FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[Jabberwocky]

If you go back to basics for overtaking. you end up with a Touring Car or a cigar tube style car from the 60's.

Now as Touring Cars (in various guises are still around) but we prefer F1 for what reason. so is overtaking what we want? nope because we watch F1. so what is it that makes us watch?

Bernie has something right as we are still talking about it

[myownalias]

If you go back to basics for overtaking. you end up with a Touring Car or a cigar tube style car from the 60's.

Now as Touring Cars (in various guises are still around) but we prefer F1 for what reason. so is overtaking what we want? nope because we watch F1. so what is it that makes us watch?

Bernie has something right as we are still talking about it

I'm not talking about going back to basics; but rollback to a time where F1 was exciting to watch; back to the 90s/early 2000's when cars were wider and shorter; hence less dirty air coming off the back of the car. If you love the strategy that's wonderful, you can enjoy the different pit strategies and so on but the majority of us want to see action on the track like we had in Brazil. Races can be incredibly tedious to watch as they are so processional because one car can not follow closely behind another and all the overtaking is done in the pit lane. I would like to see an equal amount of strategy and overtaking on the track; if things don't change; next season has the potential to be dull as dishwater with the refuelling ban coming in which will decrease overtaking even more.

[EwanM]

I think it was Gordon Murray back in the late 70s who said, when asked about the apparent overtaking and cornering speed dillemma gripping the sport at that time, that the only way to stop engineers from harnessing the power of aerodynamics was to have a pencil like car - just like the original days.

However as he said, it wouldn't do. The drivers would complain about the safety of it.

I don't think this really contributes much to the debate, but it got me thinking about it.

[myownalias]

The bottom line is the FIA meddling; back in the 90s we had cars that were about 1/3rd wider and a little over half the height and cars didn't have issues overtaking through slipstreaming; the tall narrow rear wing simply creates more turbulent air so the following car simply can not tuck into the slipstream without completely losing front end grip (which could be classed as a safety issue); hence no overtaking. KERS was a step in the right direction but only if everyone runs the KERS technology. I think some changes to KERS would be beneficial; for example; KERS can only be used in top gear to give that vital boost but I believe the number of boosts should be limited; maybe 30 uses per race instead of x amount of seconds per lap which would add more strategy to the racing; instead of simply using the boost at the same points on the track every lap to defend a position against a faster car as we saw numerous time during this season.

[EwanM]

The bottom line is the FIA meddling; back in the 90s we had cars that were about 1/3rd wider and a little over half the height and cars didn't have issues overtaking through slipstreaming; the tall narrow rear wing simply creates more turbulent air so the following car simply can not tuck into the slipstream without completely losing front end grip (which could be classed as a safety issue); hence no overtaking. KERS was a step in the right direction but only if everyone runs the KERS technology. I think some changes to KERS would be beneficial; for example; KERS can only be used in top gear to give that vital boost but I believe the number of boosts should be limited; maybe 30 uses per race instead of x amount of seconds per lap which would add more strategy to the racing; instead of simply using the boost at the same points on the track every lap to defend a position against a faster car as we saw numerous time during this season.

I would agree with you to an extent regarding the rules introduced in 1998. However for this generation of Formula One, the teams had the chance to make their voices heard and infact the overtaking working group really was a given. Maybe it was a case of wanting to justify the use of CFD or their windtunnels etc etc, but they were quite happy to design cars like this.

If they really wanted to improve overtaking they really should have listened to the fans. Oh wait FOTA "claim" to already do that.

[McLaren Fan]

If it's between having no KERS and standardised KERS in Formula One, then I'll go for the latter. However, KERS is a pretty important component, so I don't feel it should be standarised, at least for everybody. To aid the teams who cannot afford it, they should be allowed to either run without KERS or a use a standardised package which is not as good as the top of the range ones (such as those of Ferrari and McLaren) to encourage them to develop their own (like the difference between a works and customer engine).

[Cubejam]

I would rather cut off my own bollocks than watch that rubbish.

[headless]

I would rather cut off my own bollocks than watch that rubbish.

Ok then

[darwin dali]

I would rather cut off my own bollocks than watch that rubbish.

Can't wait to see that

[RyRy]

Ferrari's KERS has had just about the same amount of problems as McLaren, also you have to take into account that McLaren crashed more than Ferrari

The standardisation of KERS is in hope to make F1 more economically and environmentally friendly, they are even thinking of making all new cars in the real world have a form of KERS which is like the KERS what a few teams had where it gave them a constant speed boost.

[wacamo]

Keep KERS if they like, as long as they eliminate this rubbish about waiting for a new lap to 'recharge'. I'd like to see any braking being allowed to recharge the system. If the drivers want to trade brake pads for horsepower... well, that'll be entertaining.

[headless]

I'd want everyone having the same KERS and it be identical, so it shows who uses it best etc.

[Cubejam]

If everyone had the same KERS unit, say the mercedes unit (because its the best) I think KERS would be good for F1. Right now with 2 teams using it... its rubbish.

[texasmr2]

If everyone had the same KERS unit, say the mercedes unit (because its the best) I think KERS would be good for F1. Right now with 2 teams using it... its rubbish.

I had that same thought aswell while watching the race. KERS should be used on every car or none of them. The KERS situation relates aswell to the tire/tyre situation. Some people want only one tire supplier for so called 'fairness' but is it fair that not every team has that extra 80hp, which gives them a truelly visible advantage on the straights even though they are caughtup quite easily on other parts of the track?

My opinion is that it should be standard for all team's or removed all together. McLaren so far has the best and most reliable KERS system so why can they not supply all the team's as they do with their ECU????

[Tony_sa]

If everyone had the same KERS unit, say the mercedes unit (because its the best) I think KERS would be good for F1. Right now with 2 teams using it... its rubbish.

I had that same thought aswell while watching the race. KERS should be used on every car or none of them. The KERS situation relates aswell to the tire/tyre situation. Some people want only one tire supplier for so called 'fairness' but is it fair that not every team has that extra 80hp, which gives them a truelly visible advantage on the straights even though they are caughtup quite easily on other parts of the track?

My opinion is that it should be standard for all team's or removed all together. McLaren so far has the best and most reliable KERS system so why can they not supply all the team's as they do with their ECU????

i think a few threads got locked over that very question Tex. funny how we always go around in circles. will it end here ??