Negativity and Haterism trend....

[Tim.Wright]

...the other which would've drawn countless penalties in previous years. Not ideal really is it.

Was ironically similar (regarding track boundaries) to the ever growing myth of the Villeneuve-Arnoux battle...

[turbof1]

I do notice all the saving quite easily. In previous years you could see cars go a little sieways on corner exit, make little mistakes and even big ones whithout being pressured by anyone. This shows being on the limit. Just watch an old qualifying lap and you will understand why I would wait a whole hour of qualifying just to see THE LAP.

Just watch this and say again you don't notice it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viwllFnipds

Such mistakes happened too this year, just have a look ar Rosberg at Italy. I'm not trying to relativate; I accept the premise that without refueling less mistakes are made, but if we really want to look back in the past then it should be noted that refueling only represents a small part of the overall F1 history, and the majority of its history had a ban on refueling. It's not artificial as some might tell; DRS is artificial.

[mertol]

I'm not talking about refueling. I'm talking about driving on the limit and there are several reasons that are preventing them from doing that and they are all unnecessary, artificial and damaging to the sport. Rosberg makes this kind of mistakes on about every track with heavy braking and I blame the crappy brakes on the merc. Which are result of another artificial "invention" forced to F1.

[turbof1]

I'm not talking about refueling. I'm talking about driving on the limit and there are several reasons that are preventing them from doing that and they are all unnecessary, artificial and damaging to the sport. Rosberg makes this kind of mistakes on about every track with heavy braking and I blame the crappy brakes on the merc. Which are result of another artificial "invention" forced to F1.

Well yes, I can agree that regulations on its own constantly slow the cars down. There has to a be limit somewhere though; there's only so much a human body can handle. It's necessary evil, but yes the FIA went too far with aero and engine restrictions. Drivers already said these cars are easier to drive.

[mertol]

They can easily slow the cars down without artificial stuff everywhere, ugly wings, noses, puny, expensive engines etc. "brilliant" ideas.

[turbof1]

They can easily slow the cars down without artificial stuff everywhere, ugly wings, noses, puny, expensive engines etc. "brilliant" ideas.

The noses are a result of poor regulations and infact are less artifical as you might believe. Artificial would have been of the team literally took over the idea the fia had for its eyes. The noses are developed around the regulations optimized for pure performance. Just saying, forcing teams to run beautiful noses is as artifical as it can be.

I disagree on current wings. The sculpted and complex wings are such a sight to behold. Much more beautiful and organic then the simple wings of 90's. And 2014 regulations brought front wing sizes down to acceptable proportions. There will be more people who disagree, and there will be people who agree on that front.

[mertol]

Yep, it's always regulations and they always backfire. I didn't say artificial noses, I said ugly noses. The wings are too wide at the front and too narrow at the back and that is unnecessary because we have the "perfect" solution in the face of DRS - if there isn't enough overtaking just increase the length of DRS zones and/or size of DRS flap. They are complex because it's pretty much the only area that can be changed and not because it gives any big performance gains.

[Manoah2u]

They can easily slow the cars down without artificial stuff everywhere, ugly wings, noses, puny, expensive engines etc. "brilliant" ideas.

The noses are a result of poor regulations and infact are less artifical as you might believe. Artificial would have been of the team literally took over the idea the fia had for its eyes. The noses are developed around the regulations optimized for pure performance. Just saying, forcing teams to run beautiful noses is as artifical as it can be.

I disagree on current wings. The sculpted and complex wings are such a sight to behold. Much more beautiful and organic then the simple wings of 90's. And 2014 regulations brought front wing sizes down to acceptable proportions. There will be more people who disagree, and there will be people who agree on that front.

cound not agree more.

I don't generally think F1 has a problem or that anything is wrong, I do believe F1 could be 'more' then it is today.
More in the sense of less restricted regulations that allow more free design interpretations and directions, flocking
a field with several outstandingly different cars. I however understand that many regulations are set just as well
to 'control' costs from spiralling out, and to improve 'leveling' the competition between the field; even if Merc dominates F1 this year, the dangers are even higher of complete out of reach racing when you have 'total freedom' and an 'unlimited budget'.

[turbof1]

Yep, it's always regulations and they always backfire. I didn't say artificial noses, I said ugly noses. The wings are too wide at the front and too narrow at the back and that is unnecessary because we have the "perfect" solution in the face of DRS - if there isn't enough overtaking just increase the length of DRS zones and/or size of DRS flap. They are complex because it's pretty much the only area that can be changed and not because it gives any big performance gains.

They are still beautiful none the less; yes the rear wing should be bigger aesthetic-wise. However, after 6 years it doesn't disturb me anymore.

[xpensive]

...
I don't generally think F1 has a problem or that anything is wrong,
...

Good for you, but the problem is that the general public, sponsors and manufacturers alike all seem to think there is.

[mertol]

They can easily slow the cars down without artificial stuff everywhere, ugly wings, noses, puny, expensive engines etc. "brilliant" ideas.

The noses are a result of poor regulations and infact are less artifical as you might believe. Artificial would have been of the team literally took over the idea the fia had for its eyes. The noses are developed around the regulations optimized for pure performance. Just saying, forcing teams to run beautiful noses is as artifical as it can be.

I disagree on current wings. The sculpted and complex wings are such a sight to behold. Much more beautiful and organic then the simple wings of 90's. And 2014 regulations brought front wing sizes down to acceptable proportions. There will be more people who disagree, and there will be people who agree on that front.

cound not agree more.

I don't generally think F1 has a problem or that anything is wrong, I do believe F1 could be 'more' then it is today.
More in the sense of less restricted regulations that allow more free design interpretations and directions, flocking
a field with several outstandingly different cars. I however understand that many regulations are set just as well
to 'control' costs from spiralling out, and to improve 'leveling' the competition between the field; even if Merc dominates F1 this year, the dangers are even higher of complete out of reach racing when you have 'total freedom' and an 'unlimited budget'.

I think the everything-freeze completely cancels any "leveling" rules and the new engine rules completely cancel any money saving rules and the 2 missing teams and the huge merc lead are evidence for that.

[turbof1]

...
I don't generally think F1 has a problem or that anything is wrong,
...

Good for you, but the problem is that the general public, sponsors and manufacturers alike all seem to think there is.

manufacturers actually don't. I believe Renault, Ferrari, Mercedes and Honda are concerning the PU's more or less on the same page, just the scope of development is bothering them. It's actually the teams that are making a fuss about it, but the manufacturers are overall happy with the PU specs.

I wouldn't go as far as saying F1 doesn't have problems. F1 obviously has problems and is actually standing a cross roads: do we want to deregulate the whole deal which will (albeit perhaps only temporarily) raise costs, or do we want to do the opposite to save teams from dropping out?

Personally I'd love to see the whole thing being deregulated. It allows the smaller teams to have more scope to make bigger gains with less money.

[GitanesBlondes]

...
I don't generally think F1 has a problem or that anything is wrong,
...

Good for you, but the problem is that the general public, sponsors and manufacturers alike all seem to think there is.

Pretty much the nail on the head.

The sponsors are irrelevant to most of the public.

The manufacturers are also irrelevant to most of the public, save Renault, but really Renault isn't anything special. The average fan isn't driving a Mercedes or a Ferrari.

[Manoah2u]

About aesthatics.....I think we honest-to-god should be happy that F1 regs haven't turned F1 cars into those hideous indy cars of nowadays





If any, this breaks the entire 'spirit' of the series - regardless of performance. With these 'blocks' around, the entire
'open wheeler' idea is slightly destroyed. I can understand it would 'reduce' chances of inter-wheel contact thus launching another car into the air with 200mph.

this looks much better imho



I'm not saying F1 cars of late, aestethically, have not had better days. But still, it could be far, far worse.

[Jonnycraig]

So two, in 18 races. One caused by a safety car, the other which would've drawn countless penalties in previous years. Not ideal really is it.

And still, despite that, light years better then the last couple of years.

Light years.

I can genuinely only imagine you didn't watch F1 in previous years.