F1 2017 - Page 3 - ScoobyNet.com - Subaru Enthusiast Forum

Notices
Sport General sport discussion

F1 2017

Old 21 September 2017, 10:58 AM
  #61  
BrownPantsRacing
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (6)
 
BrownPantsRacing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Herts & Bucks
Posts: 7,720
Default

I agree with that. Fuel should be a controlled item across the field. Hadn't realised there were variances allowed. madness.
BrownPantsRacing is offline  
Old 21 September 2017, 11:55 AM
  #62  
Tidgy
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Notts
Posts: 22,078
Default

Originally Posted by JDM_Stig View Post
they also need to have one supplier of fuel (and maybe oil if it is still being used as a fuel) and let the teams work to that,
Horner recently said they had spent millions, just on the development of fuel for a few extra horses.
Fuel supplier will be spending that money not the team though.

They need to remove 99% of the rules, they spend millions getting 0.01% performance out the of same part instead of an innovative idea costing 20p making 1% difference.

Set a weight minimum (800kg or something like that), max inlet diameter size, max car width, max car length, max car height and use the same saftey rules, beyond that, anything goes.

F1 used to be about the ultimate performance from the ultimate tech, now its who can get the most from a set of limited and mega complicated rules that 99% of viewers can't understand and means all the car perform so badly following each other you need a car 3 second a lap quicker to overtake.
Tidgy is online now  
Old 21 September 2017, 07:57 PM
  #63  
joz8968
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (13)
 
joz8968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Indochina......hiding inside a bowl of rice
Posts: 23,703
Default

Originally Posted by JDM_Stig

Ferrari again lol

lol what a sook.
joz8968 is offline  
Old 21 September 2017, 08:24 PM
  #64  
JDM_Stig
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
 
JDM_Stig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Mount Weather
Posts: 5,392
Default

Originally Posted by Tidgy View Post
Fuel supplier will be spending that money not the team though.

They need to remove 99% of the rules, they spend millions getting 0.01% performance out the of same part instead of an innovative idea costing 20p making 1% difference.

Set a weight minimum (800kg or something like that), max inlet diameter size, max car width, max car length, max car height and use the same saftey rules, beyond that, anything goes.

F1 used to be about the ultimate performance from the ultimate tech, now its who can get the most from a set of limited and mega complicated rules that 99% of viewers can't understand and means all the car perform so badly following each other you need a car 3 second a lap quicker to overtake.
nothing has changed there, like in the new hybrid area, Renault and Ferrari came up with their own way but Merc got it right, so they just copied and even got some help in Reanults case, if the rumours are to be believed,
Honda tried another and ended up basically throwing away that idea after a few seasons and then went down the Merc route.(split turbo with connecting shaft through block design)
JDM_Stig is offline  
Old 21 September 2017, 10:54 PM
  #65  
gazney101
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (5)
 
gazney101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: co durham
Posts: 1,091
Default

Originally Posted by JDM_Stig View Post
nothing has changed there, like in the new hybrid area, Renault and Ferrari came up with their own way but Merc got it right, so they just copied and even got some help in Reanults case, if the rumours are to be believed,
Honda tried another and ended up basically throwing away that idea after a few seasons and then went down the Merc route.(split turbo with connecting shaft through block design)
Although the split turbo design helped a lot it was the combustion system that made the difference,
Merc went with hcci from the off and mastered it. The other manufacturers didn't cotton on to this until the season already started.
Mahle developed the mahle jet ignition for Ferrari and that's when they started catching up. Honda's reliability deficit this season is because this season's engines are the first of its compression ignition endeavour, teething problems were inevitable.
I'm guessing Renault have gone with the hcci route but are 3 development years behind mercedes.

On another note, I think McLaren are going to show the world how **** there chassis is compared to red bull next year.
gazney101 is offline  
Old 25 September 2017, 11:03 AM
  #66  
JDM_Stig
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
 
JDM_Stig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Mount Weather
Posts: 5,392
Default

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/h...nsor-2018.html

Red Bull will race as Aston Martin Red Bull Racing from the 2018 season after agreeing a new title and innovation partnership with the iconic car manufacturer.
JDM_Stig is offline  
Old 25 September 2017, 11:41 AM
  #67  
BrownPantsRacing
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (6)
 
BrownPantsRacing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Herts & Bucks
Posts: 7,720
Default

That's very good news.
BrownPantsRacing is offline  
Old 25 September 2017, 02:22 PM
  #68  
Tidgy
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Notts
Posts: 22,078
Default

hate to say it but doesnt mean much other than a name change, still doesnt solve the engine issues rebull has.
Tidgy is online now  
Old 25 September 2017, 02:41 PM
  #69  
BrownPantsRacing
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (6)
 
BrownPantsRacing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Herts & Bucks
Posts: 7,720
Default

I agree, it will make no difference to start with except for a rebrand of the cars to suit Aston. Hopefully following this as they have indicated, if circumstances look right then they will become more involved and start developing engines.


Who knows, but it's certainly great for the sport to have another very high profile manufacturer involved, especially one with such strong British roots the general public can get behind.
BrownPantsRacing is offline  
Old 27 September 2017, 03:59 PM
  #70  
AP3491
Scooby Regular
 
AP3491's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: West London
Posts: 326
Default

Originally Posted by BrownPantsRacing View Post
I agree, it will make no difference to start with except for a rebrand of the cars to suit Aston. Hopefully following this as they have indicated, if circumstances look right then they will become more involved and start developing engines.


Who knows, but it's certainly great for the sport to have another very high profile manufacturer involved, especially one with such strong British roots the general public can get behind.
I was fully expecting Honda to have a Honda worx team, I know nobaharo matsu5hita is a Honda development driver although they aren't an actually team, I think fukuzuki or whatever his name is I can't remember is the same in formula 3.
Would be nice to see cosworth have a go at developing an engine and potentially becoming a supplier, nice to see haas doing not too shabby either, entering the sport as a customer team.

Edited because it wouldn't let me write matsu****a ???

Last edited by AP3491; 27 September 2017 at 04:00 PM.
AP3491 is offline  
Old 27 September 2017, 04:05 PM
  #71  
BrownPantsRacing
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (6)
 
BrownPantsRacing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Herts & Bucks
Posts: 7,720
Default

I was never expecting a Honda works team. They are miles off the pace now.


Would be great to see Cosworth return as an engine supplier though. That would be great!
BrownPantsRacing is offline  
Old 27 September 2017, 04:17 PM
  #72  
AP3491
Scooby Regular
 
AP3491's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: West London
Posts: 326
Default

Originally Posted by BrownPantsRacing View Post
I was never expecting a Honda works team. They are miles off the pace now.


Would be great to see Cosworth return as an engine supplier though. That would be great!
I feel as though it's the only way Honda can operate in formula one without let's say...p155ing off a customer, like they have done with mclaren, they can go as backwards as they like with their own chassis, I know toro-roso are fully payed up members for the Honda treatment next year.
AP3491 is offline  
Old 31 October 2017, 12:11 AM
  #73  
JDM_Stig
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
 
JDM_Stig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Mount Weather
Posts: 5,392
Default

Nothing mentioned about LH44 becoming 4 times Champion ?
JDM_Stig is offline  
Old 31 October 2017, 10:45 AM
  #74  
Tidgy
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Notts
Posts: 22,078
Default

sorry been busy haha

well done to LH and merc, but im more lol and ferrari, they get nothing but help from FIA and still can't win, the bunch of arrogant jeb ends
Tidgy is online now  
Old 31 October 2017, 10:47 AM
  #75  
BrownPantsRacing
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (6)
 
BrownPantsRacing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Herts & Bucks
Posts: 7,720
Default

To be honest, the last race was a little bit of an anti-climax considering the great season we've had this year.


I wasn't sure who'd take it this year out of the two of them and it's one of the closest multi-team seasons we've had for a long time.


Great to see Redbull finally getting into the mix as well, but if they are swapping to the Honda engines next year as planned then that's screwed again.


Max Verstappen will be world champion within 5 years.
BrownPantsRacing is offline  
Old 31 October 2017, 11:02 AM
  #76  
JDM_Stig
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
 
JDM_Stig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Mount Weather
Posts: 5,392
Default

Originally Posted by BrownPantsRacing View Post
To be honest, the last race was a little bit of an anti-climax considering the great season we've had this year.


I wasn't sure who'd take it this year out of the two of them and it's one of the closest multi-team seasons we've had for a long time.


Great to see Redbull finally getting into the mix as well, but if they are swapping to the Honda engines next year as planned then that's screwed again.


Max Verstappen will be world champion within 5 years.

And McLaren are getting a really reliable PPU ?
Torro Rosso are getting Honda next year BTW, not Redbull, they stop using Renault(Tag lol) for the 2019 season.
JDM_Stig is offline  
Old 31 October 2017, 11:28 AM
  #77  
BrownPantsRacing
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (6)
 
BrownPantsRacing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Herts & Bucks
Posts: 7,720
Default

Yes that's right, Torro Rosso, not Redbull. Redbull are staying Renault along with Maclaren and Torro Rosso are going to get screwed with Honda. Not good.
BrownPantsRacing is offline  
Old 31 October 2017, 11:30 AM
  #78  
BrownPantsRacing
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (6)
 
BrownPantsRacing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Herts & Bucks
Posts: 7,720
Default

Would be nice to see Farnando get a few podiums next year, which could well be on the cards now with Renault engines. Although I think he's no longer a championship contender sadly, as much as I respect his driving.
BrownPantsRacing is offline  
Old 31 October 2017, 11:37 AM
  #79  
JDM_Stig
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
 
JDM_Stig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Mount Weather
Posts: 5,392
Default

Originally Posted by BrownPantsRacing View Post
Would be nice to see Farnando get a few podiums next year, which could well be on the cards now with Renault engines. Although I think he's no longer a championship contender sadly, as much as I respect his driving.
My point is that after recent races, The Renault aren`t exactly becoming the most reliable PPU`s . . .

So how much of an Improvement will the Renault really be over the Honda next year,

Even Renault have had their own issues, they were trying to blame other teams that had their ICE/PPU with finger troubles, but when their own works team have issues, they cant point the finger far.
JDM_Stig is offline  
Old 31 October 2017, 12:04 PM
  #80  
BrownPantsRacing
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (6)
 
BrownPantsRacing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Herts & Bucks
Posts: 7,720
Default

I agree that Renault have reliability issues they need to work on which will not make them championship winning engines until they are addressed. But they do make race winning engines, so it's still a massive step up for Maclaren.
BrownPantsRacing is offline  
Old 31 October 2017, 12:15 PM
  #81  
JDM_Stig
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
 
JDM_Stig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Mount Weather
Posts: 5,392
Default

Originally Posted by BrownPantsRacing View Post
I agree that Renault have reliability issues they need to work on which will not make them championship winning engines until they are addressed. But they do make race winning engines, so it's still a massive step up for McLaren.
If nothing else they will take less engine penalties, Stoffel has taken over 240 places worth of penalties this season lol lol
JDM_Stig is offline  
Old 31 October 2017, 12:59 PM
  #82  
Tidgy
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Notts
Posts: 22,078
Default

Originally Posted by JDM_Stig View Post
If nothing else they will take less engine penalties, Stoffel has taken over 240 places worth of penalties this season lol lol
equates to 1.9miles or something like that they said at the texas race hahaha
Tidgy is online now  
Old 31 October 2017, 01:23 PM
  #83  
BrownPantsRacing
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (6)
 
BrownPantsRacing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Herts & Bucks
Posts: 7,720
Default

That's madness.
BrownPantsRacing is offline  
Old 31 October 2017, 01:35 PM
  #84  
Tidgy
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Notts
Posts: 22,078
Default

Originally Posted by BrownPantsRacing View Post
That's madness.
shows the stupidity of it.

F1 rules are broken so its not really surprising. the pinicle of motorsport it no longer is.
Tidgy is online now  
Old 31 October 2017, 01:54 PM
  #85  
BrownPantsRacing
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (6)
 
BrownPantsRacing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Herts & Bucks
Posts: 7,720
Default

I don't agree with the 25 place grid penalty rules either. I can understand the need or want to keep costs under control within the teams to give all teams a level as possible playing field on the grid and not allowing cash rich teams to run away with the title with an empty checkbook approach, but surely there are better ways of doing this than the current systems.


First things first they need to sort out these massive financial handouts and bonuses that some more favoured teams get to stay in the sport.
BrownPantsRacing is offline  
Old 31 October 2017, 03:02 PM
  #86  
Tidgy
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Notts
Posts: 22,078
Default

Originally Posted by BrownPantsRacing View Post
I don't agree with the 25 place grid penalty rules either. I can understand the need or want to keep costs under control within the teams to give all teams a level as possible playing field on the grid and not allowing cash rich teams to run away with the title with an empty checkbook approach, but surely there are better ways of doing this than the current systems.


First things first they need to sort out these massive financial handouts and bonuses that some more favoured teams get to stay in the sport.
costs are a direct result of the rules, they spend millions on getting 0.0001% performance out of the rules instead of a cheap good idea getting them 1% performance.

money should be split evenly across all teams, if ferrari dont like it, then doors over there.
Tidgy is online now  
Old 31 October 2017, 03:37 PM
  #87  
BrownPantsRacing
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (6)
 
BrownPantsRacing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Herts & Bucks
Posts: 7,720
Default

Couldn't agree more.
BrownPantsRacing is offline  
Old 31 October 2017, 03:39 PM
  #88  
JDM_Stig
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
 
JDM_Stig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Mount Weather
Posts: 5,392
Default

But if there was no penalties for the engines going pop, they would be back having engines for quali and different ones for races, so there has to be a way to limit them,
one make of tyre was again to cut costs, or try and make it equal for smaller teams,

Cost caps wont work, they have all said this, which is why it didnt happen and Manor et el died off,

the idea was that if they only had 4 ICE per season it would equal it out, but as not all ICE are equal that hasnt happened,

Problem is they are yet again looking to change the rules on engines, so as they are becoming equal in power, if not reliability(which will follow) they change, so the chances are that someone will get it right and some wont, so we will be back here again,

I agree it is daft when you look at the numbers, but the teams also play games getting PPU`s into the system ready, so when a team takes multiple penalties and its 40 places, that isnt a true figure either.

Last edited by JDM_Stig; 31 October 2017 at 03:41 PM.
JDM_Stig is offline  
Old 31 October 2017, 04:35 PM
  #89  
JDM_Stig
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
 
JDM_Stig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Mount Weather
Posts: 5,392
Default

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/h...ower-unit.html

The key features of the proposals presented to manufacturer representatives at Tuesday's meeting:

1.6 Litre, V6 Turbo Hybrid
3000rpm higher engine running speed range to improve the sound
Prescriptive internal design parameters to restrict development costs and discourage extreme designs and running conditions
Removal of the MGUH
More powerful MGUK with focus on manual driver deployment in race together with option to save up energy over several laps to give a driver controlled tactical element to racing
Single turbo with dimensional constraints and weight limits
Standard energy store and control electronics
High Level of external prescriptive design to give ‘Plug-And-Play’ engine/chassis/transmission swap capability
Intention to investigate tighter fuel regulations and limits on number of fuels used
JDM_Stig is offline  
Old 31 October 2017, 05:32 PM
  #90  
Tidgy
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Notts
Posts: 22,078
Default

Originally Posted by JDM_Stig View Post
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/h...ower-unit.html

The key features of the proposals presented to manufacturer representatives at Tuesday's meeting:

1.6 Litre, V6 Turbo Hybrid
3000rpm higher engine running speed range to improve the sound
Prescriptive internal design parameters to restrict development costs and discourage extreme designs and running conditions
Removal of the MGUH
More powerful MGUK with focus on manual driver deployment in race together with option to save up energy over several laps to give a driver controlled tactical element to racing
Single turbo with dimensional constraints and weight limits
Standard energy store and control electronics
High Level of external prescriptive design to give ‘Plug-And-Play’ engine/chassis/transmission swap capability
Intention to investigate tighter fuel regulations and limits on number of fuels used
76mm diameter, minimum 20mm length of restriction on inlet restrictor,,,,,,,,, job done, no need for prescribing any of the above.

F1 should not be about all using the same engine, which tightening the rules will do.

max car width
max car length
minimum car weight
inlet size restrictor
All saftey rules as now
No barriers allowed to hide cars (as teams currently do)
All team members must be available for questions. (Stop teams like ferrari acting who they do)

Anything else goes, tyres, fuel etc totally up to the teams.

Track rules, all 4 wheels touching or over the white lines = 3 second race penalty or lap disallowed.

any other grey areas to close?

Last edited by Tidgy; 31 October 2017 at 05:37 PM.
Tidgy is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.