine regulations shouldn’t be about using less fuel. They should be about making the most out of the fuel available.
There are three important metrics for a good PU formula. Fuel flow, fuel efficiency and aero efficiency. You can cut one metric and get a good formula by making up for it with the other two. If you for some god forsaken reason decide to cut two metrics, you will either get slow cars or weird compromises. Cut both enormously and it will be a total mess.
30% less fuel and reduced efficiency was never going to work if you wanted cars pushing, even if the lack of power was band-aid fixed with more aero efficiency. Even if massive torque and active aero managaes to keep them fast, they were always going to be make difficult compromises with the MGU-K and ICE so grossly out of proportion with each other.
The worst part is that more fuel flow will likely be unable to rectify the situation, since the fundamental issue of being unable to charge the battery suffienctly without slowing down on the straights remains. They really needed 400kW of front regen or an MGU-H (preferably both) for this formula to work without the excessive slowing down on the straights. Now they are locked into this for at least 4 years, even if additional fuel flow and reduced MGU-K output/harvesting might make it workable.
It’s just such a shame what politics did to this formula, since it could have been so good if they chose to increase fuel efficiency and keep active aero. I’m sure many lap records would have fallen by 3+ seconds if the fuel efficiency went up instead of down.
But then worth remembering periodically slowing the cars down is also a thing. This new formula being 2 seconds ish a lap slower than the last one would have been a successful outcome, without all the clipping / recovery problems.
F1 needs to have a really long and hard think on what it wants to be. A sport, entertainment series, or a technology development platform.
The simple truth is that ICEs have no future in commuter cars. Electric is superior on every front except weight and associated safety for other road users (duly negated by ICE-SUVs also being ridiculously tall and heavy) and range - but if you need to commute so far that that is an issue, you live too far from work anyway. And yes, I include heavy users like sales reps there, if your battery capacity is an issue you are taking irresponsibly little breaks.
Liquid fuel ICEs (and perhaps fuel cells, but not fully convinced) are relevant only for long haul freight and heavy duty utility vehicles. Want to be a development platform for that? Go ahead. But don't pretend it's road relevant consumer tech. Want to be relevant for everyday people? Only one choice: become FE.
Do you want to be a sports? Then fairness should be central. A true, structural cost cap. A maximum spending that includes driver- and engineer salaries such that teams truly need to chose where to put there emphasis. And clear, SMART technical rules that do not change during a season. Did one team figure out something brilliant and demolish the rest? Is what it is. Better luck next year.
Ofc. you can add competition enhancing regulations in such a formula, and probably should to avoid everyone from just making walls of dirty air to screw the competition. But what is clear is that if you are setting specific design measures such as floor-focus or specific bargeboard or wing geometries, teams will find ways around it and make overtaking worse than expected. So maybe regulations should focus on ends rather than means, e.g. certain criteria for wake strength as measured in standard wind tunnel conditions. Yes, harder to measure and enforce - but if done well, better for competition. It leaves more design freedom to the teams, as long as they adhere to the limits.
Do you want to be an entertainment series? Then by all means add boosts, fan-voted action, whatever. But don't complain if the classic fans are upset and leave to other series.
Oh, and synfuels? As an environmentalist, i dont really care. Truth is the cars hardly contribute to the overall impact of F1. Logistics are much more important, and there is much to gain there in race planning and transportation.
f1 is more than that : it's a sport, an engineering competition, and an entertainment
and these new regulations deliver way more than the previous ones on all points in my opinion.
the overtakes were almost completely restricted to the DRS zones before.
this is not the case anymore, and the drivers can be "creative" in their attacks / defense.
