Nico Hulkenberg, Force India, Spa-Francorchamps, 2015

F1 could have more powerful DRS in 2017

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: F1’s planned increase in downforce in 2017 could be accompanied by a by powerful version of DRS.

Links

Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

'CFD amnesty' to help F1 revamp plans (Autosport)

Charlie Whiting: "If, as some people think, it may be a little more difficult to follow a car closely then we can increase the authority of the DRS. I don't see a big issue there."

Magnussen approached by other F1 teams (F1i)

"Yes we can say other (F1) teams have reached out, it’s no secret. So I do think I still have a future."

The tangled web behind Red Bull's bid for Mercedes engines (Motorsport)

"There are some very capable people at Renault, but it feels under resourced."

Verstappen, Ferrari rumours continue (ESPN)

"The report suggests Red Bull would switch to Mercedes engines - a partnership F1 chief Bernie Ecclestone is pushing for - while junior team Toro Rosso would return to Ferrari power for the first time since 2013."

Button wants Honda push on power before reliability (Crash)

"I'd rather have more effort on power. I think that's the aim we have right now – the aim is power – that's always been the aim."

Force India up for Lotus fight after losing ground in Belgium (Sky)

"We qualified fifth and we finished fifth. I don't think we quite had the pace of the Lotus, that was very good, and the Red Bull, but we beat Williams and Ferrari fair and square."

IndyCar stars in Golden Gate Bridge tribute to Justin Wilson (BBC via YouTube)

Roland Rat: OWRRAS Summer Spectacular (1985) - near-full episode (YouTube)

Roland Ratzenberger’s 1985 appearance on the Roland Rat television show. Thanks to Chris C for the tip!

Tweets

Comment of the day

Pastor Maldonado, Lotus, Hungaroring, 2015After another driver error-related retirement, will Pastor Maldonado be able to hold onto his seat if Renault takes over Lotus?

I can’t imagine how frustrating it must be to design, build, develop and bring to the grid an F1 car, the result of hundreds of people working flat out, and then have to let Maldonado get in it.
@Lockup

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Jelle Van Der Meer, Metrium, F199Player and Stefano!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Five years ago today Lewis Hamilton won the Belgian Grand Prix:

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 F1 Fanatic round-upTags

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

  • 129 comments on “F1 could have more powerful DRS in 2017”

    1. It’s an interesting question, whether the money which Maldonado brings to Lotus outweighs the money he arguably costs the team in prize money, and certainly costs in crashes. I suspect the former (sponsorship) still exceeds the latter (lost prize money and repair costs) but it’s much closer than it should be.

      In that context, it’s interesting to see reports that (1) a Renault purchase of Lotus is imminent, and may be finalized as early as next week (2) Renault are keen to keep Grosjean, but are negotiating with PDVSA about keeping Maldonado (3) Lotus have told the media that Maldonado’s most recent DNF at Spa was caused by a 17g kerb impact when he ran wide at Eau Rouge.

      It’s unusual for a team to brief the media in such detail about a driver’s mistake. I wonder if there isn’t a strategy to persuade PDVSA to stump up even more cash to keep Maldonado’s seat for 2016, by publicly pointing out another Maldonado error which has yet again cost a potential points finish.

      1. ColdFly F1 (@)
        30th August 2015, 17:49

        @tdog
        On the forum I once ‘calculated’ that it’s likely that the total cost of having Maldonado is higher than the money he brings in.

    2. If it is going to be harder to follow the car ahead (well, it almost certainly will be), then just keep the DRS how it is now or remove it completely. Making it stronger is not what we need. This season, so many overtakes have been far too easy. No one wants to see cars just blasting by on a straight, it’s horrendously boring.

      DRS has given us some good times, but I still believe the bad outweighs the good.

      1. @philereid DRS can be fundamentally improved by switching it up for a time-limited system rather than a location-defined system.

        Now the drivers don’t have KERS on demand anymore, give them some form of tool to effect passes on the cuff.

        1. Pat Ruadh (@fullcoursecaution)
          29th August 2015, 16:39

          Exactly @optimaximal just give them 60 seconds a race or something. Or 10 presses. Put both cars on equal footing and let either driver decide if this is when he wants his extra power. This business of only passing at one place on the circuit is making overtaking monotonous. I’d rather have 10 passes that had to be earned than 100 fly-bys. FOM wants quantity over quality for ‘the show’, which for me has become a euphamism for ‘gimmicks’.

      2. If it is going to be harder to follow the car ahead then they are going completely in the wrong direction with the rule changes.

        1. exactly this @jarooo

        2. Nailed it!

        3. Too right! I was disheartened by Charlie Whiting’s comments about the rule changes, as there was an absence of the suggested return of ground effects (and so potential for close racing). They should be thinking about how they can do away with DRS, not be thinking about making it more powerful!

      3. Agree.
        Currently DRS works well at Hungary, Spain and Monaco.

        But to even consider it for Spa is a travesty!

        Making it more powerfull is beyond comprehension.

        I want the Overtaking Workgroup proposal: ground effect and little wings.

        1. @verstappen If I had my way, I’d either go with a system more similar to FR3.5 in terms of it being timed and then they can also use it where ever they want, or with my other idea, which is to take it off of tracks which are notoriously known to be tracks where overtaking happens. They already have 1 or 2 DRS zones based on the constraints of the track, so why can’t they just call this a constraint of the track.

          I did have another idea for DRS which was to literally flip where DRS can be used right now. Instead of being able to use it on the best overtaking places, the drivers would have the use of it everywhere else (with some restrictions). For example Spa, it would be available out of Les Combes, out of Rivage (even if only a small amount), the run down to Pouhon, the run out of Pouhon, the run of of the Fagnes chicane and also they could keep the one on the start finish straight, all areas where the straight isn’t really long enough to make it a ridiculously easy overtake. My only other suggestion, albeit slightly odd, would to be to only allow DRS if you are between 0.5-1 seconds behind. Too far behind, I think, to make it an easy overtake, but close enough that it isn’t completely useless.

          1. ^^^ some very good suggestions actually, it’s a rare thing out here

          2. The DRS should be able to open up in steps and should be limited at how far it can open up at certain places.

            Examples ; in China it’s fine to open up 100%, but Barcelona and Spa it should only open up somewhere between 30/60%.

        2. Are we still having wider cars? Hope I can see more beautiful machines!

          But I can’t understand why Whiting wants to continue with complex wings. I think the standardized floor concept of Force India was a better option, or at least have more aggressive ground effects than the one suggested by Whiting.

          Hope his plans never come to fruition. And to allow DRS to continue – it is the BIGGEST GIMMICK of all

      4. There shouldn’t even be DRS. The aerodynamic regulations need to be changed, so that cars can slipstream each other again, but of course, in order to do that, they need to be more difficult to drive.

        1. Exactly! The wings should be made simpler, and the increased width of the chassis plus the tyres along with some ground effect should provide more grip. I just can’t understand how Whiting has no problem with gimmicks such as DRS. And to keep front wings complex? As I said, I hope his plans never ever see the light of day. The ground effects and narrower wings is the way to go.

          1. Will they never get it? Stupid expensive ugly front wings and stronger DRS. Spa was totally ruined this year by DRS so brilliant idea to make it stronger
            .

    3. More DRS… That is all I need to read. :(

      1. @calum F1 is really good at listening. The name F1 really applies.

        1. In yesterdays round-up: CFN Amnesty is going to be involved

          In todays round-up: DRS more powerful, I don’t see the issue.

          @calum If that is the first thing they are shouting I can’t wait what else they have in mind. I hope everyone is ready for reverse grids, triple races and double points if the dice goes above 3.

      2. knoxploration
        29th August 2015, 7:22

        Yet more proof (as if we needed it) that F1 is run by complete morons with a fundamental inability to listen or follow even basic logic.

        DRS is one of the reasons I have now completely stopped watching races for the second year running after watching only a handful of farcical pseudo-races at the start of the season. I glance at F1 news once or twice a week to confirm it’s all going exactly as expected, and that’s the sum total of my involvement in what was, before last year, a quarter-century long passion for me.

        1. Hope you checked out the race in Hungary. If not you missed a treat

      3. I’m not even joking. If DRS becomes more powerful i’m leaving the sport and never coming back.

      4. I can not believe Charlie and the rest of the F1 brass can be that tone deaf. They really couldn’t care less what we’re saying as fans.

    4. So for all of us who foolishly thought DRS could disappear with the upcoming rules tweaks, now we realize it will be powered up!
      I guess the 30 min I spent on carefully answering the GPDA survey are not worth a nickle.

      1. The purpose of the survey was not to get some sort of insight that the FIA is incapable of, the purpose was to engage fans.

        It worked, U felt heard. You were never going to be Listened to though.

        Pretty much the point of surveys.

      2. @omarr-pepper, or you could read the article instead of falling for the easiest click bait trick in the world!

        1. I read the article. The comment is still valid. Some of us saw the rule change as an opportunity to rid F1 of the most stupid thing ever to be introduced but our hopes seem to have been dashed.

          They should be making rule changes that remove the need for even considering anything as stupid as DRS. That should be the main drive, not something to tweak afterwards.

          1. I maintain that double points was the stupidest thing F1’s rule makers have ever done!

            1. Double points was only there for 1 race, DRS has been with us for multiple seasons & had ruined multiple races.

              Since DRS has had a longer, more far reaching affect on things (Double points ended up not really affecting anything) I’d put that above double points in ‘most stupid’ list.

          2. @john-h Couldn’t have said it better.

    5. While I’m tempted to rant about how a ‘more powerful DRS’ is the opposite of what I want, by all means it seems that Whiting is merely pondering it during the interview, as opposed to many other things he’s describing that are in the works.

      I find it odd he’s talking about bringing the beam wing back, but then I remember this is a person that’s high up in the FIA. Brining back banned things, or banning things that were brought back seem to be their speciality since the early 00s (just look at Traction Control).

    6. rofl @lockup great COTD…

      1. @lockup made me chuckle. But than again Maldonado is literally paying for the wreckage via PDVSA so…….

        I won’t be surprised if Renault retains him should they aquire Lotus.

      2. Cracked me up as well.

        I’m waiting for the day someone for the Lotus team punches Pastor in the face when he returns to the garage after yet another crash..

    7. Ladies and gentlemen please ignore the leading story of this weekly round up.

      It’s a click bait/misleading title by @keithcollantine to drive clicks and comments.

      DRS isn’t mentioned until the very end of the article. And it’s mentioned with a big “IF”. Almost as an afterthought comment by Whiting.

      We all know how divisive it is. There more important facts in that article regarding technical regulations. There are other more important stories within the round up articles. For example, Renault acquisition of Lotus could be finalized next week. I wonder why Keith would lead with DRS ; ) …???

      Call me cynical.

      1. The title of the link is

        ‘CFD amnesty’ to help F1 revamp plans (Autosport)

        As you can see, no mention of DRS. And the quote below it is lifted directly from the article linked to. If you really think that’s clickbait, then I think you need to get a new dictionary.

        1. @raceprouk

          “F1 could have more powerful DRS in 2017”

          Nice try but it doesn’t get more obvious than that.

          1. That isn’t clickbait; it’s not even close. If it was clickbait, then it wouldn’t be backed by an Autosport article.

            Or are you saying Autosport are being sensationalist?

          2. I’d also like to point out you’re the only person who thinks it’s clickbait; are you really going to claim you know better than everyone else? Because that ain’t cool.

            1. @raceprouk, Not my fault you allow yourself to be played like that.

              It’s sad but your frustration/anger are miss directed. As loyal audience of this website, you should demand more respect and integrity. This is borderline Tabloid techniques. Why do you think Autosport didn’t use ”DRS Could be more Powerful in 2017.” Then conveniently quote the final two sentences that don’t really support the misleading title. It’s all about context.

              It’s a shame if tricks like that have to be used to drive traffic. This is suppose to be a respectable website. I would dismiss it if I had seen this on planetf1, but not f1fanatic.

            2. To be honest, I think that Guy does have a point. Using the line “F1 could have more powerful DRS in 2017” as the header for this round-up, when all that Whiting is doing is making a throw away remark, does indeed feel like the intention was to drum up more attention and push more people to post – just look at the number of people who have already rushed to write complaints about DRS.

              I am also hardly surprised that Keith chose to use a quote about Maldonado in the round up. Again, that has the hallmark of a cheap shot against a figure that Keith knows most people here like to mock, and therefore another item likely to generate traffic from those rushing to give Maldonado a kicking.

      2. @sudd, I don’t agree it’s click bait. You are right that it’s only mentioned in the last sentence of the article, almost as an afterthought, but that makes it all the more scary. It suggests that Whiting has no qualms to resort to gimmicks if the ‘overtaking goals’ are not met.

        It’s like telling your wife “Well, if setting up my own business doesn’t work out, we can always sell the house”. Not exactly reassuring.

        1. @adrianmorse, I respect your opinion to view it that way, but the article is about teams being concerned about getting their cars finalize in time because CFD work is limited by regulations, so teams have been given amnesty.

          The other popular talking point is referring to DRS as a gimmick because it assists the driver. If DRS is a gimmick, what does that make ABS, Track Control, Tire Warmers, Power Steering, Adjustable Diff Settings, Brake Bias adjustments. These are all function’s the driver could do manually(all natural without assistance). Yet I don’t hear anyone complaining about them or calling them gimmicks. They are all technological advancements developed over the years. Demanding that F1 cars of today resemble their 70s, 80s, 90s, or even early 00s counterparts if futile. This is a sports driven by technological and it never stays stagnant.

          1. It’s because the car behind is given an artificial advantage over the car in front. Is it really that hard to understand why it’s different to the things mentioned in your list?

            DRS has nothing to do with technological progress, unless you think servos are new technology.

        2. @adrianmorse – “I don’t agree it’s click bait.”

          Right. As a web developer and consultant my idea of clickbait would not be to send the viewer away from your own website to an article on another unaffiliated website.

          1. @bullmello

            You’ve just described exactly what happened here. The ‘clickbait’ headline on the home page leads directly to this roundup (including this comments section).

            Upon closer inspection the article isn’t much to worry about, but I’m here now, on this page (as are you and all of those posting comments above and below us), having scrolled past those (clickbait) ads, engaging in a discussion about something we don’t need to be discussing.

            1. @sparkyamg your comment reminds me of what happen in early http://www.theverge.com comment section. They always had lively argument from Androidism vs Appleboys vs MS-tribe. Soon it’s became hostile environment that the site finally decided to disable comment.
              I hope f1fanatic never going to take that path…

          2. @@bullmello, I think you’re getting caught up on semantics or too busy trying to find a way to make Keith look faultless.

            What made you open the link to see all the Round-Up Articles?

            Answer, it was the headling “DRS Could be More Powerful in 2017.” That’s what made me open the link just like everyone else. I then opened the 2nd link and read the full article from Autosport, only to realize how manipulative the title and Keith’s out of context quote were. Which he conveniently made available to read without going to Autosport.

            It doesn’t have to send you to a third party to be click bait or manipulative tactics to drive traffic.

            1. @sudd – “What made you open the link to see all the Round-Up Articles?”

              I read it pretty much every day regardless of the headline because I enjoy the content, features and reporting on this website. If I didn’t, I wouldn’t be here.

              Rather than appearing to have a vendetta against any website or journalist on the internet, I would channel that negative energy, anger and frustration into a positive, creative experience and build a better website. I would be glad to check it out when you do.

        3. @anon, Thank You! This man gets it!

          “…when all that Whiting is doing is making a throw away remark, does indeed feel like the intention was to drum up more attention and push more people to post – just look at the number of people who have already rushed to write complaints about DRS.”

          1. @bullmello, You can’t even answer a simple question truthfully. The question is what made you decide to open the link from the homepage to this comment section? Not why do you visit this website?

            “What made you open the link to see all the Round-Up Articles?”

            I read it pretty much every day regardless of the headline because I enjoy the content, features and reporting on this website. If I didn’t, I wouldn’t be here.

            1. So you call @bullmello a liar, then give exactly the same reason he does. Surely you see how that undermines your argument?

            2. @sudd How is that untrue? It tells you that @bullmello reads every round-up no matter the headline (like I do), so if the headline is clickbait or not it doesn’t make any difference to him, to me and probably most active users here.

              As to why I’m engaging in this comment section (and others in the thread specifically), well, let’s say that’s because you made a ‘responsebait’ post ;)

      3. @sudd – To be fair, you may not realize that most items in the article have been discussed previously. The item not previously known was the possible more DRS mention.

        Sad to say it comes across as though you may have some kind of grudge going on. Going through life angry and bitter is not healthy. Hope you feel better soon. Peace, out.

        1. @bullmello, I’m angry and bitter for pointing out that readers are being treated like pawns that can be easy manipulated for personal gain? Yeah… probably best you drop off your jabs and scurry along since that is all you’re interested in. “Peace, out.”

          It’s not like I’m making this up. Read the comments. Some already fell for it and went down the typical DRS bashing path.

          If I hadn’t said anything, The comments would have just snowballed and this whole thing would turn into a DRS, Pirelli, “gimmich” bash session just as Keith intended by making this about DRS with a misleading headlight and pulling quotes out of context from their original article.

          I know people are always resistant when the norm is challenged. But I guess taking your medicine is never a pleasant thing.

          1. No quote has been taken out of context. Now how about redirecting your energies to something more productive than making baseless accusations?

          2. What’s your problem? As I mention above, the 2017 rule changes should be driven by removing the need for giving the car behind having a rotating flap to catch up as a counter to dirty air affecting aero through corners.

            That’s why wider cars, more mechanical grip, etc… gave some of us hope, but it seems actually the problem may get worse. I think that’s also the point of the headline, showing what’s on the minds of those in charge.

            I’m afraid us DRS haters aren’t going anywhere, and should keep speaking out whenever we can or else just give up. I suppose you’d rather we would, sorry.

            1. “I’m afraid us DRS haters aren’t going anywhere”

              @@john-h, there in lies your problem. Do you really think F1 is going to please people like you? Get with the times or stop watching. Those are your only two options. So go ahead with your futile complaints that the sport is being ruined.

              It’s not just F1 that is adopting DRS. Everywhere you turn in motorsports you’ll find cars running some type of drag reduction system. BTW, in case you missed it: Every car on the grid has a DRS system. You have to be within 1 second for it to activate. There is nothing unfair about it. You feel like you just been passed unfairly? Well just stay within a second and you can have your spot back.

              If you can’t even attempt a counter pass, then I could care less you were passed via DRS. You were just a moving chicane as far as I’m concerned.

              Gone are conventional styles of combustion engines. We have “Power Units” now. And they are amazing! So go ahead with your crusade of riding the sport of “gimmicks.” I wonder who will still be around in 10,20,50 years from now.

              Fans like you have been screaming the sky is falling for decades. I just checked, its still up there.

            2. @sudd Thank you for showing us your true colors. The ammount of baseless assumptions you make of people here staggering. From your second to last paragraph you seem to think that people who dislike DRS also hate the new engines by default, because… reasons…?

              Just because other series have been adopting DRS does not mean it’s a good thing. I don’t follow FR3.5 or GP2 but from what I’ve heard over the years those series never had an overtaking problem. They did it solely because F1 had it and they are F1 feeder series.

              Your argument that every F1 car has a DRS (memo: the S in it means system, no need to say “DRS system”) so there is nothing unfair about it is just awful. It wouldn’t have been an unfair system if the drivers could activate it anywhere, anytime for a limited number of times during a race, however in this current system of zones and time gaps, it is unfair, no question about it. It’s honestly amazing that people even have to spell that out for you. Whatever happened to the skill of defensive driving or even aggresive strategies by slower cars? It’s almost all gone, thanks to the power of the great field equalizer that is DRS.

              “Get with the times or stop watching. Those are your only two options.” No. Just no. The fans are the lifeblood of any sport. If we don’t like where things are going, then we absolutely should complain and vote with our wallets.

            3. Gone are conventional styles of combustion engines. We have “Power Units” now. And they are amazing! So go ahead with your crusade of riding the sport of “gimmicks.” I wonder who will still be around in 10,20,50 years from now.

              But I love the V6 hybrids @sudd. I really don’t know what you’re going on about anymore, sorry that’s me done.

          3. @sudd You seem to have a particularly low opinion of the F1F readers, as well as of Keith’s hard work.
            It was entirely justified to mention DRS, as we all know that without ground effects and the pushing to maintain aero, they will end up with an easy DRS upgrade “for the sow”.
            From time to time a comment like this pops, and I never found it justified. For sure, there are ways to attract readers’ attention, but it’s part of the game and it has never been anything like a clickbait.
            Unneeded bitterness in your comment, really.

            1. @spoutnik, No bitterness. Just can’t stand people trying to bring my favorite sport down. If you don’t like it, there’s the door.

              Sadly for you, Power units, DRS, energy recovery systems, insane levels of downforce have already proliferated into every form of motorsports you can think of. Ya’ll are fighting a losing battle.

              It’s amazing how well you guys think you know me. I had no I idea I was angry and bitter. Thanks for pointing that out to me.

            2. Part of being a fan is being critical of the mistakes made and the poor decisions taken. And telling people to go away if they don’t like something merely paints you as a fanboy, and undermines your whole argument.

            3. @sudd Wow, I just didn’t know that! Thanks, and glad I could help. Have a good afternoon.

      4. @sudd Ok you’re cynical.

        Firstly, Keith has merely pointed out a fact. DRS could be made more powerful for 2017. It is also a fact that Keith is not a fan of DRS and he knows his audience are for the majority against it too. And this site is his to do with as he pleases. If you don’t like it, there’s the door.

        Secondly, what you seem to be failing to get is that the majority of us who can’t stand how badly DRS ruins the integrity of F1 feel that DRS itself runs down ‘your’ sport. We’re fighting to achieve a better product on the track than we get with fake passes. All technology, just because they can use it and/or are using it, does not by default mean it is right, that everyone should just be a sheep and accept it, and there’s no turning back.

        1. Well, I guess this means you guys are defeated if all you can do is make character attacks and claim to be offended for the lamest things.

          Public service announcement:

          Next GP is Monza, if you don’t like DRS, drivers having to look after their tires and brakes, do yourself a favor and don’t watch that race. In fact, you can skip Singapore as well.

          Now that I think about it, you should stop watching the whole series. Man, what are you guys going to do if Pirelli get’s the contract as sole tire supplier again? Heads will explode.

          I know you doom and gloom brigade like to think the sport is in misery because you personally are. It’s actually alive and well. The European races are very successful when promoters do their jobs instead of trying to get rich off the fans(see Silverstone). Emerging markets are embracing the sport. The US market is growing thanks to COTA and now HAAS is coming to the grid. The technology has never been more impressive. The racing has never been better. But…but…but DRS and Pirelli tires have ruined the sport. Yeah right, only for you. The hatred of DRS and Pirelli tires have probably made some people more avid fans of the sport. Kind of like fans that claim to not like Hamilton for X reason but follow every news article about him and his personal life than his actual fans.

          Good day chaps! I wish you the best in your crusade to rid F1 of gimmicks and make the cars and racing look like it came out of the 1991! I’ll my hat if you become successful in this endeavor.

          1. Oh, you’re one of those @sudd You started this by attacking Keith’s character and that of his readers, and now have tried to turn it around that we’re attacking you.

            What a sour attitude you have. There’s a difference between the constructive and intelligent banter on this site and the inaccuracies, assumptions, and personal opinions you spew. You are a drama queen, trying to sell F1 today as the best racing ever, when millions upon millions who have watched longer than you, are all on the same page. You’re not selling anybody. I will always love F1 for many reasons, many intangible, even if I dislike some aspects of it currently. Change is a constant in F1 and life, and I’m a hopeful guy.

            You must be @sadd Guy, reading so many of us wanting a better product, including those very ones within F1, such that changes are now all that is being talked about. They’ve already started things in motion to change the F1 you so love. Maybe you should ask yourself why, before you continue your over-the-top condemnation of so many people for merely trying to see that you have a better product to watch too. One that you must simply be unable to grasp right now.

            For now I’ll continue to watch thank you very much, for my own reasons, with hope that F1 will not need to include more powerful DRS once they are actually testing the 2017 cars in anger and starting to see what they have on their hands. They didn’t exactly know with the most recent sweeping changes of 2 years ago now did they. Oops…asking the wrong guy. The one guy who thinks they got it perfect, temporarily. So perfect it’s being changed.

            1. @robbie,

              English was not my first or second language. I take it is not your first either? I’m not saying that to be rude, it’s just I can sort of tell by your writing.

              I would respond to all you have said, but I feel it would be a waste of time as you won’t comprehend or will misunderstand what I have to say since you seem to have a jaded view of who I am. It’s funny because you seem to want to ask me questions, but you seem all too eager to answer/fill in the blanks those for me.

              If you’ve read anything I’ve written so far you would have known I’m all for change. But then again you should be forgiven as you have demonstrated that reading comprehension is not your strong suit.

            2. @sudd Ah ok that explains it. English is not your first language so you’ve misunderstood Keith, and those of us concerned about the integrity of the sport. And you claim to be all for change while spending this whole topic griping about us wanting change, especially the removal of DRS. So you’re all for change yet to you the racing today doesn’t get any better and we all better get used to it. Or stop watching. Because your’s is the power to decide for people. It makes sense now. Something has been lost in the translation.

      5. @sudd If the title mentions something mentioned in an article, even at the end of it, then it’s not that misleading.And @keithcollantine isn’t my master. (The word “could” on his round-up title though…may be a bit misleading – doesn’t suddenly mean intentinal clickbaiting though)

        , I’m angry and bitter for pointing out that readers are being treated like pawns that can be easy manipulated for personal gain?

        You better not be on Windows or OS X (which if you’re nopt….well that would just be a good thing, that’s all)

        It’s not like I’m making this up. Read the comments. Some already fell for it and went down the typical DRS bashing path.

        Clickbait that doesn’t attract people to the source……OK, I actually do see what you’re on there (really, I do). Don’t see the reason for the @keithcollantine bashing of your comment though – I’d be more polite than that myself. And why so quickly judge defensive comments as “defending your master”?

        I don’t think you’re that big on politeness (then again maybe you are – but you didn’t show it), but assuming a clickbait was intentional and that a blogger was bad for an appearance of it rather than a less “offensive” (I know there’s a better word for it than that…) pointing out of how an article may possibly be clickbait….I might as well assume you’re a troll before reaslising…wait, you’ve got a wee bit of a point!

        And seriously, stop making so many clickbait comments yourself! :P

        1. @davidnotcoulthard, you don’t exist to me. So you should probably ignore what I have to say as well : )

          1. @sudd But you exist to me, why woulkd Im ignore you.

            On theother hand, if I don’t exist to you, why a reply (=de facto recognition of my existance)? :)

      6. ColdFly F1 (@)
        30th August 2015, 18:21

        @sudd – I won’t call you cynical, but I do call you ‘wrong’.
        Firstly (and most importantly). You might have missed it, but this is the round-up part where Keith provides us links to interesting articles of the past 24 hours. The whole purpose of this part of the site is that you click on those articles, and comment if you think you have something interesting to say.
        Secondly. To me the most interesting part of the whole article was the DRS comment by Whiting. I was expecting the opposite in 2017, and am both surprised and disappointed that the guys in charge have a different opinion. I’m grateful to Keith that he pointed it out to me that this was being mentioned in the article.

    8. Do they actually listen to a word the fans say? Fix the root of the problem, don’t keep applying plasters. The wall will eventually fall if the cracks aren’t repaired.

      1. I’m quite happy for Mercedes to have a 1s advantage, as long as the others have opportunity under the technical regulations and budgetary constraints to catch up.

        Unfortunately, that doesn’t appear to be a priority of the governing bodies: they are more concerned with gimmicks.

        1. So true.

        2. @vettel1,

          FALSE! Everyone has the same rule book and the same time to built their cars every year.

          Stop blaming regulations for Honda’s, Renault and Ferraris failures.

          Its not like there is one rulebook for Mercedes and another for everyone else.

          Ferrari isn’t complaining about regulations. They stopped development of last year’s car very early so they can focus on the 2015 car. If they did the same for this year, their 2016 car will be even stronger.

          If you and your classmates take an exam, you don’t get to request more time just for you or request to take the same exact exam again because you failed the first time. All you can do is study harder for the next exam just like everyone else. If you fail that exam again, well just study harder cause the teacher ain’t going to make special exceptions for you.

          1. You clearly didn’t read my comment @sudd: I expressly said “catch up”. Nobody is on the defense of other manufacturers: I have simply stated that I would prefer more open regulations to aid development, as it is stunted by the current regulations.

            Your class test analogy is also flawed in that the regulations can often remain unchanged over periods of several years, and if they curtail attempts to recoup a performance deficit then that is a problem for sporting balance. You are forgetting that F1 is a form of entertainment.

            There should be opportunities to develop areas which are a suited to a team’s expertise – underfloor aerodynamics for Red Bull and powertrains for Mercedes for example – within budgetary restrictions. That would improve competition over the current approach which favours those with large R&D budgets.

            1. @vettel1,

              All I’m hearing is blah, blah, blah…Red Bull, Ferrari, and Renault are not being given the opportunity to develop.

              Blaming the rules of the game and others for your failings are signs of a defeated competitor.

              Once upon a time there was a team called Ferrari that went around buying its championships with its wallet. Not saying they didn’t have brilliant minds at Ferrari, but that bottomless budget meant they could test 24/7, prototype any part they want and R&D like mad.

              The current formula is great because its about brilliant minds, not your bankroll. Anyone who can’t come to grips with that fact will have a hard time enjoying F1.

              There is no mystery about what Mercedes is doing to make their cars perform so well. We know about the split turbo. The hard part for rival teams is trying to duplicate or come up with something even better. Lotus already copied Mercs front nose design. I’m sure in a few years we will have power unit parity. The problem is people want Honda and Renault to match the performance of Mercedes yesterday! These things take time. Complaining about about regulations and beating on your engine supplier, a la Red Bull or being to rigid and refusing to hire/poach outside talent because it does not match your “culture,” a la Honda will only prolong their path making fast competitive cars.

            2. You cannot seriously argue that the rules are not restrictive and hand the advantage to manufacturer teams.

            3. @vettel1, These 3 are all manufacturers:

              -Renault
              -Ferrari
              -Honda

            4. Yes @mega, and Ferrari and Mercedes are 1-2 in the championship.

    9. I really hope K-Mag does get a seat next year. In many ways he might have been lucky not to be driving this years McHonda – for the obvious performance reasons, but also I can’t imaging he’d have had much of a chance to prove himself at the back against Alonso

      1. @fletchuk Anyone but Button. Jenson in the few races that the McHonda has run okay, has been really lackluster, in short the pre-2010 Jenson.

        1. Or 2012 season Button

    10. Magnussen seems to be a in very unenviable position… there’s Alonso, who’s obviously staying. Button is good enough to stay. Vandoorne is far, far too good to not have a race seat somewhere next year and I think McLaren would pick him ahead of K-Mag.

      And the midfield teams, once a haven for drivers ditched from top teams, can’t afford to take drivers without a big pile of money.

      Would love to see him given another shot and I think he deserves it, but I can’t honestly see it happening.

    11. I hope 2017 doesn’t becomea missed opportunity. Hearing rumours of ground-effect and minimal wings, wider tyres giving more slipstream effect, I really hoped we might see the end of pass flaps. Faster cars weren’t a priority for me, unless they used the rule revamp to fix other problems. Charlie’s throwaway comment at the end of that article makes it sound like they don’t really care, and haven’t listened to us at all.

      1. I think they only listen to the sponsors and the guys running the TV cameras. The commentators are there to sell you on the product. At least WEC is on this weekend, despite the fact that VAG seems to be running away with the show.

        1. @pcxmerc, considering that the voice of the fan base is often so contradictory, it is often hard to tell what they want.

          You have those who want the sport to be cutting edge and to advance new technologies, and others who want to reject much of the modern technology introduced onto the cars. There are those who demand more freedom for the engineers, and those who want to reduce the performance differentials to place more emphasis on the drivers instead of the designers. Some want the FIA to continue pressing on with further safety reforms, whilst others complain that the sport has become too ‘sanitised’ by safety reforms and want the drivers to be heroes that dice with death.
          The arguments over the new engine format is one good example of that – the polls have shown that, whilst there seems to be a majority of fans in support of the idea, there is still a sizeable minority who reject the idea and demand a return to the V8 engines, or to even older engine formats such as the V10 engines.

          As an aside about the WEC, expect the VW Group to continue running the show for the rest of 2015 at least. Toyota announced that they’d aborted development of the TS040 back in June and have written off the rest of the 2015 season – they decided that the large performance gap meant that there was no point in trying to catch them, especially given the limitations on development.

          1. that’s the real problem, F1 pretends to be something it’s not, it’s not about technical innovation, it’s about pandering to people who need to be told what they want.

            1. Of course, those same people will then complain that they were not listened to when the sport tries to dictate a particular direction to go in.

        2. You are the product, advertisers are the customer.

      2. @splittimes – Funny, most of the things in the article they have already been discussing, except for the DRS comment. But they just keep talking and talking, and some possible ideas sure seem to be at cross purposes. Nothing seems decided yet and even the timeline they vaguely mention gives teams and suppliers perilously little time to actually plan, design, build, test and actually manufacture everything required. Doesn’t it seem like such major regulation changes should be made at least two years in advance of the season they are implemented in?

    12. What’s not worth a nickel anymore is anything the Christian Horner has to say about Renault and/or anything for that matter. Could someone be more whingey and annoying? They say the measure of a man is not when things are going well but how they are when things aren’t. Well, enough said…

      1. The only thing not worth a nickel is comments made by people everytime Christian Horner opens his mouth. Lets say you build a team from a mid pack runner to a dominating force over a period of 8 years, only to have that taken away from you by a supplier that seemingly doesn’t know whether they want to stay or go or buy another team or really make any decisions, I know that I would be critical of the supplier. (I’ll take the opportunity to counter your ‘but Red Bull made them make changes’ argument, by saying this, Renault Sport F1 are a company all to themselves, if they can’t control their clients then that lays on their head. They should be confident enough in their business that they can listen to Red Bulls ideas without having to change their own business strategies.) All Mr Horner has said here is that he feels that Renault Sport F1 is under resourced… that’s probably a fairly true statement, when comparing them to Mercedes, though I really don’t know as I don’t have any dealings with Renault Sport F1… Mr Horner however, does, so I find that quite interesting.

        1. … still whingey and annoying.

          1. Nope, astute.

    13. My god this is terrible. They know airflow is screwing up the racing, but they refuse to get rid of the airplane wings. There is no hope. I could go on, but the dog refuses to quit chasing its tail. I won’t quit following F1 cause it’s still racing, but it’s still piss poor racing. It’s not a matter of following the series, it’s a matter of watching it flounder into the ground. Just cause it’s entertaining to watch the patients run the insane asylum, that doesn’t mean it’s entertaining to watch the horror the patients are producing.

      1. Well, I don’t see aerodynamics leaving modern motorsport for a long time. But there are issues with how they react to dirty air, but either the FIA or the teams don’t want a change because money probably.

    14. Fans – “Get Back ground effect, normal tyres and remove DRS!”
      FIA – “Get Back ground effect, evaluate tyre supplier and make an even stronger DRS!!!”

    15. Re. Maldonado… my 6 year old daughter asked me yesterday how many days she had been alive for, so I started typing into Google, “how many days since” (intending to end the question with her date of birth) and the 3rd suggestion in the list before I could finish typing was, “how many days since Maldonado crashed”.

      lol.

      I think he faces a struggle tbh, his reputation as crash happy just isn’t going to go away.

      1. @bad_whippet, I agree that, now he has been labelled as crash prone, people will automatically write him off irrespective of whether or not he is at fault or whether the complaints are even warranted. You didn’t see anything like the volume of jokes and complaints about Sutil in 2014, even though he actually crashed more often due to driver error than Maldonado did; Perez also had some notable crashes (such as with Massa in Canada or Sutil in Austin) and, although there were some detractors, the criticism was nevertheless somewhat muted.

        As an illustration of how difficult it can be to shift perceptions, there are still people here who characterise Grosjean as crash prone, even though he has been one of the cleaner drivers in the sport in the past couple of years.

        1. We ll said, @anon

          Maldonado is a very talented driver but most people just seem to hate him for some reason.

      2. Could be that Google knows what your doing. Very funny or otherwise very scary.

      3. Oops, nope I Googled it. Perhaps you have hit that link before. I’ve seen the site but Google didn’t produce that. What that means is, you Google Maldonado alot lollll

      4. If you search that the first result is

        1. I don’t have a single clue how to link stuff on this site: http://hasmaldonadocrashedtoday.com/

    16. If Renault do buy Lotus… I can see them keeping Grosjean – but Maldonado? If the guy was going to cut out these silly errors and shake loose his crash-prone nature he would have done it by now. There’s better drivers out there.

    17. If I was in charge of Renault Sport, and if I was going to purchase the Lotus F1 Team, then I would keep Grosjean in the team as he is a solid driver, but I would kick Maldonado out of the team. He is the worst driver on the current grid, and quite possibly one of the worst drivers in Formula 1 history (definitely the worst F1 driver of all time to win a race). He does bring his PDVSA sponsorship, but Renault does not need Maldonado’s PDVSA money because Renault is doing very well money-wise. I see a lot of Renault cars on the road, so the company must be making a profit.

    18. I think Pastor Maldonado, whilst quick, I don’t think he’ll be kept by Renault. This is both because Renault won’t need his money and would want to be fighting for titles- and therefore need 2 cars finishing the races rather than 1, as well as the situation in Venezuela.
      Venezuela’s government is on the brink of collapse, the country is facing famine and major inflation and the collapse in oil prices is hitting them hard. I imagine PDVSA must be running into financial difficulties therefore I wonder how long the Venezuelan government will last and hence the cash support they give Maldonado – who is also a socialist and supporter of Venezuela’s government.

      I would like Renault to sign Vergne – a) he’s French hence would fit in and they could make Renault a properly French team – perhaps putting pressure on Paul Ricard or Magny Cours and Ecclestone to revive French GP which would be good, but seeing as Vergne is a Ferrari test driver I’m not entirely sure whether he’ll be taken by Renault. Similar situation with Belgian Vandoorne being a McLaren tester hence unlikely he’d make a diversion away from McLaren to Renault.

      I’d like to see Jolyon Palmer get the drive instead, although a dark horse could be Rio Haryanto. I think I heard somewhere he’s got funding from Indonesia gvt to get a drive next year so could be on the grid- obviously brings money but I don’t know what he’s been like in GP2 so I don’t know if he’d be another Maldonado or Perez?

      1. @chr1s – I’d love to see JEV as a driver for a Renault team or back in F1 period. I think he is much more qualified than at least a few of the drivers on the grid currently.

    19. In terms of 2017 I can honestly say that if they keep DRS & certainly if they make it more powerful I’m not sure I will continue watching. Since 2011 DRS & to a lesser extent the High-deg tyres have really hurt my love/passion for F1 because I simply do not find those easier highway passes interesting to watch let alone exciting. I used to love watching those great battles with 1 driver defending & the driver behind having to really fight to find a way past with any overtake been a truly exciting moment.

      Sure since 2011 there has still been some of these moments but they have been overshadowed by the hundreds of ridiculously easy DRS/Tyre-deg led passes where 1 driver has been defenseless against the car thats cruised past him with ease. Look at Spa last weekend as an example, There was 1-2 good overtakes by Verstappen & Kvyat but the other 95%+ of the passes were far too easy & utterly uninteresting to watch to the point where my interest in that race became virtually non-existent.

      2017 should be an opportunity to put together a rule set that does what the GPDA survey said, Improve the racing without gimmicks & if they continue to rely on gimmicks & even make the gimmicks we already have more powerful than they have failed in what was a good opportunity to do that.

      One final point, You keep hearing fans, media people, teams, drivers etc.. talk about making F1 more challenging for the drivers, Making the cars trickier to drive & putting the drivers back in control. Well surely DRS is the opposite of that as it makes passing less of a challenge for the drivers, makes passing far too easy in many cases & removes an element of skill from the drivers in terms of race-craft (attacking, defending & overtaking).

      1. @gt-racer Well said as usual. I think of it like this. No DRS pass will ever be considered memorable and talked about ad infinitum for years to come, like many real passes in the past have. No driver can be considered among the Greats whilst having gadgets such as DRS to rely on and indeed simply wait for that zone to make a pass.

      2. @gt-racer
        A bit off-topic, but I was wondering what you thought about the Mercedes protection system that was on the round-up the other day, and what – if any – implications it would have on the on-board cameras.
        I was thinking that the size and shape would pretty much block the view of the roll-hoop camera, although it’s hard to tell from the images they released.

        1. @beneboy I don’t think it would cause much trouble for the in-car cams, The halo solution that was put out by Mercedes shouldn’t cause any problems for the t-cam on the roll bar, looking at it there should still be a good view of the driver working the wheel & a clear view of the road ahead.

          Full canopies would be a bigger issue as far as having a good view of the driver working the wheel from the t-cam is concerned.

      3. I think there is a great many long year fans that feel alike about this.

        We already missed the opportunity to do away with DRS when the 2014 rules came in and it was a big miss.
        Now they want to make the cars more interesting to drive but instead of getting rid of / simplifying front wings to limit cars losing downforce following, they actually increase that and would even consider giving DRS an even greater role instead of dumping it for good.

        1. I suppose it’s cheaper than policing the obsession with these complex front wings.

      4. @gt-racer – It is worrisome, the changes they keep talking about, some at cross purposes. That and the fact they are painting themselves into a corner time-wise to change regs, get stuff built and tested. I would rather see major changes for 2018 and have them get things right instead of making dodgy changes in haste for 2017. No doubt waiting for 2018 would create a huge controversy though.

    20. I read

      “If, as some people think, it may be a little more difficult to follow a car closely then we can increase the authority of the DRS. I don’t see a big issue there.”

      and just went “sigh” no more comment on that

    21. To be honest, I’d rather see DRS go and replace it with something driver-activated that affects acceleration, like KERS, but more powerful.

    22. Without Maldonado, Lotus probably won’t have a car that can score points. His sponsorship helps with funding the running of the team. Unfortunately for Maldonado, he gets too excited sometimes or often. No doubt he has the talent when he remembers to stay calm.

    23. Yes cmon, lets do the most ridiculus thing ever even bigger with even more effect. Get the Saturn rocket booster insted…Why dont they get it, that this kind of fake things ruin the sport even more. The DRS is the most basic object which brakes the most fundamental rule of the sport: No aerodinamic moving parts on the car. I rather see 1 true overtake than 100 which were maid by pressing the button.

    24. They want to lose F1 directly. Instead of this series will coming some electronic series.
      I refuse it!

      The DRS can work correctly, but they don’t want it!.
      The solution for the more and real overtake issues is very simple and very cheap.

    25. Obviously the ideal is for simpler wings and a return to ground effect with a loss of the DRS.
      Assuming the DRS stays in some form, I agree with other posts above where a time-limit should be applied to how long it can remain open for. Maybe in tandem with an increase to 2 seconds rather than 1? And you can use it anywhere on the track. Maybe cars should be able to use it as a defensive tool too? Rather than just having to be sitting ducks. Maybe allocate a number of times it can be used in the race? Or a number of times it can be used per stint?
      Either way, it definitely should not be a free-for-all, and these all bring an extra element of strategy and “the unknown” to the race, which can only be of interest to the viewer.

    26. Maldonado, the undisputed Cash & Crash King!

    27. DRS needs to be banned.
      /discussion

      Go watch Ted Kravitz and Karun Chandhook explain the 2017 rules and see what’s good and what’s awful with the new regs. The front wing still is source of much of F1’s issues, particularly with passing.

      DRS is a gimmick. It doesn’t showcase driver ability or car performance. It’s a contrivance that any true F1 fan should dislike.

    28. @keithcollantine I’m only just catching up with the roundups after a weekend away, but I’m really surprised that you haven’t included the story posted by Autosport revealing that Renault are on the verge of announcing their purchase of the Lotus/Enstone team. I had a great one liner specially prepared about Renault and Enstone being the Ross and Rachael of F1.

      Seriously though, I’d have thought it was THE big news story of the minute.

    Comments are closed.