This sort of thing really naffs me off (not the post but the sentiment of certain people in Motorsport), if the chicane is too tight then the car hasn't been designed properly. Its not the tracks fault is it? Monza has been like this for years and on the calender long before the cars/bikes in question were designed. The cars should be designed for the competition they are entering, not the other way round.Per wrote:
According to this article the reason for this additional chicane is so that LMP1 and SuperBikes can go straight at the first chicane, which is a bit too tight for them now.
+1Tim.Wright wrote:I don't necessarily buy that as a reason eithet. There is so much room at the first chicane now that if they wanted to open it up they could.
The concern about the current first chicane is not the technical challenge for car and driver, but the funnelling effect especially at the race start. In F1 it's already one of trickiest first corners of the season, and LMP1 cars are an even worse nightmare for wheel-to-wheel racing.Facts Only wrote:This sort of thing really naffs me off (not the post but the sentiment of certain people in Motorsport), if the chicane is too tight then the car hasn't been designed properly. Its not the tracks fault is it? Monza has been like this for years and on the calender long before the cars/bikes in question were designed. The cars should be designed for the competition they are entering, not the other way round.Per wrote:
According to this article the reason for this additional chicane is so that LMP1 and SuperBikes can go straight at the first chicane, which is a bit too tight for them now.
Well, it doesnt sound so bad. I mean, if drivers can try both and decide, with some common sense , which one is better it could be interesting. But common sense is a treasure In F1 those days...Per wrote:I haven't read the original story in Gazzetta dello Sport, but this one is explaining what Gazzetta wrote: https://www.road2sport.com/2016/01/23/f ... formula-1/
According to this article the reason for this additional chicane is so that LMP1 and SuperBikes can go straight at the first chicane, which is a bit too tight for them now. Currently if you send them straight through the first chicane, they are too fast at Curva Grande to be safe.
The current layout of Curva Grande will not disappear, this chicane will just be the 'alternative route' for some classes. So basically F1 would have the choice to use the new layout, without first chicane, or the old one.
Couldn't agree with the sentiment any more.The cars should be designed for the competition they are entering, not the other way round.
Vasconia wrote:Well, it doesnt sound so bad. I mean, if drivers can try both and decide, with some common sense , which one is better it could be interesting. But common sense is a treasure In F1 those days...Per wrote:I haven't read the original story in Gazzetta dello Sport, but this one is explaining what Gazzetta wrote: https://www.road2sport.com/2016/01/23/f ... formula-1/
According to this article the reason for this additional chicane is so that LMP1 and SuperBikes can go straight at the first chicane, which is a bit too tight for them now. Currently if you send them straight through the first chicane, they are too fast at Curva Grande to be safe.
The current layout of Curva Grande will not disappear, this chicane will just be the 'alternative route' for some classes. So basically F1 would have the choice to use the new layout, without first chicane, or the old one.
