Forum menu
I am genuinely struggling to understand what all the flap is all about. Is this a social media thing? Do we all have to be hysterical about everything all the time now?
There is a genuine concern for safety.
The mario-kart element I can kind of live with as we've had 'fake' racing for a long while now - but we can't have cars with massive (and variable) closing speed differences. Drivers know the risks, but you could easily end up with a car clearing the catch fencing and injuring spectators.
There is a genuine concern for safety.
There's evidence coming out that Colapinto was stuffed by programming glitches in the Mercedes PU. I don't know if they're the same ones that Mercedes and others are using to game qualifying and partly the reason Russel missed out on pole, but if that's the case, it's not clear whether it's a problem that just concerns the Mercedes engined cars that can be fixed, or is something that effects all PUs across all teams and is inherent in the design. I think its probs too early to say its a fault of the regs.
It does feel that with the rise of YouTube channels and alike making a living from reporting f1 that there has to be a continuous stream of content even when there isn’t really anything to talk about. The next 5 weeks for the war break will see just how desperate some or all of these channels get to create content out of nothing happening
The next 5 weeks for the war break will see just how desperate some or all of these channels get to create content out of nothing happening
Bernie says "Hold my beer."
He was a maestro at keeping f1 in the news over a much longer off season than we have these days. As soon as things started getting quiet he'd throw out stuff like sprinklers to make dry races wet. These squeaking influencers have got a lot to learn.
There is a genuine concern for safety.
This I agree with. Ollie Bearman’s crash illustrates the problem very clearly, and it’s something that’s been raised by the drivers for a long time. They need to get this sorted before Miami really
I think they should have gone for a spec MGU-H. That would have eliminated a lot of the problems they're having.
Yes this +1!
It does feel that with the rise of YouTube channels and alike making a living from reporting f1 that there has to be a continuous stream of content even when there isn’t really anything to talk about.
The You Tube channels are a double edged sword; some are genuinely interesting and knowledgeable, with short to the point videos... But there are so many click bate titles, with zero content, dragged out over 15 mins of waffle or just regurgitating content from someone else.
There is a genuine concern for safety.
This I agree with. Ollie Bearman’s crash illustrates the problem very clearly, and it’s something that’s been raised by the drivers for a long time. They need to get this sorted before Miami really
On the other hand, Schumacher was able to calmly drive back to the pits after he slammed into a slow running Coulthard in a rainy Spa race a few years ago...that closing speed must have been similar to Colapinto & Bearman 😉😁
I am genuinely struggling to understand what all the flap is all about. Is this a social media thing? Do we all have to be hysterical about everything all the time now?
I get it, the drivers aren’t at the limit for some the corners, which makes for a very different qualifying, it would be better if they were and I’m sure a solution for this will be found. In the mean time, Max threatening to leave, long time fans saying they’ll stop watching and all the other histrionics is starting to look a bit pathetic tbh
not quite sure why it's "hysterical" or "pathetic" for a long term fan (e.g me) to say they're thinking of stopping watching. If I don't find the current racing satisfying to watch because I find it even more artificial this year, that's a perfectly valid opinion. I didn't suggest anyone else should stop watching. I really only posted to generate some debate and see what others think.
I really only posted to generate some debate .
Hysterical, pathetic TwoDogs admits clickbait posting shocker!!
😉
On the other hand, Schumacher was able to calmly drive back to the pits after he slammed into a slow running Coulthard in a rainy Spa race a few years ago..
'calmly drive back to the pits' before trying to start a fight
..it's not clear whether it's a problem that just concerns the Mercedes engined cars that can be fixed, or is something that effects all PUs across all teams and is inherent in the design. I think its probs too early to say its a fault of the regs.
Well there are a few different related problems...
1. the delta between max deployment and superclipping is far, far too high, like 450 BHP too high. So the closing speed when this happens is massive.
2. the system is automated and is therefore clipping/superclipping at inappropriate times. So when point 1 will occur is unpredictable.
3. on some tracks the cars cannot recover anywhere near enough energy therefore superclipping is basically inevitable.
An ex F1 engineer (Toni Cuquerella) ran some simulations and found that you can eliminate the need for superclipping completely by making it 64/36 instead of 50/50. It would only make the cars roughly a second and a half slower and basically entirely solve all the above issues.
It's in Spanish but if you look at the table you can understand it pretty easily.
Translation of the post text:
F1 Miami 2026 Simulations . How to improve without changing the hardware, since increasing the fuel flow would mean building a completely new engine. My proposal:
- 200 kW maximum positive power (was 350 kW)
- 350 kW maximum charge power. Kept as is.
- 6 MJ maximum recharge energy (was 9 MJ)
- Slew rate 50 kW/s (was 100 kW/s)
- MGUK/ICE Ratio: 36/64 (was 50/50) Result:
- Vmax 328 km/h right before braking.
- No superclipping
- Only 1.4 seconds slower
- Still +8 sec faster than an F2
https://twitter.com/tonicuque/status/2039283363899387991
That looks like a workable solution for the moment. It is probably only interim as they get better with the software, but for the next few races at least, it would add safety without massively reducing the excitement.
1. the delta between max deployment and superclipping is far, far too high, like 450 BHP too high. So the closing speed when this happens is massive.
2. the system is automated and is therefore clipping/superclipping at inappropriate times. So when point 1 will occur is unpredictable.
My understanding is that the Mercedes PU in certain modes reduces the battery input in one abrupt step as opposed the the multiple steps that the FIA suggested. However it does it in the same time-frame, and the FIA have already said that it meets the regulation. It's useful because it applies full battery deployment for slightly longer (as opposed to stepped reductions) . There was commentary saying that Colapinto may have mistakenly or inadvertently triggered this mode - which partially at least explains his very abrupt pace reduction, as opposed to gradually slowing as the battery recharges during super-clipping.
My understanding is that the Mercedes PU in certain modes reduces the battery input in one abrupt step as opposed the the multiple steps that the FIA suggested. However it does it in the same time-frame, and the FIA have already said that it meets the regulation.
I was reading that they are using this for quali as the 60 second lock out penalty that you suffer on the inlap doesn’t matter so they take the benefit to get a better final straight. The irony is that these teams are complaining about the speed differentials being dangerous but are quite happy to create them to exploit the rules for quali.
I don’t see a problem with that: it’s a competitive sport. With big budgets. By all means exploit the stupid rule with big performance gains. Play the game according to the current rules. Those rules apply to your competitors after all.
you can still lobby the rule makers to change that stupid rule. At which point it will apply to all.
The merc strategy is legal, as the (daft) rule is written, and could have been foreseen. And it’s mostly likely to cause speed differential on the straight when there’s ample room for drivers to keep away from each other.
I don’t like the rule, but that’s what you get when you write rules full of loopholes.
I completely agree that what Merc are doing is leagal and completely within the rules. Howerver to be then complaining about speed differentials that you are deliberately exploiting is the height of hypocracy.
Just on a quick scan of who's left Red Bull recently, it's quite shocking.
There’s always some leakage from the dominant team but that is a lot, especially as they were only the dominant team for two years and not since 2023
24hrs of classic F1 races on the F1 YouTube Channel...
- Increase Power of "Superclipping" (Raise Harvest Cap): To reduce the need for lift-and-coast, proposals suggest raising the superclipping harvest cap (when the car harvests energy while still at full throttle) from 250 kW to 350 kW, reducing the need for drivers to throttle lift.
- Make Cars Slower Overall (Reduce Battery Energy): To prevent energy depletion on long straights, plans include cutting the total battery energy allowed per lap from 9 megajoules to roughly 6-7 MJ.
- Tighten Energy-Recovery Limits: By lowering the maximum allowed energy recovered, the "yo-yo" effect of speed differentials on straights is reduced, decreasing the need for dramatic braking on straights.
- Active Aerodynamics Overhaul: Expanding the "straight-line mode" (X-mode) for low drag, potentially removing fixed zones entirely to give teams freedom, allowing them to lower drag to save battery energy.
- Increase the Combustion Engine's Role: Long-term talks focus on raising the fuel-flow limit to increase the power contribution from the V6 engine, reducing reliance on the massive electric power component.
- Simplify the Rules: Reducing the complexity of the regulations—specifically removing algorithm-driven energy management thresholds that have made qualifying feel artificial and complex to both drivers and fans.
Anyone here in the know, know what they are? Want to discuss them?
1 seems sensible with no major implications for most teams (i think)
2 might solve the symptoms but i don't like the idea of just reducing the power to disguise the problem.
3 i am not clear on what that means
4 should make for some interesting driver choices about when and where to deploy. Not sure of the unintended consequences
5 this is next year at the earliest
6 simplifying the algorithm makes sense if it stops things like LeClerc qualifying being ruined because he lifted for a microsecond or Lando accidently overtaking Lewis because the car made him do it.
Just on a quick scan of who's left Red Bull recently, it's quite shocking
Rumours of Hannah Schmitz moving to Ferrari, god knows they need her!
I just watched most of a really badly AI-voiced video talking about the six new rules or fixes that they are going to put into Formula One. Apparently they have been discussed between tomorrow and Miami. The six proposed fixes being discussed include:
- Increase Power of "Superclipping" (Raise Harvest Cap): To reduce the need for lift-and-coast, proposals suggest raising the superclipping harvest cap (when the car harvests energy while still at full throttle) from 250 kW to 350 kW, reducing the need for drivers to throttle lift.
- Make Cars Slower Overall (Reduce Battery Energy): To prevent energy depletion on long straights, plans include cutting the total battery energy allowed per lap from 9 megajoules to roughly 6-7 MJ.
- Tighten Energy-Recovery Limits: By lowering the maximum allowed energy recovered, the "yo-yo" effect of speed differentials on straights is reduced, decreasing the need for dramatic braking on straights.
- Active Aerodynamics Overhaul: Expanding the "straight-line mode" (X-mode) for low drag, potentially removing fixed zones entirely to give teams freedom, allowing them to lower drag to save battery energy.
- Increase the Combustion Engine's Role: Long-term talks focus on raising the fuel-flow limit to increase the power contribution from the V6 engine, reducing reliance on the massive electric power component.
- Simplify the Rules: Reducing the complexity of the regulations—specifically removing algorithm-driven energy management thresholds that have made qualifying feel artificial and complex to both drivers and fans.
Anyone here in the know, know what they are? Want to discuss them?
The problem is they are all just sticking plasters. Fundamental change will take well over a year and cost teams a fortune as it needs a fundamental engine redesign
What fundamental change needs to be made?
What fundamental change needs to be made?
V8s and synthetic fuels!!
It's on it's way anyway so they may as well dump these rules asap. 🙂
Anytime you try a major revamp of anything, you get unexpected problems, it always takes a couple of iterations to iron out the problems. They aren't going to dump these rules or scrap the engines, they will adjust things to mitigate the worst of the problems but try to keep the successful things. The new cars do seem to be able to follow more closely and there is a lot more passing, those are successes that they will want to keep. They will tweak the harvesting and deployment rules this year to try to work around the worst problems, maybe make some bigger adjustments for next year when the PU suppliers will have had time to make hardware changes. What they won't do is scrap these rules entirely, that's not going to happen.
By the end of this rules cycle I can't see car makers producing many (if any) ICE cars. So then what do we do?
If the manufacturers rule the sport it will veer more to the electric side. If it does they may as well close the garage doors and pack up as it will no longer be F1.
I agree though we are stuck with what we have (with tweeks) for the duration of this cycle. I just feel a bit for Cadillac who are developing an engine to these regs and the goal-posts are moving race to race.
The simplest fixes are the ones I linked a few posts up by Toni Cuquerella, they could mostly be fixed in ECU software. It's just that doing so will make the cars a bit slower.
Personally for the next reg cycle I'd rather it be a simpler energy system but more manually controlled by the driver. I'm not massively interested in whic team can come up with the best deployment map that is applied automatically by a computer around the lap.
By the end of this rules cycle I can't see car makers producing many (if any) ICE cars. So then what do we do?
Not convinced personally! I reckon petrol engines are going to be around a lot longer than 2030...
Formula E has exclusive use of electric only powertrain until the late 2040-somethings anyway IIRC.
They appear to be trying to solve problems in too many ways simultaneously.
For example, way back when rich teams could test a lot and develop loads, hence testing restrictions, TPC regulations etc. Then wind tunnel and CFD allowances. Then the budget cap
I think now we've got the budget and there are no 'rich teams' or at least much smaller gaps, the testing rules should be repealed, if teams what to spend their limited budgets on testing let them, it's a much more level playing field, they will be making a trade-off elsewhere if they choose to do so rather than just 'buying success'
Likewise on the engines. Now we have fuel restrictions we should be repealing most of the other engine regs, and simplifying a lot. You have 105kg of synthetic fuel per race, three engines a year. If you can make a 2,000hp V16 which can do that distance on that fuel then well done!
Not convinced personally! I reckon petrol engines are going to be around a lot longer than 2030...
Not saying they won't be, but car makers are dropping ICE at a rapid rate. Just have a look at Renaults UK website - there are just a hand-full of ICE and Hybrid cars for sale.
And this oil crisis has ramped up interest in electric cars.
I think now we've got the budget and there are no 'rich teams' or at least much smaller gaps, the testing rules should be repealed, if teams what to spend their limited budgets on testing let them, it's a much more level playing field, they will be making a trade-off elsewhere if they choose to do so rather than just 'buying success'
Likewise on the engines. Now we have fuel restrictions we should be repealing most of the other engine regs, and simplifying a lot. You have 105kg of synthetic fuel per race, three engines a year. If you can make a 2,000hp V16 which can do that distance on that fuel then well done!
Bring back Can-Am 😉
I think F1 is in a sad state when to fix most of it's problems you have to tweak the ECU
For those wanting a motorsport fix this weekend is a good one…
Nurburgring 24hrs on YouTube
WEC live for a small ish season sub.
BTCC live in ITV.
Indycar if you have a Sky/Now F1 sub.
…and the wife is out all day tomorrow!! 🤣🤣
There was a fatal crash at the Nurburgring race yesterday:( RIP Juha Miettinen
For those wanting a motorsport fix this weekend is a good one…
Nurburgring 24hrs on YouTube
WEC live for a small ish season sub.
BTCC live in ITV.
Indycar if you have a Sky/Now F1 sub.
…and the wife is out all day tomorrow!! 🤣🤣
Plus the IMSA race at Long Beach California.