Formula E

[Andres125sx]

FE get around the dirty air issue by just not generating any downforce

An F1 car has SCz >>6.5 (17.7kN at 240km/hr) while the FE is SCz~ 1.7-2 (5kN at 240km/hr), less than 1/3 of the F1. They also only produce ~1/2 the drag. It's really not an aero-formula. The massive diffuser is mostly for show.

BTW it would be extremelly interesting to compare those aero numbers with some other category wich is more similar and a more fair comparison to FE, do you have those SCz number for GP2, GP3, Indy, DTM, GT or any other category

[Andres125sx]

The huge issue (poor tracks aside) I have is with what the cars look like. They are so ugly, and just look like a child designed them to look 'cool'. (and I agree they are used as bumper cars far too much)

My issue with Formula E is that the vehicles are too darn lacklustre in terms of performance. Racing on tracks with overly tight chicanes only highlights this. Why not build electric formula cars capable of racing on regular circuits -[If 30 min sprint races is the maximum range that is OK, just have three sprints races.]

Surely the whole hype around EVs is because they are fast? Tesla are promising their new Roadster EV to be one of the fastest hypercars in the world, every bit the match for hybrid hypercars.

Yet the Formula E cars are not even close to the pace of F2. Formula E does not live up to the hype of EVs being rocketships.


The Roadster needs a 880kg 200 kWh battery to be fast (in a straight line), and that's fine, that's no problem. Yet Formula E tries to make do with a piddly 54 kWh battery that, no doubt, contributes to the lacklustre nature of the vehicle's performance. If the Formula E car needs to weigh 1500kg or 2000 or 2500kg to be fast and have decent range, that is perfectly fine -- just do it (TM Nike).

For crying out loud, put a bigger battery in it and crank up the power!

IMHO a 250kg battery fitted into a car wich weight (without driver and battery) around 480kg can´t be considered piddly, but I get your point. Only that I disagree with the proposed solution. They don´t need heavier cars, but the opposite, half the battery and race lenght so cornering speeds increase dramatically and also aceleration and braking.

An extremelly fast car in the straights is nice, but if it´s so heavy it will be extremelly slow in the corners, that would be quite a poor advertising for EVs. That is what american cars have always been, and they have never been considered the top of the industry. Not even close. FE tries to promote a technology wich is seen as the future so they must do it much better than that. Only that batteries need to be too heavy nowadays yet, so they can´t really compete with any existing category and that´s the only reason they don´t race on traditional tracks.

I´d lower battery weight and race lenght

[jjn9128]

FE get around the dirty air issue by just not generating any downforce

An F1 car has SCz >>6.5 (17.7kN at 240km/hr) while the FE is SCz~ 1.7-2 (5kN at 240km/hr), less than 1/3 of the F1. They also only produce ~1/2 the drag. It's really not an aero-formula. The massive diffuser is mostly for show.

BTW it would be extremelly interesting to compare those aero numbers with some other category wich is more similar and a more fair comparison to FE, do you have those SCz number for GP2, GP3, Indy, DTM, GT or any other category

Japanese Super Formula is ~5.7, current IR18 Indycar ~5, Indy manufacturer aerokits ~6.4 <-- these are heavily idealized numbers, normally based on a pound-force at 200mi/hr.

[hUirEYExbN]

FE get around the dirty air issue by just not generating any downforce

An F1 car has SCz >>6.5 (17.7kN at 240km/hr) while the FE is SCz~ 1.7-2 (5kN at 240km/hr), less than 1/3 of the F1. They also only produce ~1/2 the drag. It's really not an aero-formula. The massive diffuser is mostly for show.

I´m sure there´s a term for what you just did, but my english is not good enough.
....

The incomplete comparison fallacy may be the closest you'd find to a logical fallacy fitting what you describe. I personally don't think it fits in this case as the comparison is valid, it compares two different single-seater cars using a familiar metric.

[jjn9128]

FE get around the dirty air issue by just not generating any downforce

An F1 car has SCz >>6.5 (17.7kN at 240km/hr) while the FE is SCz~ 1.7-2 (5kN at 240km/hr), less than 1/3 of the F1. They also only produce ~1/2 the drag. It's really not an aero-formula. The massive diffuser is mostly for show.

I´m sure there´s a term for what you just did, but my english is not good enough.
....

The incomplete comparison fallacy may be the closest you'd find to a logical fallacy fitting what you describe. I personally don't think it fits in this case as the comparison is valid, it compares two different single-seater cars using a familiar metric.

It wasn’t used to disparage FE. Just offer comparison. I think F1 should produce less downforce to combat the overtaking issue. And have narrower/harder long life tyres like FE.

[Andres125sx]

FE get around the dirty air issue by just not generating any downforce

An F1 car has SCz >>6.5 (17.7kN at 240km/hr) while the FE is SCz~ 1.7-2 (5kN at 240km/hr), less than 1/3 of the F1. They also only produce ~1/2 the drag. It's really not an aero-formula. The massive diffuser is mostly for show.

BTW it would be extremelly interesting to compare those aero numbers with some other category wich is more similar and a more fair comparison to FE, do you have those SCz number for GP2, GP3, Indy, DTM, GT or any other category

Japanese Super Formula is ~5.7, current IR18 Indycar ~5, Indy manufacturer aerokits ~6.4 <-- these are heavily idealized numbers, normally based on a pound-force at 200mi/hr.

Interesting, thanks. So those categories provide similar DF to FE. Sincerely, I was expecting FE DF was well below those.

[Andres125sx]

FE get around the dirty air issue by just not generating any downforce

An F1 car has SCz >>6.5 (17.7kN at 240km/hr) while the FE is SCz~ 1.7-2 (5kN at 240km/hr), less than 1/3 of the F1. They also only produce ~1/2 the drag. It's really not an aero-formula. The massive diffuser is mostly for show.

I´m sure there´s a term for what you just did, but my english is not good enough.
....

The incomplete comparison fallacy may be the closest you'd find to a logical fallacy fitting what you describe. I personally don't think it fits in this case as the comparison is valid, it compares two different single-seater cars using a familiar metric.

Thanks. But my point is using F1 DF as a reference is flawed because F1 is the category with most DF well ahead any other, so any category wich is compared with F1 will look like not an aero formula

[Andres125sx]

I´m sure there´s a term for what you just did, but my english is not good enough.
....

The incomplete comparison fallacy may be the closest you'd find to a logical fallacy fitting what you describe. I personally don't think it fits in this case as the comparison is valid, it compares two different single-seater cars using a familiar metric.

It wasn’t used to disparage FE. Just offer comparison. I think F1 should produce less downforce to combat the overtaking issue. And have narrower/harder long life tyres like FE.

Fully agree with this. It is great to see cars cornering at 5G, but I´d prefer if they corner at only 3G but they can follow each other closer, fight for positions on track and provide more entertaining battles

[nzjrs]

FE get around the dirty air issue by just not generating any downforce

An F1 car has SCz >>6.5 (17.7kN at 240km/hr) while the FE is SCz~ 1.7-2 (5kN at 240km/hr), less than 1/3 of the F1. They also only produce ~1/2 the drag. It's really not an aero-formula. The massive diffuser is mostly for show.

I´m sure there´s a term for what you just did, but my english is not good enough.
....

The incomplete comparison fallacy may be the closest you'd find to a logical fallacy fitting what you describe. I personally don't think it fits in this case as the comparison is valid, it compares two different single-seater cars using a familiar metric.

This is an uncharitable response. jjn9128 provided a great and concise comparison of aero that is independent of any points anyone was arguing about.

Thanks jjn9128!

Edit: oops, I guess I should have been replying to Andres

[senja]

The huge issue (poor tracks aside) I have is with what the cars look like. They are so ugly, and just look like a child designed them to look 'cool'. (and I agree they are used as bumper cars far too much)

My issue with Formula E is that the vehicles are too darn lacklustre in terms of performance. Racing on tracks with overly tight chicanes only highlights this. Why not build electric formula cars capable of racing on regular circuits -[If 30 min sprint races is the maximum range that is OK, just have three sprints races.]

Surely the whole hype around EVs is because they are fast? Tesla are promising their new Roadster EV to be one of the fastest hypercars in the world, every bit the match for hybrid hypercars.

Yet the Formula E cars are not even close to the pace of F2. Formula E does not live up to the hype of EVs being rocketships.


The Roadster needs a 880kg 200 kWh battery to be fast (in a straight line), and that's fine, that's no problem. Yet Formula E tries to make do with a piddly 54 kWh battery that, no doubt, contributes to the lacklustre nature of the vehicle's performance. If the Formula E car needs to weigh 1500kg or 2000 or 2500kg to be fast and have decent range, that is perfectly fine -- just do it (TM Nike).

For crying out loud, put a bigger battery in it and crank up the power!

IMHO a 250kg battery fitted into a car wich weight (without driver and battery) around 480kg can´t be considered piddly, but I get your point. Only that I disagree with the proposed solution. They don´t need heavier cars, but the opposite, half the battery and race lenght so cornering speeds increase dramatically and also aceleration and braking.

An extremelly fast car in the straights is nice, but if it´s so heavy it will be extremelly slow in the corners, that would be quite a poor advertising for EVs. That is what american cars have always been, and they have never been considered the top of the industry. Not even close. FE tries to promote a technology wich is seen as the future so they must do it much better than that. Only that batteries need to be too heavy nowadays yet, so they can´t really compete with any existing category and that´s the only reason they don´t race on traditional tracks.

I´d lower battery weight and race lenght

The solution for FE is to start using battery prototypes. They currently using standard batteries. With some prototypes they could pack much more kWh in same weight.

[Jolle]

My issue with Formula E is that the vehicles are too darn lacklustre in terms of performance. Racing on tracks with overly tight chicanes only highlights this. Why not build electric formula cars capable of racing on regular circuits -[If 30 min sprint races is the maximum range that is OK, just have three sprints races.]

Surely the whole hype around EVs is because they are fast? Tesla are promising their new Roadster EV to be one of the fastest hypercars in the world, every bit the match for hybrid hypercars.

Yet the Formula E cars are not even close to the pace of F2. Formula E does not live up to the hype of EVs being rocketships.


The Roadster needs a 880kg 200 kWh battery to be fast (in a straight line), and that's fine, that's no problem. Yet Formula E tries to make do with a piddly 54 kWh battery that, no doubt, contributes to the lacklustre nature of the vehicle's performance. If the Formula E car needs to weigh 1500kg or 2000 or 2500kg to be fast and have decent range, that is perfectly fine -- just do it (TM Nike).

For crying out loud, put a bigger battery in it and crank up the power!

IMHO a 250kg battery fitted into a car wich weight (without driver and battery) around 480kg can´t be considered piddly, but I get your point. Only that I disagree with the proposed solution. They don´t need heavier cars, but the opposite, half the battery and race lenght so cornering speeds increase dramatically and also aceleration and braking.

An extremelly fast car in the straights is nice, but if it´s so heavy it will be extremelly slow in the corners, that would be quite a poor advertising for EVs. That is what american cars have always been, and they have never been considered the top of the industry. Not even close. FE tries to promote a technology wich is seen as the future so they must do it much better than that. Only that batteries need to be too heavy nowadays yet, so they can´t really compete with any existing category and that´s the only reason they don´t race on traditional tracks.

I´d lower battery weight and race lenght

The solution for FE is to start using battery prototypes. They currently using standard batteries. With some prototypes they could pack much more kWh in same weight.

FE’s main goal from the start was not to be all green and a Etech development series, but to bring racing to places where it couldn’t before. This innercity racing is ideal for marketing and exposure. How much better to invite your clients to the innercity of Rome then the paddock of a B-grade racetrack in a tent. So they made the cars look fast, while being quite slippery (the wheel fairings), rock hard tires so cars slide around and a fair amount of spec parts to keep it close. Put in some old F1 drivers for good money and there we are now.

[jjn9128]

Gen 3 car to have "more open wheel" aesthetic: https://the-race.com/formula-e/formula- ... el-design/

And possibly no more fan boost: https://www.racefans.net/2021/05/13/for ... next-year/

Both would be steps in the right direction for me. No more bumper cars - with wheel pods strewn around the track.

[nokivasara]

Gen 3 car to have "more open wheel" aesthetic: https://the-race.com/formula-e/formula- ... el-design/

And possibly no more fan boost: https://www.racefans.net/2021/05/13/for ... next-year/

Both would be steps in the right direction for me. No more bumper cars - with wheel pods strewn around the track.

Fan boost and attack mode (?) are so unnecessary, would be a good thing to ditch those.
I've tried to watch a few races but haven't gotten past the 10 minute mark yet, I don't mind the lack of sound or the design of the cars but they are so slow and have so low grip with those all seasons tires that I just can't watch.
Maybe next year

[jjn9128]

Fan boost and attack mode (?) are so unnecessary, would be a good thing to ditch those.
I've tried to watch a few races but haven't gotten past the 10 minute mark yet, I don't mind the lack of sound or the design of the cars but they are so slow and have so low grip with those all seasons tires that I just can't watch.
Maybe next year

Disagree about attack mode. It's like pitstops and IMO actually gives some element of strategy into the races.

Low grip too I think F1 should explore. It actually makes the driver the most important bit - rather than relying on massive downforce and huge tyres where the cars are essentially on rails.

[senja]

Gen 3 car to have "more open wheel" aesthetic: https://the-race.com/formula-e/formula- ... el-design/

And possibly no more fan boost: https://www.racefans.net/2021/05/13/for ... next-year/

Both would be steps in the right direction for me. No more bumper cars - with wheel pods strewn around the track.

Gen2 Evo was more open wheel too. Too bad they didn't race it.