Max Mosley wants F1 to become a spec class

[The Boston Dangler]

Text

Max Mosley said Wednesday that he would like to see each Formula 1 team use the same engine.
...
Mosley, calling teams? current spending on technology ?irrational?, also said he is in favor of the introduction of standard suspensions and gearboxes.

the 5-girl s&m concentration camp orgies i could cope with, but now he's gone too far! is this what f1 is all about? low-cost spec-issue is great for the feeder series, but not the pinnacle of motorsport. he claims this will "make F1 teams? research more road-relevant". what research? if you're mandating identical parts, what the hell are people developing? why would any manufacturer want to spend a dime on this, when there is zero technical return?

i think this is the exact opposite of what f1 should do. i'd like to see them open the rules like never before. this would promote manufacturer participation, as they would have something tangible to show for the 100's of millions spent. KERS was a good, but belated, first step. fancy-pants transmissions are cool, but irrelevant to regular cars. should the floodgates open, performance could easily be kept in check with a restrictor plate, smaller fuel supplies and a reasonable limit on stored electrical power. even a fully drive-by-wire, 4 wheel drive car can be stripped of driver aides like traction control, anti-lock braking and yaw control with the standard-issue computer.

f1 fans, don't take this laying down. if there's a petition you know of, pass it around. if you read any car or racing websites, let them know what a mistake this is. if this comes to pass, f1 will be dropped like a hot rock, and people and teams will flock towards the le mans series.

 

[DivideBYZero]

One engine would have the manufacturers running away.

Let me guess who the single engine supplier would be.....Prancing Horse logo anyone?

 

[ElFenix]

nascar is about as close to spec as you can get without actually being spec, and running a cup team costs just as much as an F1 team. why? every time they limit testing, someone comes up with a new, more expensive way to test (like that giant wind tunnel + treadmill machine)

 

[exdeath]

I'd like to see them lift the displacement limit and put an end to the debate once and for all... so many people are baffled by the "technology" in F1 that they sincerely believe that small displacement high revving bumble bee engines are superior somehow, when in fact, they only squeeze everything they can from arbitrarily imposed limitations.

Somehow I don't see Ferrari staying with 2.4L because they can do it better than everyone else's 6.0L V12...

If that was the case we would be using these in our cars, I mean these things get 700 HP/liter...

 

[Demon-Xanth]

Originally posted by: exdeath
I'd like to see them lift the displacement limit and put an end to the debate once and for all... so many people are baffled by the "technology" in F1 that they sincerely believe that small displacement high revving bumble bee engines are superior somehow, when in fact, they only squeeze everything they can from arbitrarily imposed limitations.

Somehow I don't see Ferrari staying with 2.4L because they can do it better than everyone else's 6.0L V12...

If that was the case we would be using these in our cars, I mean these things get 700 HP/liter...

qft, there are very few, if any, racing classes that choose to run significantly smaller engines than their maximum limit is. Sure, you'd get to a point that it's just stupidly large and a smaller would be better. But given that IHRA cars run 800+ CID engines, it's pretty far up there.

Now, if cars DIDN'T make any downforce, and there were tire restrictions, the engine weight would be much more of a factor. But currently cars often run a balance between drag inducing downforce vs. lessening drag for speed. If there were no engine restrictions, they could compensate for a heavier engine with more downforce, knowing that the power will overcome the drag penalty.

I think if all engine limitations were removed you'd likely see more pushrod engines given their tendency to have a lower weight for a given displacement. Which would result in a much much more diverse field of engines, with some likely choosing to try rotary and turbines again.

Indy 500 fun facts:
Cummins raced diesels at Indy, they stopped doing it because when they started becoming competitive, they changed the rules to protect the current manufacturers (such as Offy)

When a turbine powered AWD car almost won the race (a hub broke and the car wrecked with four laps to go), turbine powered cars had their inlet size reduced by 75%. Thus making them uncompetitive.

The rules shape the cars more than the cars shape the rules.

 

[alfa147x]

so this would then just be a faster version of Indy ?

 

[KGB]

Originally posted by: alfa147x
so this would then just be a faster version of Indy ?

NO. F1 cars also make right-hand turns. :laugh:

 

[Demon-Xanth]

Originally posted by: KGBMAN

Originally posted by: alfa147x
so this would then just be a faster version of Indy ?

NO. F1 cars also make right-hand turns. :laugh:

Beh, I still want to see them scrounge together 43 F1 cars and race them at Bristol for 500 laps. It'd be like a giant episode of "Will it blend?".

 

[The Boston Dangler]

designers will always choose the smallest, lightest options. manufacturers have already stated a desire to to go small displacement turbo motors, in order to gain relevance to road cars. what immediately comes to mind is the turbo era, with 1.5 liter turbo engines cranking out 1500 hp. obviously, this won't happen again, with already tight rules on fuel and some common sense.

my idea of a good formula:

open engine spec, all cars using identical restrictor plates for 750 hp
kinetic (2009) and thermal energy recovery systems
open transmission spec, mechanical or electric drive
each car is self-starting
each car is given barely enough fuel (gas or diesel) to complete the race (maybe 99% to force economy management)
4 wheel drive and steering are allowed
100% drive-by-wire is allowed
severe limits on aero devices (more extensive than 2009 rules) - smaller wings, all the flips, flaps, doodads and winglets are gone, flat bottoms with a spec rib down the middle to increase minimum ride height
active aero (2009) and suspension - possible
no driver aides - braking, traction and spin control prohibited by spec computer. drivers can select pre-set engine, transmission, braking and chassis settings on the fly.
centerline-mounted cameras above the driver's head (front) and below the rear wing (rear)
slick tires (2009), with no forcing the use of all available compounds

your thoughts on this recipe?

 

[The Boston Dangler]

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth

Beh, I still want to see them scrounge together 43 F1 cars and race them at Bristol for 500 laps. It'd be like a giant episode of "Will it blend?".

:thumbsup:

"hmmm, euro-trash smoke. don't breathe that."

 

[JulesMaximus]

We already have that here in the states...it's called the IRL. And it sucks.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth

Originally posted by: KGBMAN

Originally posted by: alfa147x
so this would then just be a faster version of Indy ?

NO. F1 cars also make right-hand turns. :laugh:

Beh, I still want to see them scrounge together 43 F1 cars and race them at Bristol for 500 laps. It'd be like a giant episode of "Will it blend?".

Would that be any less boring than Nascar?

 

[Demon-Xanth]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth

Originally posted by: KGBMAN

Originally posted by: alfa147x
so this would then just be a faster version of Indy ?

NO. F1 cars also make right-hand turns. :laugh:

Beh, I still want to see them scrounge together 43 F1 cars and race them at Bristol for 500 laps. It'd be like a giant episode of "Will it blend?".

Would that be any less boring than Nascar?

For the first 5 laps until 43 cars end up in a huge pile up and none can continue to race.

 

[Peter E]

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth

Beh, I still want to see them scrounge together 43 F1 cars and race them at Bristol for 500 laps. It'd be like a giant episode of "Will it blend?".

Okay. Then I would like to see 43 NASCAR cars race at Spa (or any of the F1 circuits) in the wet. It'd also be like an episode of "Will it blend?"

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: Peter E

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth

Beh, I still want to see them scrounge together 43 F1 cars and race them at Bristol for 500 laps. It'd be like a giant episode of "Will it blend?".

Okay. Then I would like to see 43 NASCAR cars race at Spa (or any of the F1 circuits) in the wet. It'd also be like an episode of "Will it blend?"

More like "Will the race even start?"

 

[Raduque]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: Peter E

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth

Beh, I still want to see them scrounge together 43 F1 cars and race them at Bristol for 500 laps. It'd be like a giant episode of "Will it blend?".

Okay. Then I would like to see 43 NASCAR cars race at Spa (or any of the F1 circuits) in the wet. It'd also be like an episode of "Will it blend?"

More like "Will the race even start?"

NASCAR driver's don't race in the rain. They ain't stupid, ya know.

Also, they run road courses. They run the Glen and two others, I think. NASCARs are capable of turning right when they're setup for it.

 

[exdeath]

The suspensions on NASCAR cars are pretty advanced. SLA (double wishbone), every single suspension parameter is completely adjustable, etc. The cars may look ugly and run carbs but other than that they are pretty advanced for what they are.

 

[The Boston Dangler]

Originally posted by: Raduque

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: Peter E

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth

Beh, I still want to see them scrounge together 43 F1 cars and race them at Bristol for 500 laps. It'd be like a giant episode of "Will it blend?".

Okay. Then I would like to see 43 NASCAR cars race at Spa (or any of the F1 circuits) in the wet. It'd also be like an episode of "Will it blend?"

More like "Will the race even start?"

NASCAR driver's don't race in the rain. They ain't stupid, ya know.

Also, they run road courses. They run the Glen and two others, I think. NASCARs are capable of turning right when they're setup for it.

each chassis is built for the type of track. they have chassis designed for short ovals, big ovals, superspeedways, and road courses.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: exdeath
The suspensions on NASCAR cars are pretty advanced. SLA (double wishbone), every single suspension parameter is completely adjustable, etc. The cars may look ugly and run carbs but other than that they are pretty advanced for what they are.

A brick with a big engine? :laugh:

The only vehicle more advanced than a Formula One car is a fighter jet or the Space Shuttle.

 

[Peter E]

Originally posted by: Raduque

NASCAR driver's don't race in the rain. They ain't stupid, ya know.

Also, they run road courses. They run the Glen and two others, I think. NASCARs are capable of turning right when they're setup for it.

And F1 drivers don't race in ovals. They ain't stupid, ya know.

I do realize that NASCAR runs a few road course per season. But trying to make F1 race in a NASCAR style is ridiculous. They are different styles of racing. What's next? MotoGP in a WRC style race?

 

[Demon-Xanth]

Originally posted by: Peter E
And F1 drivers don't race in ovals. They ain't stupid, ya know.

I do realize that NASCAR runs a few road course per season. But trying to make F1 race in a NASCAR style is ridiculous. They are different styles of racing. What's next? MotoGP in a WRC style race?

I have seen some where they do a split on a road course and dirt track, I can't remember what it was called, but it was awesome.

Edit:
Supermoto

 

[Peter E]

But that's not a MotoGP bike. You guys were comparing racing F1 cars in a NASCAR race. So can we compare MotoGP bikes in Rally Finland?