Human Garages

[Dutton]

Ah, right, yes, I see what you are at.

The thing is, the most it could do would be to reduce the number of stops by one (IMHO). The same issues would be raised and *****ed about as before.

The teams still use fuel stops: so re-introduce tyre stops and then they will just have that many tyre stops - they always used to get tyres done long before the fuel was finished, and I would venture in say 8/9 seconds a small number of crew could get tyres changed (or at worst very little over).

I am not convinced it would make much difference at all. The tyre change benefit would increases the stops back up to 2003/2004 levels, then the potential loss of time, at most, would reduce the desries for tyre changes by one: therefore, we find ourselves, at most, back at 2005 (pre-2003) levels. I would think 2003/2004 standards being more likely.

Perhaps I am missing something startling simple and obvious (which has been known!).

[Marbot]

I would prefer that there were no pitstops at all.

[Dutton]

I don't mind either way, but is there actually a certainty that drivers would really succeed in overtaking more? Would we not just see a proliferation in strong defensive driving (which the majority of people seem to consider the epitome of evil)?

[dtype38]

I was under the impression (possibly misguidedly, which is quite often these days) that the basic idea behind fuel and tyre stops was to increase "team involvement" and at the same time increase the "entertainment" value of F1. During the days of big fuel tanks it took a lot of driver skill to manage tyres and deal with a car changing significantly in its handling characteristics over a race. Cars could be set up to handle well heavy or light, but seldom for both. Unfortunately such skill and strategy was lost on the tv masses. No pit stops could also lead to unfortunate cases of races becoming processional on difficult to overtake tracks. So refueling and tyre changes were introduced to "spice things up". This created the possibilities of overtaking in the pitlane, different teams having different strategies, and, of course, the chance for the mechanics to make or break a drivers chances in a race. These changes were heralded as the saviour of "boring old F1". And so began the race for TV ratings and the ever increasing rates of rule changes to try and make the sport more entertaining. Now there seems to be a bit of backtracking going on! I wonder what odds I'd get down the bookies that once the V8s are in, someone will propose using the freed up space in the car for a big fuel tank and ban fuel stops as well

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Dutton

I don't mind either way, but is there actually a certainty that drivers would really succeed in overtaking more? Would we not just see a proliferation in strong defensive driving (which the majority of people seem to consider the epitome of evil)?

Strong defensive driving...like everyone backed up behind Trulli because it's safer and easier to wait for the fuel stops rather than risk an overtake.If there were no fuel stops they would have no choice but to at least attempt to do so.

Ok,so TGF never really stood a chance of passing FA at Imola,but that was mostly down to the aero and techno regs (too much aero and traction control).

IMO it's just a matter of time before we have another nasty accident in the pitlane,and i don't want to have to say i told you so.

[Dutton]

Well, to be fair, I think in cases like the Trulli scenario....... would a driver really sit behind someone else and lose seconds per lap for safety?

If the opportunity arose, me thinks it would be taken. Although the fact they would have no choice but to overtake if they want to progress may well produce more regular attempts - but it will definitely increase, in my opinion, thoroughly robust defence since there is no opportunity to repass in the pits.

I am more than happy for this situation to occur. I have no problem whatsoever with hard-nosed racing that has the potential for accidents (not that the accidents are wanted).

People will ***** like hell about any event of actual racing that ends in even the tiniest bit away from a pass with a mile in between both cars and the position given up 30 metres before the turn. It is the eternal paradox.

Well, okay, I exaggerate somewhat - but the base reality remains the same.

[lookleft]

Too many people. Tyre checks should only be allowed when a spare is on standby for a suspect incident. Fuel guys and lollypop man are all that is required.

[Asa]

Even when there is a tyre change, there really shouldn't be so many people around the car. If not for the TV camera nearby, the spectators couldn't see a thing.

Worse thing would be a pitlane fire during refuelling and then the fire spreading out to people who had no real need to be near the car.

[Kirk]

In my mind, that number has always been too large. The sport has been fortunate that pit incidents are rare, but why tempt fate? It is short sighted that F1 too often reacts rather than proacts, and where safety is involved there should be no excuse.