Is Formula One *Too* Fast?

[JAG]

Just to high;ight how speeds are, IMO, getting out of control the fastest race lap at Silverstone last year was 1.22.236. This year Schumacher was running 1.18s, lap after lap when he needed to push on.

Almost 4 seconds in one year! That is too much.

Pole this year was 1.18.233. In 2000 it was 1.25.703.

I assume its already been discussed, but the teams have agreed to reduce the size of the difusser which will frop speeds by 1.5-2 seconds per lap. The FIAs target is to cut downforce by 20-25% in 2005.

Tyres are likely to be restricted to 2 sets, one for qualifying and the race. Engines will have to last 2 races in 2005, with 2.4 V8s coming in 2006.

The 2005 changes should cut speeds by 4-5 seconds a lap.

[f1manoz]

Well, Formula One is certainly very fast at the moment. As for being *too* fast, I'm just worried about the loads being placed on the driver in the cockpit. With such high g-forces in corners on driver and car, I'm worried about more failures in both resulting in even heavier accidents.

Pushing the envelope so much will lead to problems...

[Adam43]

A little off topic, but Silverstone was a big increase in fastest lap times. Maybe that was down to conditions? The increase at Magny-Cours was less. Only a couple of tenths and Michael ran a four stopper!

Whatever the lap times are dropping a lot. That is clear.

What is not clear is why it is this year's improvement that makes it too much? Why not the improvement from 2002-03? Was that acceptable. Was the 10s improvement since the late 90s acceptable? The 20s since the 80s, the 30s since the 70s, the whatever since before that. Facetious? Yes, sorry, but I don't understand why these improvements of a couple of seconds makes all the difference.

[Fuzzyfelt]

It struck me at Monaco this year that the cars were already single file by the time they reached Loews on the first lap rather than being bunched up. Same at Silverstone; by Becketts they were line astern. And, that's just down to the jump in speed this year. Tyres (and the tyre war) play their part but ...

Originally posted by shiny side up!
In the end, the technical 'formula' that is F1 is responsible for the speed at which cars travel, as the object of racing is to go as fast as possible given the rules of the game. I hope F1 does something soon to slow the cars down, hopefully whilst making it a bit easier to pass, before one of these big crashes turn out horrible...

Too true. The aero packages on modern F1 cars are just too sophisticated. Paring back these developments would solve a plethora of F1's problems (safety and entertainment). The jet fighter analogy has been made over and over, but I don't particularly want to watch jet fighter racing.

[jj2728]

the thrill seeker in me (or should i say thrill watcher) says that no, they are not too fast. that the cars as they are right now are on the very knife edge of adhesion and that the men who pilot them are true modern day 'samurai' and that well it is f1 after all and it is the pinnacle for many reasons and that to slow the cars down would be lessening the overall impact of the sport...the realist in me says that the envelope in f1 has always been pushed to the nth degree and that the overall safety of the sport has increased dramatically over what it was 10/20/30 years ago....it was not uncommon in the late 60s early 70s for either a driver injury or fatality to occur with some frequency over the course of the season and the general consenus was, well, it is a blood sport, the drivers know full well the risks involved so let's carry on......sir jackie stewart was the first true safety crusader in this aspect....i don't know that i'd want to see the cars slowed down, but if they were, and unless some fairly drastic new rules were laid down, you can pretty well guarantee that within a season or 2 the engineers would find all the right loopholes and tweeks to get the most out of the cars and we'd be back to quicker than ever speeds......

[avsfan733]

an f1 car can't be to fast thats the purpose of an f1 car

[Gt_R]

The reason for slowing down cars is because cars are now starting to be too quick to be "safe".

The speed of F1 cars have increased at an alarming rate, and unfortunately, the increase in speed is not matched by an increase in "safety regs", track safety, and also the capabilities of the brakes, tyres, car structure and other counter-measures to speed etc.

For example, William's have one of the fastest cars...but what's worrying is that while the speed is among the best of the fields, it is struggling with important aspects such as it's brakes, being marginal and risking brake failures (Spain, Canada)...

And it's something that many teams are struggling with..brake pad failures, wears, exploding...And also, the fact that tires are now right on the limit in it's performance too. It's only dangerous if a car corners faster than what the tyres/driver can withstand, or that cars are faster than what the brakes can cope.

Hence, F1 is not too fast...it's just that teams are starting to lose control over the performance of their own machinery and allowing it to stray too near, if not over, the boundary of what's safe. Until teams can practice the responsibility of developing a car that performs safely within it's own limits, F1 would still be safe at the current speed.

[Kicking-back]

Most of us watching don't see any visual speed difference between this year and the recent past - so pulling back laptimes by a few seconds won't damage that spectacle.

[Peter Mallett]

[History]A good way to slow them down would be to take away the big wings, put fat slicks on them and give them steel brakes. Oh, and whilst we're at it, get rid of the traction control and paddle gearchanges.[/History]

Seriously, the speed isn't the problem, they are supposed to excite and that means they should be pushing the limits. Trouble is we haven't learned that high technology's raison d'etre is to overcome obstacles. Ergo unles you put old technology into the cars you'll have the same problem year in year out.

The answer? Ban F1 racing.

[Kicking-back]

Peter. they haven't banned F1 - but they seem to have banned "racing" a while back

[Peter Mallett]

Good point.

[Vicki]

F1 cars have smaller engines than that V10 VW, but more power. I think the sppeds are okay as long as we have drivers who can handle the speed and don't get overly confident. However, tyres can only give so much grip in corners, so if tese speeds increase much more, we could be looking at some potential fatalities when accidents occur. So, no, straight line speed is not a problem, but it is when the track gets twisty.

[yobro]

Im starting to understand some of the reasons your all putting forward here, maybe the big teams are capable, and have a balaced out car, while others are having the troubles such as brake failures or they are just not good enough for the power the cars put out nowdays.

[Kicking-back]

yobro - it's nothing to do with big teams and small teams or a well balanced car or not.

It's simply that the cornering speeds are getting to a point where an accident will have potentially much more serious consequences.

[AlesiUk]

The essence of motor racing is speed.Always has been. The "safety brigade" are ruining motorsport. The changes to classic circuits like Hockenhiem,Ostrechring,even Spa and Suzuka. The introduction of ridiculous concrete run off areas.

Narrow cars,grooved tyres,V8 engines. Come on. This is motor racing. Its dangerous. I know that,the drivers taking part know that.It says so on signs at every circuit "MOTOR RACING IS DANGEROUS".

Changes need to be made to make the racing,chances are some of these may slow the cars down anyway,but lets be doing it for the right reasons

[1200Datto27]

Gt_R,

The reason why the teams are having issues with the brakes now is that the FIA mandated a certain size of rotor that the teams could use, and did not make it the thickest available "in the interests of racing" so as to make the drivers conserve the brakes through a whole race.

[Fondmetal]

6g is that exageration/hype? or proven from the telemetry?

[DKGandBH]

I don't think it is too fast...
Then again, I am not driving a F1 Car, and putting myself in that sort of danger.

I have no real concern about the speed, I would just like more overtaking. (Like most people I guess)

I think that banning combined tyre / fuel stops is a good move.

David.

[paddy]

It is where the cars are fast that is the point. The higher that cornering speeds and the shorter that braking distances become the bigger run offs have to be. Consequently spectating is worse and overtaking less likely.
Reduction in downforce and the banning of carbon brakes would address both issues.

[1200Datto27]

I do not understand why it is that everyone blames CF brakes for the lack of overtaking. Teams can get iron rotors to work as well as, and for as long as Cf ones will. The reason that they are used is that they weight around 80% less than the equivelent iron rotors, thereby reducing unsprung and rotational masses.

[dazbaz_99]

In terms of straight line speed i wouldnt go as far as saying they are to fast.Its the fact that the cars these days have semi automatic gearboxes,huge amounts of downforce and other electronic gizmos to make them go faster round corners.The driver is more like a passenger! Reduce downforce, take away all the electronic systems, give them manual gearboxes and big slick tyres. This will give the drivers more of a challenge, it will encourage more overtaking with more rubber being laid down on the track, but by reducing downforce and electronic aids the drivers simply wont be able to go so fast in my opinion because they'd lose control. We want to see drivers win races because on the day they drove there car to absolute limit, I dont enjoy watching a driver win because he had the best tyres or a superior car to the rest. Winning should be done in the car, not on the pitwall.

Im in no means an expert, this is my personal opinion-i welcome any comments/criticism!!!

[Kicking-back]

To say the driver is a passenger is taking a bit far - a good driver will still be quicker than a not-as-good one in the same car.

But I'd welcome an end to traction control, yes.

[Glen]

The maximum potential corner speed with TC and without is precisely the same. TC encourages the drivers to go closer to the limit more of the time, but it doesn't give higher corner speeds per se.

[paddy]

all cars are fitted with TC as standard. It is the driver's right foot.

[j4r4lly]

To make things more interesting the aero effect should be vastly decreased and the tyres incresed so that it is more mechanical grip. At least if the car starts to drift the driver has a good chance to control it. The current cars seem to have very high limits but simply leap off the track once the limits are reached. Brakes should be steel rather than carbon to increase braking distances and allow more overtaking opportunities into corners. I am sick of seeing races won on pit strategy and so little overtaking.