Forum menu
Why comment?
Errr, this is a chat forum right?
Some interesting thoughts, as always, from James Allen:
http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2016/01/thoughts-on-the-formula-1-year-that-lies-ahead-in-2016/
F1 stands out as the easiest sport to give up on as it had become dull, and falls right in the middle of a Sunday. But TBH I can recommend that you do this with a lot of sport on TV, as you'll suddenly have far more time to do interesting stuff.
Prediction McHonda won't threaten anyone next year, it'll be another Merc snooze fest.
jimw - MemberErrr, this is a chat forum right?
Gets a bit tiresome hearing how shit something that you like is from people who don't even watch it.
Looks like the BBC have given up altogether, their F1 page has almost ground to a halt!
BBC f1 will go the same way as the motogp coverage. I imagine / hope the guys get new jobs over at C4. I've always like the shots and trailers they used to do for motogp and f1. My favourite laguna seca trailer with Rudimental
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/motogp/18980410
Looks like the BBC have given up altogether, their F1 page has almost ground to a halt!
It's the first week of January. What are you expecting..............
A question for those who watch F1 on NowTV - If you buy a weekend pass do you have to watch the race live, or is there any sort of catch-up option? I always like to watch the whole race, but can't always watch live.
Ta!
It's a live watch as far as i can work out.
I read that Ferrari are claiming to be behind on their 2016 car as they were developing the 2015 to the end of the season. Getting their excuses in early?
I read that Ferrari are claiming to be behind on their 2016 car as they were developing the 2015 to the end of the season. Getting their excuses in early?
...only stories I've seen are the usual Ferrari bigging themselves up and wanting to be 'the team to beat' in Australia.
the-muffin-man - MemberA question for those who watch F1 on NowTV - If you buy a weekend pass do you have to watch the race live, or is there any sort of catch-up option? I always like to watch the whole race, but can't always watch live.
Dare I ask how much it costs to get F1 on NowTV?
Dare I ask how much it costs to get F1 on NowTV?
£6.99 for Day Pass, £10.99 for week pass...
...not cheap. But a lot cheaper for me if I cancelled my Sky Sub and watched coverage on C4 and filled in with the races they don't broadcast live using NowTV.
Buy a dish point it at the RTL satellite, tune into R5, pretend they're not out of synch by 0.3 of a second and enjoy. Job done. 🙂
Link to the Ferrari story on [url= http://m.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/122395/ferrari-delayed-work-on-2016-car ]Autosport[/url]
lot cheaper for me if I cancelled my Sky Sub and watched coverage on C4 and filled in with the races they don't broadcast live using NowTV.
That's what I do
More great Pirelli news - they're now saying their tyres can't cope with more power and cornering speed for 2017. Well Goodyear seemed to manage fine with 1000bhp+ in the 80s!...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/35283404
Partial quote there..... what they seem to be saying is the FIA can't eat its cake and have it. Coping with increased power and speed will require higher pressures - which the FIA don't want for performance reasons.
They should go back to a tyre war with two suppliers, why are F1 cars still on hugh sidewalls anyway all other "Sporty" cars the thinner the better?
Other motorsports tend to have suspension 🙂
Heard they want to go back to 2m wide cars and more aero grip - going backwards to go forwards, let's make sure there's even less chance of a pass occuring.
Pirelli just making more noise to ensure they get to test their tyres on a representative car before they race on them. IIRC lotus ran with 17 inch rims as part of a filming/test day last summer but the decision was to remain with the current profile. Suspension design was a lot to do with it I think.
Yep, Coulthard has appointed Coulthard as one if C4 presenters... 🙂
Sounds like Maldonado's paymasters haven't stumped up the cash for him. Finally!
Aye - sounds like the Renault seats are both available.
I though Palmer Jr was in the other seat?
No loss if Pastor deosn't show up. Except for the Carbon fibre suppliers around Enstone, they must be layiing folk off on the strength of that.
And Magnussen slated for that seat. Good News all round.
Thinking about pirelli they might actually be doing us all a favour. The 2017 regs seemed to be all about bolting on more aero downforce which most people think would worsen the dirty air problem and make close racing even harder. If pirelli say they need to keep current downforce levels but will increase tyre size to enhance mechanical grip then that sounds like a (small) positive step for closer racing.
Interesting piece on the 2017 regs...
http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/f1/opinion/f1-about-to-score-another-own-goal/
...seems like a complete shambles!
Yes it does. 🙁 Ban winglets, turning vanes, reduce the size of the front and rear wings. This mega complex aero has damaged the sport.
I agree, the sport should get [url= 
]back to basics.[/url]
holst - MemberI agree, the sport should get back to basics.
Probably quicker than last years McLaren.
They'd never go for it, but standard aero packs for the front and rear wings would be good (imo) to stay away from the standard "we've upgraded our front wing and now have 154,000 different elements on it" nonsense
I read something the other day that said in a season, a top team goes through about 75 designs for the front wing. It's flipping ridiculous that.
Well 2017 regs should ban all winglets etc. and also go back to proper tyres. Also simplify the engines (or PU if you prefer), a small engine with only one limited boost (e.g. an electronic turbo) should be enough IMO. However, mixed grids as proposed in that article linked above is the worst idea and thankfully F1 isn't going down that route. Personally I don't have an issue with 'lift and coast', it happens in motorsport.
Oh and stop this obsession with employing old drivers sons, it is nepotism of the worst kind.
Fueling (for green reasons) is the easiest thing to fix by a mile. Everyone starts on exactly the same fuel level of x litres, no more, no less - deploy as you see fit!
Next season make that x-1 litres - woohoo we're saving polar bears!
Or is there a reason why F1 have felt the need to make it incredibly complicated?
I wonder if there's merit in going back to a form of ground effect type design, but with an early 90s "push to pass" suspension that lifts the cars a few millimeters clear of the track to aid overtaking.
I wonder if there's merit in going back to a form of ground effect type design,
A simpler (than the 70s) ground effect system was tested by Williams last season. Reading between the lines I think this is getting kicked out due to Pirelli's recent concerns about tyre loads.
[img] 
[/img]
I think this is getting kicked out due to Pirelli's recent concerns about tyre loads.
Pirelli have been pretty vocal about teams running outside their parameters for pressures / cambers, as they don't want the negative press associated with high speed tyre failures. Running a G/E set-up would just load more stress through an already weak tyre, so I'm not surprised they put a stop to it.
The tyres have been designed to fail, yet all the teams / FIA / fans get their panties in a twist when they do just that.
Just make the damn things last 3 times as long and not degrade. I'm still at a loss as to why they enforce a driver to use 2 different compounds during a race.
Or is there a reason why F1 have felt the need to make it incredibly complicated?
Because manufacturers want to use it as a technology showcase for hybrid powertrains.
holst - Member
Because manufacturers want to use it as a technology showcase for hybrid powertrains.
Fuel flow rates mean naff-all to the general public though. I still believe my way up there is better and easier, and doesn't get in the way of the hybrids either
I agree, it would be much better racing. The manufacturers will not agree though, they want to develop hybrid technology. He who pays the piper, etc.
Fuel flow rates mean naff-all to the general public though. I still believe my way up there is better and easier, and doesn't get in the way of the hybrids either
There must be some appeal/draw from the technology side though?
If people just wanted to watch simple, close racing then Indycar would be bigger than F1.
And if F1 didn't help manufacturers to develop and sell their cars they would soon shift their money elsewhere.
The tech, bluffing, soap-opera side of F1 has always been as big a draw for me as the racing is.
The technology side would still be interesting as the teams are stretched to meet the fuel limit and work out how best to deploy what they have through the race.
Plenty of drama too when the FIA (possibly) go "this year was too easy, next year you're losing x% of your fuel"
Easier as a marketing tool for the manufacturers, showing how they get more power with better fuel economy.
Just seems a lot better to me than the current fuel flow situation