What was so special about 2016 & obviously went missing a year later?So, uhhh. You know these new cars that are better for racing...View attachment 1143733
2017 was the introduction of the extra downforce cars with worse wake, so makes sense that there is a drop there.What was so special about 2016 & obviously went missing a year later?
They are better for racing. Battles can actually last longer than a few laps now, the races have so far all been okay to very good. It's just that dirty air was part of the problem and not the actual problem itself. The cars are still far too big and too heavy, and the FIA has always ignored those issues until now.So, uhhh. You know these new cars that are better for racing...
16 introduced 3 tyre compounds, and also included the 2016 Chinese GP which holds the record for the most overtakes ever as Hamilton, Vettel, Raikkonen and Ricciardo had to battle from the back to the front in fast cars after a chaotic lap 1
So Teams finding their feet really & discovering through trial & error what works.The first 4 races of 2016 had a lot of first lap incidents, so depending on how overtakes are counted that could account for the figures. The first couple of rounds also has that short-lived and very unpopular elimination style qualifying format which means cars could have started futher down the grid then they normally would.
I think they probably never had to remedy the situation because they didn't get to the same situation consistently... They did have many situations that were considerable safety concerns.As for the porpoising, one would think a little research of the previous ground-effects era would uncover what the teams did back then to remedy the situation.
In this interest of Fl racing as a sport the teams should act together .. also Ferrari are able to get great performance despite still being affected, so at the moment it perhaps not the biggest performance issue...The simple fix for Porpoising is to raise the minimum ride height, but I doubt teams will want that because those not struggling with the issue will be punished to allow the other teams who are further back be closer.
The cars ever since the hybrid era are massively long compared to what they were like 40+ years ago. That longer wheelbase can only exagerate the porpoise effect, i imagine, and especially when the downforce from the wings, even in 2022's reduced form, will also be much greater.As for the porpoising, one would think a little research of the previous ground-effects era would uncover what the teams did back then to remedy the situation.
I've been watching races from that era (1978-1982) recently & haven't noticed anything as severe as what some teams are suffering this time around. Having said that, the front & rear wings back then were nowhere near as big as their current levels.
Depending on the circuit, some teams didn't even run with their front wings in place.
Correct, therein lies the catch-22 - the strength of the underfloor aero effect is what is causing the porpoising, but it is also the source of the car's aerodynamic performance. Every bit of ride height you give up for less porpoising also translates into less downforce, as the cars were built to run slammed to the floor.Wouldn't raising the (minimum) ride height just negate the ground effects effect?
Ah yes, I didn't consider the length/wheelbase of the current cars.The cars ever since the hybrid era are massively long compared to what they were like 40+ years ago. That longer wheelbase can only exagerate the porpoise effect, i imagine, and especially when the downforce from the wings, even in 2022's reduced form, will also be much greater.
Wouldn't raising the (minimum) ride height just negate the ground effects effect?
All the FIA have to do is claim it's a change on safety grounds (loss of control of the car) and bang. It's changed and fixedThe simple fix for Porpoising is to raise the minimum ride height, but I doubt teams will want that because those not struggling with the issue will be punished to allow the other teams who are further back be closer.
More Road racing in NASCAR is dumb and has done nothing to improve the sport.
Well... it didn't win the race. And neither did the TS020 so what's stopping the CLR from being 'iconic'? Oh right, a near-fatal design flaw which makes it a laughable deathtrap instead. The TS020 also had a design flaw - there was a problem with the downforce acting on the wheel arch hence the triple punctures for all three Toyotas - but not severe enough to make it infamous rather than famous. If anything, the BMW V12 LMR should get more credit and fame for actually winning rather than two cars with inherent problems.The 1999 Mercedes CLR, not the Toyota TS020, would have been the most iconic car from the 1999 race had it won LeMans and not crashed. It would have been remembered as the most beautiful car in LeMans history.
I really wish that V8 Supercars had weight penalties but it won't happen after the tyre allocation debacle from 2020. Teams and drivers complained that restricting the tyre allocation created "fake racing" and I'm sure the same complaints would arise if success ballast was a thing. I actually liked the tyre rules that were put in place for a while there because of the entertainment it provided. Seeing different drivers out front was good to see but Supercars are stuck in the past and the big teams have too much sway in the running of the championship, so they'll never adopt such ideas again to "improve the show".Weight Ballast system > BoP
Seems BoP can become a victim of bias and sandbagging pre tests to not get hit with it for the race (I remember the controversy of the Ford GTE program from this). Not to mention the politics behind it all like what happened in Supercars with the Mustang and Commodore ZB in Gen2
If you construct a Weight Ballast like Super GT (weight added based on point total and to prevent intentional sandbagging, the weight is halved for the penultimate race and fully removed in the finale), you get a lot less politics and rule bias going on due to more concrete guidelines and still a racing season with more interesting results.
Shame it's criticised to death when the idea is mentioned to other series elsewhere (I can understand why you don't want it in something like F1 but not else where)
Weight Ballast worked really well in BTCC for years*, but they have 3 races on race day, so it may not work quite as well on a single, longer race format.Weight Ballast system > BoP
Seems BoP can become a victim of bias and sandbagging pre tests to not get hit with it for the race (I remember the controversy of the Ford GTE program from this). Not to mention the politics behind it all like what happened in Supercars with the Mustang and Commodore ZB in Gen2
If you construct a Weight Ballast like Super GT (weight added based on point total and to prevent intentional sandbagging, the weight is halved for the penultimate race and fully removed in the finale), you get a lot less politics and rule bias going on due to more concrete guidelines and still a racing season with more interesting results.
Shame it's criticised to death when the idea is mentioned to other series elsewhere (I can understand why you don't want it in something like F1 but not else where)
My guy really said this like Marcus ****ing Ericsson didn't just win the Indy 500 lmaoAbout 1/3 of the drivers in F1 are the best in the world. The rest wouldnt particularly stand out in other elite racing categories.
He also seems to have forgotten about Takuma Sato winning the Indy 500..or Hulkenburg winning the 24 Hours of Le Mans.My guy really said this like Marcus ****ing Ericsson didn't just win the Indy 500 lmao
Tough one to swallow.Josef Newgarden, not Colton Herta is America's best driver. Herta does have a higher ceiling though and could be better then Newgarden in 2 years.
And is also (at the time of this post) 12 points away from leading the 2022 Indycar Season with 3 races to go.My guy really said this like Marcus ****ing Ericsson didn't just win the Indy 500 lmao