All those extra revs won't do much if the fuel flow limit doesn't rise. The current engines get 15,000 but it doesn't even matter.
Honestly I'm a little upset they're sacrificing efficiency a bit for the sake of louder engines. I know this would benefit everyone in terms of parity, and mitigate annoying penalties, but it feels like a technological step backwards, which F1 doesn't usually make. The new regs definitely sound more inviting to new suppliers though.
As for the giving up efficiency, I agree, it's a bad move to me, but fans on a great level seem almost child like with what they fixate on to enjoy a race.
The pinnacle of engineering is being able to produce more power than they did at 20000rpm while running at 12000rpm. The pinnacle of engineering is being able to get an engine more than 50% thermal efficient, which Mercedes have done. rpm isn't the be all and end all of engine design.Hmm F1 should be the pinnacle for engineering and motorsport, so why are the engines not peek at 20krpm when tuned old aircooled straight 6 1000cc motorbikes can do it.
F1 has lost the magic loong loooong time ago.
The pinnacle of engineering is being able to produce more power than they did at 20000rpm while running at 12000rpm. The pinnacle of engineering is being able to get an engine more than 50% thermal efficient, which Mercedes have done. rpm isn't the be all and end all of engine design.
Hmm F1 should be the pinnacle for engineering and motorsport, so why are the engines not peek at 20krpm when tuned old aircooled straight 6 1000cc motorbikes can do it.
F1 has lost the magic loong loooong time ago.
Because of turbo and kers, and what not, not because of what they have done with the engines themselves.
To be honest it has barely happened anything at all engine wise since like forever.
MotoGP is just people falling off bikes and getting back on them despite every doctor in the world going "Are you stupid?"
Shattered bones aren't well known for their strength and anti-shaking abilities.Haha, Mm but it is because of just that the two wheeled motorsport/racing is more demanding and takes more balls and talent than when driving a 4wheeler.
When you have been racing for say over 20 min and you come back to the pitlane/box you are shaking, but when you are racing a 4wheeler you can keep on doing it and doing it and doing it and doing it
But good weather forecast systemShattered bones aren't well known for their strength and anti-shaking abilities.
Can we have traction control, fan cars and blown diffusers back?All those extra revs won't do much if the fuel flow limit doesn't rise. The current engines get 15,000 but it doesn't even matter.
Honestly I'm a little upset they're sacrificing efficiency a bit for the sake of louder engines. I know this would benefit everyone in terms of parity, and mitigate annoying penalties, but it feels like a technological step backwards, which F1 doesn't usually make. The new regs definitely sound more inviting to new suppliers though.
Your thought process is missing the fact that F1 cars have banished many technologies over the decades already for the sake of show/competition/money/efforts to allow drivers to make the difference. This is no different.All those extra revs won't do much if the fuel flow limit doesn't rise. The current engines get 15,000 but it doesn't even matter.
Honestly I'm a little upset they're sacrificing efficiency a bit for the sake of louder engines. I know this would benefit everyone in terms of parity, and mitigate annoying penalties, but it feels like a technological step backwards, which F1 doesn't usually make. The new regs definitely sound more inviting to new suppliers though.
Don't forget ABS, 6-wheels and active suspension/cars programmed with track geometry into them.Can we have traction control, fan cars and blown diffusers back?
Wsbk is getting simpler because the cost needs to be kept down so more than two teams can fight for win, the championship is becoming more akin to the wstk1000 class. F1 should not have any kind of restrictions, except for fuel consumption/ max exhaust pollutants/km and how many engines they should be able to use per season. The cars are too similar because of all the restrictions.
F1 is not that exciting compared to say Motogp racing or other car racing classes/championships.
F1 needs to get its act together.
This isn't exactly the same. Things like movable aero, fan cars were banned for the same reason ground effects were. They were too dangerous. Cars were getting too fast too quickly, and any simple failure of the system to work results in an accident that may have been fatal back then. Any 'movable aero' banned in modern day was to stop frivolous spending on rule bending philosophies.Your thought process is missing the fact that F1 cars have banished many technologies over the decades already for the sake of show/competition/money/efforts to allow drivers to make the difference. This is no different.
Don't forget ABS, 6-wheels and active suspension/cars programmed with track geometry into them.
Sorry I just meant the current limit was 15k but it doesn't really matter because of the fuel flow limit. Raise one without the other and the results will be the same.Current engines don't run at 15k, they run at 11,5 to 12,5. So while they may increase 3k they'll probably be running more likely at 14-15k finally all to make sure they can last long enough over a season.
Wsbk is getting simpler because the cost needs to be kept down so more than two teams can fight for win, the championship is becoming more akin to the wstk1000 class. F1 should not have any kind of restrictions, except for fuel consumption/ max exhaust pollutants/km and how many engines they should be able to use per season. The cars are too similar because of all the restrictions.
F1 is not that exciting compared to say Motogp racing or other car racing classes/championships.
F1 needs to get its act together.
Wsbk is getting simpler because the cost needs to be kept down so more than two teams can fight for win,
F1 should not have any kind of restrictions, except for fuel consumption/ max exhaust pollutants/km and how many engines they should be able to use per season.
The cars are too similar because of all the restrictions.
F1 is not that exciting compared to say Motogp racing or other car racing classes/championships.
F1 needs to get its act together.
I say call their bluff & watch them wipe eggs of their faces.
If they do leave, they can take their veto vote with them.
Exactly 👍They're not going to leave, and give up making as much money as they do even when the CVC gets changed up. Racing is what sells their cars and develops them, it seem to be shifting somewhat but no enough to just drop everything they've built their image on.
You can't have an unlimited budget in F1, so restrictions have to be made, because of a global company like a Mercedes is allowed to spend endlessly no one will ever keep up. Then the sport dies because of one team and then no teams see a reason to race, and a great series ends because myopic fans like you exist not ever stopping to think why.
Teams don't want to compete in a series where they get nothing out of it, it has no pay out toward their other market interests and so on. The cars aren't too similar if they were you wouldn't see such a disparity in points between 1st through 9th. Also Motogp is dominated by the same teams season to season. Tires have been a critical reason MotoGP has produced closer racing, narrow tire temps make it hard for even the faster teams to be dominant all season long, this has nothing to do with less restrictions.
Your argument is all over the place, you want to argue WSBK is being reigned in simply because it's too open and somehow F1 isn't open enough, yet F1 has had a bigger dominant team than Kawasaki in WSBK. Two you want to claim F1 needs to be more open to produce better racing it seems, but use MotoGP as the comparison, when in fact over the years MotoGP was highly regulated and the bikes being not all that different other than the front farring development for this season. So what is it more open? Or more regulated? You can't ask for more open of a series and then ask for racing of the same degree as MotoGP when talking about regs.
Motogp has made big strides when it comes to competitiveness and even now the win is often up for grabs for the non factory teams. The thing is, even a "bad" bike can win with a good rider especially if it is mixed condition.
Wsbk is owned by dorna and it seems they dont want the class to be challenging the Motogp championship just like it did in the past. Look at the race calendar, it has gotten much better now when those two classes do not intertwine, which is good. And because sportbikes have dropped in sales many brands have dropped since long their official support for the class making the wsbk a fight between Kawasaki and Ducati, rest are what one should consider private teams so holding cost down is good here as the cashflow to the class seems not even close to motogp or F1.
Look, F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of engineering and motorsport, meaning if you dont have the cash to develop highly competitive car then you should not be racing. Because a brand has cash does not mean a smaller brand cant get sponsors that are wealthy. Look at the redbull even though they are the team/brand here.
I dont want f1 to be like indycars or other classes where they in the end share the same chassis but maybe have different brands of engines if even that.
The thing is, as it is right now it is a race for the F1 teams to adopt to the new regulations, not how to make the greatest racing car. Now they are in an arms race to make a car which is pretty much the same car as the other ones, the team that gets this best will be the winner.
If the regulations would be a lot looser then we would see more variations, and the road to a fast car would be different depending on who you ask.
We would probably see a lot of excitement on the track just because of how differently the teams go about to make a win a reality.
Would it not be fun "insert a brand here" would start the season with a pretty much orthodox F1 car but then end the season with an electric powered one with Wankel engine as a generator/help engine and with a canopy or what not. The overall look is adhered by the the physics, but why should a nose or a wing be regulated to fit a certain dimension or look. And why should all cars adhere to a certain power plant restriction. turbo, electric, otto, wankel, diesel, let it loose I tell ya, let it looose
At least it would be a real exhibition and not a snooze feast as it is today when only the start is exiting and that the biggest discussion is of one driver was blocking/pushing the other car wide in a turn...
The point is, a top end series like f1 should not be this restrictive for creativity. Simple as that. Even Motopg suffer from this, when they restricted the use of factory electronics to keep the cost down and try to keep field on the same level then the aerodynamics suddenly was taken into consideration and this was a money pit making the field to stretch again. Then Dorna decided to ban the winglets and suddenly the biggest teams started to throw even more money into aerodynamics just because of the winglets ban.
The thing is, as long as big money are allowed into a sport the team with biggest support will be producing the best results.
The thing is, regulations are making the machines way to similar, and the teams that are considered the best are simply the ones that have adapted their machine the best to the regulations, ie they are able to bring the most of what the regulations dictate even though their car is very similar to all other in the field.
Yes I want a "freak show" that has been the whole argument with making the F1 more exiting, not only on track but also when the racing machines are standing still
There should be a better format for F1. F1 is a money pit if they dont want it as such then they need to limit cashflow into a team and free up the regulations.
It is the regulations itself at least as it is now that is a big money pit for the teams. adapt the machine and then get the best possible out of what you are allowed to do is extremely costly. That is what I am against.