Nico Rosberg, Mercedes, Circuit de Catalunya, 2013

Two DRS zones for every track bar Monaco and Suzuka in 2013

2013 F1 season

Posted on

| Written by

Nico Rosberg, Mercedes, Circuit de Catalunya, 2013Almost every track on the F1 calendar this year will have two DRS zones, according to German magazine Auto Motor und Sport.

Monaco and Suzuka will be the only venues on this year’s calendar to have a single DRS zone.

As of this year, drivers are only allowed to use DRS in the designated zones at all times. The number of zones has been increased to ensure teams still exploit the benefit of having DRS, which is designed to facilitate overtaking.

The Circuit Gilles Villeneuve, which originally had two DRS zones but was cut back to one last year as it made overtaking too easy, will have two again.

The changes to the tracks are as follows:

Circuit2012 DRS zone/s2013 DRS zone/s
Albert ParkPit straight and second straightPit straight and second straight
Sepang International CircuitPit straightPit straight and final straight
Shanghai International CircuitLongest straightLongest straight and pit straight
Bahrain International CircuitPit straightPit straight and straight to turn 11
Circuit de CatalunyaPit straightPit straight and straight to turn ten
Monte-CarloPit straightPit straight
Circuit Gilles VilleneuvePit straightPit straight and final straight
SilverstoneWellington straightWellington straight and Hangar straight
Nurburgring*Straight before chicanePit straight and straight before chicane
HungaroringPit straightPit straight and second straight
Spa-FrancorchampsKemmel straightKemmel straight and pit straight
MonzaPit straight and straight to AscariPit straight and straight to Ascari
SingaporeStraight to turn sevenStraight to turn seven and pit straight
Korean International CircuitLongest straightLongest straight and pit straight
SuzukaPit straightPit straight
Buddh International CircuitPit straight and longest straightPit straight and longest straight
Yas MarinaTwo longest straightsTwo longest straights
Circuit of the AmericasLongest straightLongest straight and pit straight
InterlagosReta Oposta straightReta Oposta straight and pit straight

*Last used in 2011

Which tracks do you think need DRS zones? Vote here:

2013 F1 season

Browse all 2013 F1 season articles

Image ?é?® F1 Fanatic |

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

Posted on Categories 2013 F1 seasonTags , , , ,

Promoted content from around the web | Become a RaceFans Supporter to hide this ad and others

  • 138 comments on “Two DRS zones for every track bar Monaco and Suzuka in 2013”

    1. car that lack straightline pace like Lotus will suffer

      1. Why? The decision to enhance the number of DRS zones only affects teams that somehow gain an advantage from DRS, like Red Bull and Mercedes last year with their now outlawed double DRS systems.

        1. I don’t think that’s 100% true. Some teams are still testing/using ‘legal’ passive versions of the DDRS.

          1. @force-maikel You mean the system Lotus pioneered and was copied by Red Bull and Sauber in testing? This system has absolutely nothing to do with DRS (the name DDRS is very misleading). It does give them a straight-line advantage, but it doesn’t favor them when the number of DRS zones is increased.

            1. @andae23 I would add that it gives them straight-line advantage if it’s not a DRS straight. In DRS zone, the wing is stalled and there is no need for the device (I still prefer that name over DDRS). So if the number of DRS zone increase, the interest for the device could drop …

              Not sure having 2 DRS zone at most track is a good idea, I feel we will have lots of “pass by overtaking” which is not what we want.

            2. @jeanrien No: the DDRS (or DRD ‘device’) seen in testing stalls both the upper and lower element of the rear wing partially. DRS stalls only the upper element, but for its entirety. Not to mention that with a DRD the upper element still produces downforce and thus drag, which would be reduced by DRS. Also DRS works for all velocity ranges, in contrast to DRD which is activated at a high speed. So indeed with a DRD, DRS is less effective, but it still gives a significant reduction in aerodynamic drag.

            3. @andae23 thanks for the details, haven’t thought about that. And my main point was that having more DRS zone lower the interest for DRD which is a shame according to me, always great to see teams develop new stuff like that.

          2. They’re unrelated. The passive systems would operate using an airflow switch at various speeds to blow air onto the rear wing to stall it, but they’ve proven unreliable.

            The outlawed systems in particularly were the ones that were secondary functions of the DRS activation.

            1. @jeanrien They need two because with only one teams would be tempted to gear the cars to hit the rev limiter under closed wing conditions meaning an open DRS would be worthless.

            2. @nickthegeek Once again that depends how we see it, it would open the possibilities and the diversity between teams which is a good thing as F1 tend to have them doing all the same choices (or almost) …
              Furthermore, that would incitate teams to develop “the device” as they would gain more from it.

              But I understand that as far as I like F1 development and I find it necessary to keep F1 attractive, it goes again the tendancy for cost limitation and only big teams could afford to develop working “device” while DRS is a know entity for all.

              I’m not saying it’s bad though, I wait to see what it gives, I just hope it doesn’t make pass to easy. The tyre will probably already play a big part in that as the degradation is higher which mean the delta in speed between cars during a car would be higher in function of their tyres. So if you have 10 km/h difference from DRS + 10 from tyre, you can even wave your hand while passing another car.

              And again, I hope I’m wrong or at least that F1 will keep all his panache

    2. Why? Last year saw fantastic racing, and the best of it happened away from the DRS zones. Are they completely incapable of basing a decision upon the results of the previous year?

      1. They need to ensure people still investment time in developing DRS. If the gains were very small you may see cars not have it, similar to KERS.

        1. @bertie So what ? Let’s the team chose if they develop DRS or not … At least that would make a bit of liberty in the decisions for teams.
          I rather have F1 with moderate DRS zone and great show (whatever with the decision of teams about developing it or not) than F1 with plenty of DRS zone, DRS system improved by the team (not even sure it will happens) and plenty of boring pass by overtaking with no show

          So do they need that ? Surely not

        2. There is no development to DRS. It’s a flap. It took a few minutes to develop when it was first announced that teams would be allowed it, and hasn’t changed since then (other complex, and now banned systems aside).

        3. jimscreechy (@)
          7th March 2013, 6:11

          I think DRS was a quick fix to the regulations to allow overtaking. When Mclaren came out with the F-duct the FIA quickly made plans to outlaw it for the follwoing season in favour of their sanitised DRS version. Once again, intelligent design and innovation highjacked by the F1 judiciary. However, I have to admit it did solve the rather unpleasant problem of the inability to overtake a slower paced car… which I think is a good thing. However, I think this problem surfaced largely because of the restrictions placed on KERS which was always the sensible alternative to DRS and rather more genuinely *ie through technological development* provided a solution to the problem. I don’t necessarily think they should do away with DRS immediately, but I have always though it more sensible to just remove all the KERs restrictions and allow teams to simply gain maximum effects from it that they can. This compulsion to restrict everything is counterproductive… the engines KERS, two of the most important elements that flatline the teams into scraping for titbits with areodynamics which is hugely more expensive with far more marginal dividends. The ‘Arms Race’ we have at the moment is stiffling development.

    3. Isn’t it about time the whole DRS concept was dropped? The cars do not really need any assistance in overtaking any more

      1. +1….DRS is bringing F1 into disrepute,imho…..

      2. @thomf1s They clearly do. Do you remember pre-2011? Overtaking was a rarity.

        1. I think the point THOMF1s was trying to make is that of the three variables (KERS, DRS, and bubblegum tyres) which were introduced, Pirelli’s have enabled overtaking much more than the other two tools.

        2. DRS isn’t the only reason we have seen a significant increase in overtaking, also there are very few DRS passes which have since been hailed great overtakes.

          Also I don’t believe overtaking was a rarity prior to 2011. Most races were still entertaining in my opinion and overtaking itself is not the only thing which makes races exciting.

          1. Does anyone remember the days when drivers like Alonso, montoya and schumacher could defend their position? No more.

        3. See the overtakes video on the BBC F1 site.

        1. For goodness sake, the day DRS is dropped from F1 will be the best day in its history, since the day traction control was banned.

          1. Yes. Agree.
            I was looking forward to the season. Now I’m sad. World wide wrestling Overtaking again.

          2. @kingshark
            I agree. It will be such a happy moment. We might not see quite as much overtaking, but I think we will be much better off as a result.

      3. +10000000000

    4. This feels a little gimmicky to me…. We restricted DRS in qualifyign, now we need to justify it’s cost, so lets go triggerhappy on appointing zones….

      I think this is WAY to optimistic, some tracks will benefit, others will not. By making these choices this early , they have ruled out the possibility of adjusting the DRS zones according to what we see on track. What if the first 2 races show that overtaking is actually doable, and that DS zones can be shorter because of it. Oh no wait, we made a descision in march to put TWO zones on this track, ah well… lets just make overtaking supereasy. Or hey . it’s way warmer than expected, trackconditions are different , but hey we already chose our zones in march, so let it go….

      My point is that this way you lose to much flexibility with the DRS zones, and that’s a shame

      1. @melkurion

        now we need to justify its cost

        This isn’t why they’ve increased the number of DRS zones this year.

        When DRS was introduced the rationale behind allowing free use of it in qualifying was that it would encourage teams to set their gear ratios long enough to get maximum benefit from it, therefore meaning they would get enough benefit from using it in the races.

        As that’s no longer the case (at the request of several drivers on safety grounds) they are increasing the number of DRS zones in the hope that it will still offer enough of an advantage for teams to gear their cars accordingly. See here:

        Webber: DRS rules change won’t reduce overtaking
        Two DRS zones per track necessary for 2013 – Lowe

        1. @keithcollantine

          True, but that’s the arguement I was trying to make, just more eloquently worded ;) They restricted it in qualifying, so now they need to show that it’s still worth doing.

          Wether that is from a cost perspective or from a set-up perspective is in my opinion (as they say in thailand) same, same , but different :)

    5. Maybe they’re just trying to make up for the relative loss in speed in qualifying because of the no-DRS-all-the-way rule?

      1. The FIA continues to ignore the views of the vast majority of F1 fans YET AGAIN….i feel insulted…

        1. Have you written them a formal letter expressing your displeasure or do you just rant on internet forums about the problem?

        2. G (@unklegsif)
          6th March 2013, 13:00

          I am off to shout at a brick wall in a sound-proof room, about how nobody ever listens to me :-)


        3. If the FIA et al have done a survey of people who do NOT watch F1 and those people say “It’s boring, no overtaking.” are the FIA wrong to try and introduce more overtaking.
          If this is the reason, then your only option is to become a retired F1 fan.

          1. If they do a survey of people who don’t watch, and take their opinions too seriously, then all they’re doing is trying to attract a group fundamentaly less interested in the sport at the cost of actual fans becoming disheartened.

    6. It seems that motorsport’s rule makers are united in the belief that DRS is the way to go. Formula Renault 3.5 Series cars featured it already last year and DTM are planning to implement the adjustable wing this year. I’m not really happy about this trend but I understand that some of the races would be completely dull without it. So I’m ready to tolerate the DRS as long as races aren’t turned into predictable overtaking orgies.

    7. Fine…..2 zones…….but please REDUCE the length of the zones. Why can’t they understand that?

      On top of that you would think in 2013, they could have a system/GPS, whereby once the car using DRS pulls up along side it, the DRS is de-activated.

      1. On top of that you would think in 2013, they could have a system/GPS, whereby once the car using DRS pulls up along side it, the DRS is de-activated.

        That’s actually not a bad idea, though I think it will require a complex system. Maybe in the DRS zones themselves you have sensors that tell which car is leading which car, and as soon as the overtaking car passes one of these lines earlier than his prey, his DRS is disabled.

        Continuing this speculation: what if the car that has been overtaken then gets DRS, and this will go back-and-forth until they reach the braking area. This could lead to some issues though: For instance, the first activation point must coincide with the detection point for this system to work, and I don’t know if this information can be processed fast enough.

        1. i think S2G meant it as a joke. At least i hope.

          That would just be pure sacrilege. That would be like letting the FIA also remotely control the throttle and brakes. they would slow some cars down to increase overtaking. cool!

          we should drop this whole concept that overtaking is what we want. i think the definition of an exciting race is more complicated than that.

          In F1 if a part on the car doesnt bring you a benefit it goes off. period. Why are we changing the rules just for the sake of keeping it?

        2. I doubt pilots would like that DRS get’s closed outside their control (when magic-GPS finds out you are already passed) – now they can control it themselfes either by braking or by pressing button – it gives the control to pilot.

        3. Michael Brown (@)
          6th March 2013, 19:32

          What if the DRS would only stay open for a set time, say 2-3 seconds? The car behind passes the activation point and gets it for the allotted time, to ensure that the DRS gets the cars alongside and the DRS should close once they are side by side.

          I prefer to keep DRS because we don’t get processional races but now it’s too easy to pass with it.

      2. Agreed. If the length of the zones is increased the number of dull, uninspiring overtakes will also increase. I understand why the rules have changed but that cannot be to the detriment of the racing, which I fear it may well be. If the DRS zone length remains constant between qualifying and the race though I fear to may very well do that.

    8. In Canada 2012, we had DRS on the straight after the hair pin, right? This straight is called “Final straight” or “Pit straight”?

      1. That straight is the final straight I think. The pit straight refers to the straight adjacent to the actual location of the pit crews and equipment. The easiest way to think of it is: wherever the start-finish line is located is the pit straight.

    9. Have people still failed to accept the fact that DRS is in F1? Have you forgotten why it was introduced in the first place? A car would get to about one second behind a slower car, and be held up due to the dirty air. The FIA then made a swap, front wings which can be used to increase downforce for rear wings which can be used to decrease downforce. Perfectly fine swap for me! No one can deny the racing over the last two years has been so much better than the 10 years previous. I tried watching some races from the mid-2000s a while back and they seem so dull compared to races of this era! F1 constantly changes, that’s a given. Don’t like it? Watch a different series.

      1. Meanwhile, back to the topic: two DRS zones at most tracks seems like the sensible idea really. Remember most tracks only have two decent-length straights for DRS to have much of an impact. Should make the racing a bit more interesting as well.

      2. Wasn’t DRS supposed to be a stop-gap while the teams/rule-makers figured out a better way to reduce the dirty air?

        1. Exactly.

      3. i think last year it was the tyres and teams not knowing how to use them that created the great racing, and overtaking in NON DRS zones. DRS is fake racing, its not as good as push to pass in other series, because not everyone has the same system.

      4. G (@unklegsif)
        6th March 2013, 14:54

        There really is only so much mechanical grip that can be developed to hold the car to the track to such a level that affords it the performance to corner at the speeds we are used to. Aero is vital in the modern Formula, and cannot be replaced: its just an irony that its benefit is also its dissadvantage

        Can you imagine the furore that would be created amongst all the fans if the FIA said “right, races are boring, so we are going to change the Formula to make it more interesting… new tyres, reduced aero, smaller rear wings, stuff to inject some actual overtaking in the races etc…. to make things more exiting for the fans and increase overtaking”

        Oh, hang on….. havent they already done that
        And STILL people whine on-and-on-and-on……
        “The cars are ugly with the silly new wings”
        “These new tyres are making things fake”
        This DRS rubbish is rubbish”

        Well Said Craig-o


        1. DRS was brought in so racers could close up the back of another car to enable them to have ago at overtaking.

          Not create a passing lane.

          They have removed the goal posts. and its totally unfair that a driver defending has no chance at all to defend. If DRS had been about in 2005 the imola race would not of been a classic as alonso would of pretty much just waved him past.

          DRS zones or wing allowence MUST be shorter to do what they were intended for. It was never intended to be an overtaking tool, but an aid to get the cars closer.

          1. They have removed the goal posts.

            Great analogy. That sums up what they have done perfectly.

      5. @craig-o

        Don’t like it? Watch a different series.

        I wouldn’t replace my girlfriend just because she suddenly caught the Bieber fever, but I would certainly not stay quiet about it either.
        So I will continue to complain about DRS and its abuse until it’s solved or down to a level where I can accept it.

      6. Don’t like it? Watch a different series.

        Maybe people are turning off, Global TV figures were down last year & that included country’s where the TV broadcast situation had not changed.

        The US for example, Despite having a USGP the Tv figures nosedived & there was a lot of criticism about the ‘new’ f1 on the speed channel forums.

        In 2011 I would say that fan opinion was split relatively evenly on DRS, However through 2012 there was definitely a shift where it now seems the majority of F1 fans now dislike DRS & especially how its used.

        I know a few people who liked DRS initially but are now firmly against it because they feel like its now having far too big an impact.
        I’ve also seen a lot of criticism in Canada because DRS makes passing far too easy & none of the DRS-ing can actually be seen by any fans because there’s no grandstands down the straght & because of where the DRS zone is there is no longer any racing going on at the hairpin (Where most the fans are) because nobody wants to overtake into the hairpin because the DRS detection is on the exit.

    10. Good bye F1… I was so looking forward to the new 2013 season but now with this i feel the racing will become far too fake.

    11. There are still DRS zones in areas where they’re not needed, for example the endless straights at Shanghai and Yeongam. In those sorts of places DRS is more or less a “free pass” for the trailing driver.

      If we have to have this ridiculous joke of a system in place (rather than, say, doing something about the underlying reasons why F1 cars can’t overtake, such as masses of expensive and unnecessary aerodynamics) then at least the FIA could be sensible about where they put the DRS zones.

    12. I’ve got no problem with two DRS zones in different parts of the circuit. But when they’re next to each other (e.g. at Sepang), why would anyone overtake in the first DRS zone when you know that you’ll be re-overtaken straight away in the DRS zone that immediately follows?

      1. @dave-m In that case you play strategically. Don’t overtake in the first zone, wait until the second one.

        1. . . . so the first DRS zone is pointless, isn’t it?

          1. @timothykatz Not at all. Say you are approaching two cars, you can overtake one in the first DRS zone, and the other in the second.

            1. 2 DRS’s are ok if it gives the guy that has just been past, a chance to pass back.

              but for that they need 2 detection zones. will we have 2?

    13. what i dont like about drs…. teams with already high top speeds get the most gain from the system… ie mclaren and mercedes who often fly past the car infront at 15km/h faster. while teams like redbull with renault engines, the drs doesnt give anywhere near as much advantage, often not even near enough to have let the driver have a “dive down the inside” pass attempt. yes i know there are gearing and aerodynamic issues, but from the past 2 seasons, i have seen mclaren and mercedes drivers not have to worry about outbreaking cars while overtaking, because they are past halfway down the straight……. if the drs was made to only let the driver get close enough, and then still have to battle for the pass, then it would be a fair system. the worst thing when watching f1, with how competitive it is, is to see one car pass another half way down a straight, that does not liven up the show, it makes it more boring, as certain drivers are credited as being better overtakers then others because of nothing but a push of a button.

    14. I fail to see how the pit straight at Singapore is even worthy of a DRS zone. Its not only too short, but the cars cant follow close enough through the last corner to even make use of it.

      I would also argue that the “pit straight” at Interlargos hardly needs DRS as it produces plenty of overtaking into turn 1 anyway.

      1. exactly one of the passes of the season was alonso onto massa and webber at turn 1. with DRS that would of been boring.

    15. No idea why there isnt a 2nd DRS zone at Suzuka, right before 130R. Would be pretty epic and would hopefully lead to more lunges into the chicane if it was just enough to give the car behind a bit of extra speed coming round there.

      1. I was thinking exactly the same thing. Surprised no-one else has raise this point. You could end the DRS zone just after 130R allowing the braver drivers to gain and advantage.

        1. I would say just before as those in anything but something like a Red Bull probably would not be able to use it through there safely, thus giving those that can a slightly unfair advantage.

      2. Not sure it is wise encouraging overtaking on 130R.

      3. Just think about Maldonado and Grosjean side by side in 130R

        1. @tmekt
          The first thing that jumped into my head was this:

    16. I totally disagree with this news because it totally anhialates the fact that drs was banned during qualy in the sectors where it is not permitted So this is basically saying…. that they are going to have 2 sectors where they can use it for qualy! So much for erasing some team´s advantages!
      There is no need for 2 zones in all tracks because the whole idea of the pirelli tyres is to have higher grip… therefore cars can be closer together because of this and will ultimately traduce itself in proper racing so why 2 zones?
      I have my opinion but will not say it so that i don´t create controversy but all in all, this is very sad news for F1…

      1. What the heck are you talking about? There was no restrictions with DRS use in quali last year…

        Some teams got an advantage in quali because their car produced more downforce and they could use DRS in some places that other teams with lower downforce couldn’t. This advantage will go away because they are now restricting the use of DRS in quali also.

        1. @tmekt

          Dude, I think you don´t understand what I mean… 2013 was to see the ban on drs use in qualy. It could be use only in the designated DRS zone… now, with this news of there being 2 DRS zones in every race, it means that teams will be able to use DRS in 2 zones during qualy and THAT is what I´m ticked off about. The idea of eliminating DRS on “safety purposes” was being taken to take away a certain team´s advantage during qualy(we all know that´s the truth in the end really)…. and it´s a crock of **** now that they say every race is going to have 2 zones… kind of destroys the whole purpose around eliminating DRS during qualy except for the designated zone… So much for playing on an even flatter field…. It seems that the lack of pace shown by some in testing has triggered this defense mechanism (even though we can´t surely put our finger on who´s quick or not, the teams certainly know!).

          I hope I made myself clearer this time!

          1. @catracho504

            The idea of eliminating DRS on “safety purposes” was being taken to take away a certain team’s advantage during qualy (we all know that’s the truth in the end really)

            No it wasn’t, that’s just what you wanted it to be.

            1. No it wasn’t, that’s just what you wanted it to be.

              How is that something that I wanted it to be @keithcollantine ???
              It was thouroughly discussed in the forum that everybody felt it was an unfair decision by the fia to do that because of “safety measures”… I believe you even said it yourself that RBR would lose advantage of this because they could exploit their downforce in corners… I might be wrong but I believe you said this too.
              If you want to acuse me of anything… acuse me of wanting an even flatter playing field… and if it meant limiting the amount of drs used in qualy, well so be it… but I honestly don´t feel it was done just on safety purposes… Just like michelin wasn´t allowed to introduce new tyres back in the tyre war days…

          2. @catracho504

            Dude, I think you don´t understand what I mean… 2013 was to see the ban on drs use in qualy. It could be use only in the designated DRS zone… —

            I knew this already thanks. They are restricting DRS in quali for this season. You however said this in your original post:

            I totally disagree with this news because it totally anhialates the fact that drs was banned during qualy in the sectors where it is not permitted

            Incorrect. Teams could previously use DRS unrestrictedly in qualification.

            now, with this news of there being 2 DRS zones in every race, it means that teams will be able to use DRS in 2 zones during qualy and THAT is what I´m ticked off about.

            The idea of eliminating DRS on “safety purposes” was being taken to take away a certain team´s advantage during qualy(we all know that´s the truth in the end really)

            kind of destroys the whole purpose around eliminating DRS during qualy except for the designated zone… So much for playing on an even flatter field….

            Well the purpose was and is to make it safer so that drivers won’t have to look for the boundaries which could potentially lead to dangerous accidents. And that’s still happening.

            What’s also still happening is that the supposed benefit Red Bull could gain and other teams couldn’t will go away. Their car produced more downforce and they could use DRS in some places that other teams with lower downforce couldn’t and because the use of DRS was unrestricted, they were able to benefit from this in qualifications. These places were in corners because on straights every car was able to open their DRS without losing control.

            This advantage (see above) Red Bull had will now be eliminated by the fact that they can now only use DRS in the specified DRS zones in quali.

            1. I totally disagree with this news because it totally anhialates the fact that drs was banned during qualy in the sectors where it is not permitted

              Incorrect. Teams could previously use DRS unrestrictedly in qualification.

              Okay, I see what you mean…. sorry about that. It´s just that sometimes I get all worked up about something and have a hard time transmitting my idea… Sorry for that. All I can say is that the english language is my second language so sorry.

              This advantage (see above) Red Bull had will now be eliminated by the fact that they can now only use DRS in the specified DRS zones in quali.

              I beg to differ… How will it be a disadvantage if they will still be able to use it on the straight right before the 130 R?? Same will apply to any corner in which follows a long straight… That in qualy…. what about in the actual race?? Anybody who isn´t quick enough… (RBR) will be able to further benefit from it…

    17. I wish they’d just drop the zones altogether.

      Give every driver 100 seconds of DRS use to use as he sees fit during the race. The DRS would still add excitement to the ‘show’ and we’d have a fairer system that showcases drivers with strong tactical minds.

      Go for broke in the opening laps or play the long game? Use DRS to defend or save it knowing you can strike back later? Attack the battling pair in front or keep pace while they both use up their allowance?

      Sounds much more fun than motorway passes to me.

      1. Well said! I was just thinking of something similar…

      2. I like that idea. It would be similar to Kers. If the driver is tactical, they gain an advantage. Great thought. :)

      3. I’ve been thinking the same thing for a long time. Don’t some of the lower classes already use this system where you can use DRS only a few times during the race and that’s it?

        1. Yes, Formula Renault 3.5 used this system for their adjustable rear wing last season I believe.

          A1GP also had an allowance-type system where you had just eight KERS-style boosts to use during a race. On-screen graphics covered how many uses each driver had left. It was always exciting seeing a driver with eight following a driver that had blasted through it all in the first few laps!

      4. @bookoi They have an on/off similar idea in IndyCar, and I don’t really think it has a great deal of an impact on the racing for the most part. The problem with that idea, is it will be used then as a tool to defend, which is not the idea of DRS, it’s a tool for attacking. Anyway, from 2014 teams will be able to use ERS (the evolution of KERS) for up to a third or half a lap in some cases.

        1. Last year, Indycar tried to minimize the use of their Push-2-Pass (P2P) system for defensive use by introducing a delay on it. Once you pressed the button, your P2P wouldn’t activate for a few seconds after that. The idea was that if you were the defending driver, and you saw someone coming up quickly behind you, even if you did use the P2P, it wouldn’t activate for a couple seconds, by which time, the attacking driver would be past you already.

          A couple problems with that idea, though. Drivers had to anticipate when the engine would start producing more power in order to get on the button soon enough. And the racing was kinda boring. When they removed the delay, I’d say racing did get better.

          Overall, I think the P2P in Indycar was successful when there were fewer restrictions. Also, it’s more like KERS than it is like DRS.

      5. +1

        Give every driver 100 seconds of DRS use to use as he sees fit during the race


        Use DRS to defend

        I like strikers not defenders :D

    18. Artificial overtaking is here to stay. I suppose it’s a lot simpler than coming up with design rules that make overtaking inherently possible by limiting the amount of dirty air when following a car closely. Booooo-urns.

    19. I quite like that some of the zones are quite short. Might actually produce more “natural” overtakes in some places if DRS only gets you a bit closer instead of the usual motorway overtaking.

    20. Ben (@scuderia29)
      6th March 2013, 15:00

      horrible news

    21. Well, I think some of the criticism is too much. Given that a pit-straight DRS zone only allows for overtaking if it follows another DRS zone (think Circuit Gilles Villeneuve) since a sole pit-straight DRS boost can be countered by KERS, as we have seen in the last two years, we only have a few tracks which actually have two DRS zones: Sepang, Montreal, Silverstone and Abu Dhabi – three tracks that need it, one that doesn’t. Not that bad a ratio I guess.

    22. WilliamB (@william-brierty)
      6th March 2013, 15:12

      Good idea, could be interesting. However I don’t see why there couldn’t be two in Monaco and Suzuka. OK, obviously the tunnel and the straight leading to 130R are unsuitable, but at Monaco what’s wrong with a short DRS zone between the swimming pool chicane and taback? There would be no overtaking there, but it would help cars to stay close to each other through the high speed second half of the lap and potentially put them in a position to overtake on the pit straight. And at Suzuka the concertina effect seen between “Kobayashi corner” and Spoon can be attributed to the shortage of overtakes there, so a DRS zone along the curved straight between those corners would equally aid the chances of overtaking along the pit straight. I think the FIA need to view DRS not simply as tool for blasting past the car ahead, but also a way of keeping the offensive car nailed to the gearbox of the car ahead, thus providing an overtaking opportunity at some of the more “follow-my-lead” tracks.

    23. Don’t allow him to get as close as a sec behind you…
      If you can’t stop that then let him pass, without messing up his strategy!

      1. That’s the worst thing about DRS, the defending driver can’t….defend.
        Some of the most exciting racing happens when the driver in front is slower, but is driving fantastically to keep the faster car behind.
        Racing isn’t all about overtaking. F1 (and a lot of F1 fans) seem to have forgotten that.

    24. People talk about how great DRS is & how much its added to the excitement, Yet how has it?
      All of the DRS passing have been totally boring & unexciting to watch, so in that regard DRS has added nothing to make f1 more exiting, Its actually done the opposite.

      We have seen the past 2 years that all the real overtaking (The exciting stuff) had happened well outside the DRS zone & all the ‘top overtakes of 2011/2012’ were overtakes which had zero to do with DRS.

      By making more DRS zones there simply going to generate more of the boring DRS drive-by’s & less of the real overtaking which is actually exciting to watch.

      Lets for an example take the new Texas circuit there was some brilliant racing into & exiting turn 1, Add a DRS zone on the start/finish straght & all its going to do is ensure passing is completed before the braking zone so were going to lose the sort of good racing we saw into turn 1 last year.

      This may honestly be the final straw for me, I hate DRS & have hated every single DRS-generated pass i’ve had to sit through the past 2 years so having to watch even more boringly easy DRS drive-By’s is just going to see me get less excitement out of the races & that will just see me turn them off!

      Even worse for me is that I won’t even be able to watch Indycar this year with its move to ESPN :(

      1. +1

        F1 is losing its sporting integrity.

    25. I am not the biggest fan of DRS. one DRS zone was okay. It added the needed spice and flavor to the race but I guess 2 will make it very spicy :)

      @keithcollantine I never understood the rationale of taking away the DRS from Qualifying…. Was this done to slow down vettel during qualifying and therefore not running away with pole and the race :) ?

      1. @tmax “apparently” it was on the grounds of safety, as drivers “expressed a concern” over the hazards posed by it. I am yet to buy that excuse though, because it is a driver operated device so therefore any mistakes are driver error.

        I think the true reason for it’s restriction is probably closer to what you have said!

        1. Hmm Safety… That was interesting. I thought Drivers always wanted more speed. Again as you said it is upto the drivers to ensure how safe they operate their machinery.

          On the other hand I think Red bull might have more to lose compared to others with this New DRS qualifying rule.

      2. @tmax Apparently several of the drivers asked for it on safety grounds.

        Mark Webber was among those pushing for the ban and he said recently the drivers were “virtually unanimous” in asking for it. I seem to remember reading an interview with Raikkonen recently where he said he was for it as well.

        Among those who were against it was Lewis Hamilton.

        1. @keithcollantine – I suppose we have to take their word for it, they are the ones driving the cars after all. But I fail to see how it is much more dangerous than having KERS or a throttle pedal in all honesty…

          1. I suppose we have to take their word for it, they are the ones driving the cars after all.

            I guess we have to @vettel1 , @keithcollantine but it seems we can all agree the reason behind it all… eh Keith??

            1. I do find it to be more than just a coincidence though that Hamilton (known to be a good qualifier) objected to the change, unlike Webber for example (who just so happens to be Vettel’s teammate). Again though, we have to take their word for it.

          2. The throttle pedal is actually more dangerous. It should be allowed to be used only uphill.

    26. Looking through some of the locations for the new zones, Why do we need a DRS zone into turn 1 at Austin? There was plenty of great racing & overtaking there last year!

      One down the start/finish straght at Interlagos, Why?

      Do they want every pass to be done via DRS because thsts whats going to end up happening!

      1. Perhaps both of these new DRS zones on start/finish straights have more to do with a possible increase in grandstand costs.
        Is this a method of giving the circuits a bit more earning power?

    27. Unless it is entirely on the ground of safety, I can’t see why Suzuka is thought to only have one DRS zone. From Spoon up to 130R is a straight of more than sufficient length to merit it’s use, and an attempted overtake into 130R would be utterly thrilling to watch! Again though it may be a safety hazard, and so I respect the decision of that is the case.

      1. I thought Alonso did that already to schumi back some time now…

        1. That is very likely @catracho504, but a DRS zone would make that a more frequent sight (and besides, it’s very difficult to overtake into turn 1 at Suzuka so that DRS zone doesn’t have much effect).

    28. Michael Brown (@)
      6th March 2013, 16:43

      Yes, these new rules are making racing a bit more artificial and gimmicky (personally I like the way the tires work), but DRS, while not perfect, is still better than not having it. In the off season I decided to watch the 2000 and 2007 season. I remember falling asleep during Monza 2000 at the beginning and waking up 5 laps from the end with no change, unless it was due to reliability problems. All the cars did was follow each other around until the pit stops, where the car behind would set faster laps to get ahead.

      You can’t argue with a straight face that races without DRS have been more exciting. How do you feel watching a much faster car being unable to pass a slower car? How about when David Coulthard said that you had to be 5 seconds faster to pass in Imola?

      1. You can’t argue with a straight face that races without DRS have been more exciting.

        I think they were.

        I can remember loads of exciting Pre-DRS races & for all the whining about no passing, 2010 featured more on-track overtaking than any season since 1989 so overtaking was clearly possible Pre-DRS.

        Regarding Monza 2000, There was plenty of good racing & overtaking in that race, However remember that a lot of good cars crashed on lap 1 so there wasn’t as much as there likely would have been.

        As I said above, what excitement does DRS provide when every DRS pass is so easy that its boring to watch?
        DRS add’s no excitement, It just produces easy, boring & totally unexciting drive-by highway passes.
        No wonder no DRS pass has appeared on anyone’s top overtakes list the past 2 years.

        All extra DRS zones will do is eliminate the real overtakes & increase the number of boring DRS drive-by’s, That isn’t improving the racing, Its killing the racing!!!!

        1. Spot on.

    29. I am genuinely furious over this, There should be less DRS & not more of it.

      DRS already makes passing far too easy most of the time so having double the DRS zones will only end with more easy passing :(

    30. Some are good additions. That way at least they won’t wait until THAT only zone to make a move.

      Some are not good additions. Having too many DRS zones often produces a sort of waiting game that’s just stupid. I mean, it’s the 2011 Korean GP effect: Webber overtaking Hamilton at the first DRS, Hamilton overtaking Webber in the 2nd (easily).

      I mean, for example Sepang. The 2 DRS zones are almost identical, the only difference is the corner they preceed (first a harpin, then a rather open right hander). What’s the point of overtaking into the harpin if you have an ENORMOUS straight after that, with your rival presumably right up your gearbox and DRS available?

      It’d either be meaningless (one pass after the other). Or they’d have to back out, wait for the harpin and then make a boring, mid-straight pass.

      1. Not to mention that adding more DRS zones they are virtually killing off opportunities for a well-fought DRS-free overtaking spot.

        1. @fer-no65 – I feel it is to make up for the now restricted DRS use in qualifying (to entice the teams to still pay more attention to it) but my response to that is why restrict it in the first place?

          1. @vettel1 I know that, I understand. DRS in qualyfing and practice really seemed like a waste of time.

            I didn’t see the point of it.

            Maybe they are thinking ahead realizing that overtakings will be a lot harder because teams won’t set the cars to maximize DRS use during qualifying. But still… DRS should help drivers at places where overtaking is difficult, not at the most obvious places. The last harpin at Sepang has always been a good overtaking spot…

            1. @fer-no65 – I liked DRS in qualifying, although personally I don’t see the point in it at all! Pirelli’s are more than sufficient in my mind…

    31. I presume this means two detection points per lap as well? Surely?

      Seriously have they confirmed that? If not and the two DRS zones are going to continue to operate from the same detection point I truly despair.

      DRS is increasingly drawing Formula 1 down a very dark path. This kind of gimmickry is the thin end of a very bad wedge. I don’t know if we’ll ever go back to real racing.

    32. drs zones should be EVERYWHERE, like in qualifying

      1. Ben (@scuderia29)
        7th March 2013, 17:33

        but then there is no advantage, and there may as well be no DRS at all

    33. This would definitively kill REAL overtakes. I can’t stand this :(

    34. The news about Circuit Gilles Villeneuve concerns me. I attended the race in 2011 and may be going again this year, and can only hope that the new qualifying rules restricting DRS use mean the teams will use shorter gears that may offset the ease of overtaking as seen in the past. Although i do prefer the final straight/pit straight combination as opposed to the straight to hairpin/final straight combination of 2011

    35. I really dont know if this is going to be a good or bad thing. On one hand it makes getting that 1 second lead absolutely vital so the driver in front will push like crazy, on the other hand it could just lead to stupidity. I dont know about everyone else but I get more of my seat with over taking on corners than straights. That’s when you really get to see the nerve and skill of the driver on display.

      My major concern is if the drivers just give up on attempting any overtaking during corners and just wait for the DRS zones.

      Trying to block a move on straight, you can defend your position once, its near on impossible.

      Some circuits you could definitely justify it for, Circuit de Catalunya springs to mind.

      I still dont know if the reports are true or not. I will wait to hear the official word on it.

    36. Jared H (@thejaredhuang)
      6th March 2013, 19:18

      I think DRS has been a very good addition to the sport. How many times have you seen a driver that has been passed with DRS re-pass the previous driver? Besides the tracks where the DRS zones are in succession (e.g. Abu Dhabi) its quite rare. This just goes to show that the driver that got pass was slower and had they been in a car with less downforce like a touring car they would have been passed anyways.

      By the way, Singapore’s 2nd DRS zone on the pit straight is completely ridiculous like another poster said. It should be on the straight after the hairpin where Massa passed last year after turn 13.

      Suzuka should definitely have a DRS zone leading up to Spoon Curve after the hairpin. The pit straight one is ok although it might be a little short. You can’t put one before 130r because most cars can’t handle going through 130r with DRS open in 7th.

      Pit straight DRS on Spa is pretty much suicide as you’re certainly going to be passed on Kemmel, they should put it after Stavelot but Blanchimont is quite challenging with DRS open.

    37. Maybe you can use DRS anywhere in the race but each driver only gets a certain amount per race? could be quite interesting from a tactics point of view. It wouldnt only need to be used for overtaking, it could be used to close a gap.

      1. @nickthegeek – I could accept that: an almost P2P-like system so that drivers can choose to defend if they so wish. It would eliminate the current unfair advantage gained by the trailing driver.

    38. In which case I will not be watching F1 this year.

      DRS is starting to have far too big an influence on the racing, Watching drivers not wanting to pass into the hairpin at Montreal, Intentionally backing off when they could have pulled off an overtake to make sure they were in the DRS zone down the next straght was a complete joke to watch from the grandstand down there.

      I want to see more Non-DRS overtaking & not more DRS-ing, By adding more DRS zones your just going to get more DRS-ing & less real racing.

      What do they want, For all overtakes to be achieved via DRS?
      For every pass to be so easy its no longer exciting to watch?
      Maybe they just want every pass to be done easily on the straights via DRS to try & prevent drivers actually having to try & pull off a real overtake & risk a collision.

      DRS-ing isn’t racing, It isn’t fun, It isn’t entertaining & I am no longer willing to put up with it!
      Goodby F1, Its been a fun 35yrs but you are now dead to me!!!!

    39. I was open on DRS when it was introduced & quite supportive of it to begin with, However I’ve turned firmly against it over the past year & am gutted about them moving to 2 zones for this year, Especially on tracks that don’t really need any.

      DRS was sold to us as a temporary thing which would only work as an ‘overtaking assist’, We were told that DRS would not generate passes & would only ever work to assist a chasing driver to pull alongside the car he was trying to get by.

      Well 2 years later, No sign of it been temporary, Everything indicates that it will be around long-term & will only get more effective.
      And rather than just be an ‘assist’, It often seems to generate passes & leave the car been passed unable to even attempt to defend.

      I’ve grown real tired the past 2 seasons of watching cars get into the drs zone, push a button & then be driven clean past well before they even think about braking & i’ve grown real tired of DRS been as big an influence on passing as it has become.

      If drs was simply acting as an assist, if the passing it was assisting was still fun to watch & if drs was having a smaller role in the races i would probably still be in support of it, However since the opposite of all is happening i have turned as i say firmly against it.

      Regarding the 2 zones, why do we need 2 zones? If the zone we already have is already too effective on a lot of circuits & if the passing its generating is already too easy, why add a 2nd zone where we will perhaps see more of the same?
      I would rather they look at making drs less effective & less of an influence rather than maybe making it more effective & more of an influence via more zones, especially where not needed.

    40. perhaps they’ve misunderstood and that the drs can be used in 2 zones during practice and qualy but only on 1 drs zone during the race. this would limit drs overtake but still persuade teams to use long gear ratios for best qualy time (like last year).
      how could the fia leak this info anyway?

    41. Well I like the DRS it makes the race a little more interesting when you see the cars getting close enough to use it and passing becomes possible; and sometimes very interesting as with Weber/Ham in Korea in 2011 when KERS/DRS balanced each other out.

      But perhaps Monza/Gilles Villeneuve/Spa just don’t need it & giving a bit of purity back is a good thing.

    42. Chris (@tophercheese21)
      7th March 2013, 2:23

      Wow, 2 zones for every track, sans Monaco and Suzuka. Didn’t expect that tbh.

      I think that’s a little bit of overkill, just to offset the restrictions of it in qualy.

      Wouldn’t it have been better to allow usage of 2 zones in qualifying, and then 1 zone in the race?

      1. @tophercheese21 – I don’t understand why they didn’t do that either: restrictions were placed on DRS usage after parc fermĂ© before anyway. I feel this is just going to make the racing more artificial.

        My question is simply why they didn’t keep DRS in qually for another year and then ban it totally in 2014, hence abiding by the original intention of it’s use.

    43. I prefer keeping DRS, but it should not be used at places or circuits, where overtaking haven’t ever been a problem, for example Spa’s Kemmel straight, Montreal circuit, Main straight of interlagos, Monza also could run without DRS and the longest straight of shanghai (1170 meters long back straight).

    Comments are closed.