"Kai M. Radicke" wrote:
> ...snip
> Personally, I agree with how FIA goes about attempting to slow the cars down
> by taking away some of their advantages. Grooved tyres are a pretty nifty
> idea, and the fact each tyre gained an extra groove this year was clearly
> mitigated by the fact the cars were still 3 seconds a lap quicker than last
> years Aus GP qualifying times!
Exactly. What would have been the influence of the new tire
compounds if they were on slicks! 10 seconds a lap?!
> I also would have to say that having FIA double the side impact load
> specifications for the 2001 F1 season probably saved J.Villeneuve's life the
True.
> I think it is time we see a change in engine format. Lets drop the V10 and
> go for lets say inline 5s with a displacement of 2L,
...and no turbo! The last time we saw 2L engines in F1 they made
over 1000bhp -- but that was with the help of a little (read: a lot) of
boost!
> I'm not for traction control, only because I think this is something that
> should be governed by driver skill. HOWEVER, if it is nearly impossible to
> restrict teams from using any time of traction control a standard must be
> set for the legal use of traction control to at least give an even
> opportunity to each team.
Absolutely. All of the teams, well, except perhaps for Minardi,
were experimenting with traction control of some kind and just
under (read: in violation of) the FIA rules. Some were using
differential engine braking, some used TWO brake pedals so the
driver could dynamically adjust brake balance left-to-right, some
even had plans to integrate traction control into the computer
controlled power steering! No innovation, my foot!
> Rule changes and regulations are good.
I used to refute this claim until I got so deeply into F1 strategy and
technology. Left unchecked, there would be only two teams and
9 pairs of four-wheeled-road-cones.
> Kai
Rick
|