Official: Formula One Thread
05-21-2015, 08:53 AM
#2686
Yeah. Pit strategy can win or lose a race. Spain was a pretty blatant example of that. Although, I suppose the current stints are pretty reasonable.
05-21-2015, 09:01 AM
#2688
Registered User
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Campbell, CA
Posts: 7,634
Car Info: Some sort of Subaru
I'm pretty sure pit strategy has always played a major part in the race. Refueling will offer strategies, which will be interesting to see what teams do (run less fuel for faster times but pit more, run more fuel so you can have longer stints, etc.)
05-21-2015, 09:08 AM
#2689
I like the idea of refueling, just not the cost. I want to see more teams in f1 for added competition and adding to the already high barrier to entry will not help that.
oh and just bought tickets to the singapore gp
oh and just bought tickets to the singapore gp
05-21-2015, 09:59 AM
#2690
Old School
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Union City
Posts: 14,983
Car Info: '99 RBP GM6
It's not faster because it's new. Give it time for more development. The V8s were at the peak of their development. They were fast as ****. The V6T is still new.
How can you not see that the lack of power in the V6T is not due to it being new, it's due to the lack of fuel?! V6Ts are far more power potential than the V8s and even the V10s. These should be the fastest F1 cars on this engine design, but it's being held back on purpose by FIA.
Why they would move to such a costly platform, and then severely limit it's potential, is what bothers me so much about FIA. Drop the fuel limits and then these engines will easily top the V8s and V10s in power and still use less fuel than those engines did due to these engines being DI vs Port Injection.
Well, hmm... Seems weird that they would bring it back when they're trying to cut costs.
Yeah. Pit strategy can win or lose a race. Spain was a pretty blatant example of that. Although, I suppose the current stints are pretty reasonable.
05-21-2015, 10:02 AM
#2691
Old School
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Union City
Posts: 14,983
Car Info: '99 RBP GM6
Again, which was put into place to slow the cars down and let them follow each other better into turns. Due to DRS, we see these trap speeds and think they are still fast, but it's all artificial since the lap times are lacking.
This is true, however, that potential being wasted is what bothers me. Sad that the 80s had the most powerful engines of any F1 era.
Yup. This is what refueling has always brought to the table and something that F1 really needs to get back to, and looks like it will. Should have never changed this aspect of F1.
The engine and ERS system together are making similar horsepower to the V8, as well as a lot more torque. I blame the current fuel limits and lack of down force on current cars.
I'm pretty sure pit strategy has always played a major part in the race. Refueling will offer strategies, which will be interesting to see what teams do (run less fuel for faster times but pit more, run more fuel so you can have longer stints, etc.)
05-21-2015, 10:06 AM
#2692
Old School
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Union City
Posts: 14,983
Car Info: '99 RBP GM6
Dude, singapore will be dope.
05-21-2015, 10:17 AM
#2693
If RBR stops racing because they won't spend the $, then sure, it's working, money has been saved. If they spend the $, put in the engines, and take the penalty, well, it's not working... They sure didn't save money, they just took the penalty. If it's a deterrent, it's not working.
if the penalty wasn't working, everyone would be using their 5th engines by now. But only one team has been royally screwed by their supplier and they are taking the penalty. That sounds like it's working. I would also hope that Renault would be hooking RBR up on that extra engine at some kind of discount.
Actually they weren't fast as ****, because the v10s were fast as ****. V8s were put into place to slow the cars down, and that happened. In the era of cost cutting somehow a very expensive engine hybrid system is a-okay, yet, an extra 100 gallons of fuel per team, per race is ZOMG so expensive... right...
How can you not see that the lack of power in the V6T is not due to it being new, it's due to the lack of fuel?! V6Ts are far more power potential than the V8s and even the V10s. These should be the fastest F1 cars on this engine design, but it's being held back on purpose by FIA.
Why they would move to such a costly platform, and then severely limit it's potential, is what bothers me so much about FIA. Drop the fuel limits and then these engines will easily top the V8s and V10s in power and still use less fuel than those engines did due to these engines being DI vs Port Injection.
How can you not see that the lack of power in the V6T is not due to it being new, it's due to the lack of fuel?! V6Ts are far more power potential than the V8s and even the V10s. These should be the fastest F1 cars on this engine design, but it's being held back on purpose by FIA.
Why they would move to such a costly platform, and then severely limit it's potential, is what bothers me so much about FIA. Drop the fuel limits and then these engines will easily top the V8s and V10s in power and still use less fuel than those engines did due to these engines being DI vs Port Injection.
I think there is still a lot of potential with the V6T even with the current fuel and RPM restrictions. The development just need more time.
05-21-2015, 11:34 AM
#2694
Old School
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Union City
Posts: 14,983
Car Info: '99 RBP GM6
I wouldn't expect any team to just stop because they're out of engines. But the vast majority aren't exceeding the restriction.
if the penalty wasn't working, everyone would be using their 5th engines by now. But only one team has been royally screwed by their supplier and they are taking the penalty. That sounds like it's working. I would also hope that Renault would be hooking RBR up on that extra engine at some kind of discount.
if the penalty wasn't working, everyone would be using their 5th engines by now. But only one team has been royally screwed by their supplier and they are taking the penalty. That sounds like it's working. I would also hope that Renault would be hooking RBR up on that extra engine at some kind of discount.
Gotta advance the technology. The current climate is that fuel is harder come come by. Make a situation where teams need to do more with less fuel. restrict fuel. introduce more hybrid technology. I feel like you think the fuel restrictions are to reduce cost. I think the fuel restrictions are for fuel efficient technology. The same reason why there's the V6T.
I think there is still a lot of potential with the V6T even with the current fuel and RPM restrictions. The development just need more time.
I mean the whole concept of refueling a car and changing tires was straight up out of this world. If not for Fangio's wicked pace, wouldn't have even been tried and it wasn't even attempted again for like 30 years. But once teams figured out how to quickly inject fuel safely it became a total staple, well, once FIA lifted the ban on refueling in the 90s that is. The problem with today's use of refueling ban is it coincides with a limit on fuel rate.
Again, look at the late 80s turbo cars. They could not refuel, like today, and thus were built big, and had lots of fuel on board so they could race the distance. But UNLIKE today's turbo cars, or even later years v8s, there was a very lax limit on fuel level and fuel flow. The result was no refueling, but 1000hp turbo cars that drivers could wring the hell out of.
Today they can't do that. You lose the strategy refueling brings, AND you lose the pace and speed such cars could have by limiting fuel, and flow rate, and thus power, and thus a cars potential. So we get instead a race of conservation. Conserve tires because they wear like ****, and conserve fuel because there is a limit to how much a car can have, and how much it can use in a given time...
LAME
How expensive are the refueling systems?
No... I said,
I wish there were more pitstops. The tires are too robust.
05-21-2015, 12:02 PM
#2695
GPDA Survey 2015
new F1 survey put out by the drivers, looks like a lot of people are doing it as it is not loading for me
new F1 survey put out by the drivers, looks like a lot of people are doing it as it is not loading for me
05-21-2015, 03:12 PM
#2696
Old School
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Union City
Posts: 14,983
Car Info: '99 RBP GM6
GPDA Survey 2015
new F1 survey put out by the drivers, looks like a lot of people are doing it as it is not loading for me
new F1 survey put out by the drivers, looks like a lot of people are doing it as it is not loading for me
