Edax wrote: ↑31 Oct 2017, 23:30
I guess it is personal. But I like where F1 cars are now. For me it is a good balance between technological innovation, and competition based on drivers skills. And yes it does not have all the amenities of modern cars. But by technical innovation an working around the rules, they were able to build in all those things like adaptive suspension, active aero and traction control. The challenge to beat the rules without breaking them, is for me one of the distinguishing features of F1.
If I would have to change one thing it would be the tracks. The new tracks make it really hard to appreciate just how fast, agile and powerful these things are. If you compare cars climbing eau rouge there is no question that F1 is the pinnacle of all that has a motor and wheels.
But Spa is approaching the 100 year mark, Interlagos and Mount Panorama 80, Suzuka 60. It is hard to explain that with everything we now have at our disposal we are not able to design more radical and crazy stuff than our parents and grandparents did. Instead we get Sochi.
The cars are great but to have them really stand out and make F1 the pinnacle of motorsport we should see them driving on some crazy insanely banked circuit that is winding through the grand canyon in the US, not doing laps on an industrial parking lot in New Jersey.
I agree about the circuits. Every circuit has basically an endless straight with a tight corner in the end to "aid overtaking" massive runoffs that make F1 circuits look like autocross tracks, and some circuits that make me sick by how boring they are to play on the simulator, let alone watch races on.
We can still build good circuits, like Istanbul and Sepang, also it seems like "old circuits are good" because the good ones are for the most parts the only ones that still exist. it's just that good circuits won't either a) Aid DRS overtaking, b) Have miles of runoff or c) Pay enough to be in F1.
