Daniel Ricciardo, Red Bull, Bahrain International Circuit, 2016

Races will be “very dull” with more downforce – Ricciardo

F1 Fanatic round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Daniel Ricciardo warns increasing downforce will make F1 races much less exciting.

Social media

Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:

Took this lovely lady out for a spin today… #P1 #Mclaren #Dreamgarage

A photo posted by Jenson Button (@jenson_ichiban) on

Comment of the day

Lots of you had fun with this weekend’s Bernie Ecclestone/Derek Warwick Caption Competition. The winner was @andae23:

Derek Warwick, Bernie Ecclestone, Bahrain International Circuit, 2016

We need to change the rules again, there are still people in the grandstands.
@andae23

Thanks to everyone who took part this weekend and special mentions to Robbie, Lopek, Steven, Kavin Kannan, MOG, James Brickles and Michaeldobson13 who also made great suggestions.

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Aniket Garg!

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

It’s two years to the day since the FIA announced it had accepted an entry from new team Haas to compete in Formula One!

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

  • 114 comments on “Races will be “very dull” with more downforce – Ricciardo”

    1. Mustavo Gaia
      11th April 2016, 0:10

      I always like when Villeneuve expresses his opinion.
      It is immediately possible to realize which position about a given issue is the wrong one.

      1. Villeneuve’s. I can’t believe Ricciardo went against RB. Horner has been sneaking in the “more downforce” message in every statement he does. Horner implies fans want it, windtunnels that is.

        1. I think we need to look at the downforce addition in a different way. It’s very obvious it’s an engine dominated formula now but if you can add on enough downforce, there’s a chance you’ll considerably reduce the time gained by having a superior engine on straights I.e it’ll give red bull a chance to get very close in the twisty bits. Not all tracks are Monza

          1. One of Ricciardo’s wins in 2014(when Renault PU was considerably weaker) was at Spa, which is Monza- like circuit.

          2. Is that not F1’s problem? Rather than deal with an issue directly they change something else which then has more negative knock on effects. Take the lack of competition/racing currently, F1s solution – mess around with qualifying.

          3. Common misconception, perpetuated through to the fans, via his holinesses media minions, by the great string puller of Norfolk!!!
            If its an engine dominated formula, how come ALL the customer teams, using the same engine technology as the manufacturers, are so far behind, and seemingly so unable to close the gap?

            Dont be fooled! This is just one of his many ploys to destabilise the manufacturers

      2. :-) Yup. Not to mention that thing about the pot and the kettle when JV does the talking Mustavo!

        1. Drivers and fans who like overtaking will NOT support JV!

    2. For the sake of my sanity I’ll assume I didn’t just read an article where Jacuqes Villeneuve, of all people, complained about other people complaining too much…

      1. The irony is rich in that story, but I think it goes straight over JV’s head.

        1. Yea some F1 drivers need to shut up….

    3. Jacques Villeneuve retired from F1 in ’06- so he’s not even in F1, and has no idea what is going on- so he should shut up. You can say that for most people, but Villeneuve always has been a bit of a moron who has spoken some sense- but mostly nonsense. And honestly- he is probably the worst F1 driver who won a world championship- he could only win if he was in the best car.

      1. Any less than that- and he was ineffective, to say the least. Granted- nearly every F1 car he drove after ’97 was uncompetitive but he was never even on the podium again from ’98 to ’06.

        1. Wait- he was on the podium after finishing 3rd 4 times from ’98 to ’06.

          1. Have you looked at JV’s resume? Indy 500 winner, CART rookie of the year, CART Champion, F1 Champion, 2nd at Lemans…etc etc. including another run at the Indy 500 only a few years ago. Yeah what a slouch. Only has on his resume what two other drivers in the world have…those slouches Andretti and Fittipaldi.

            BTW, virtually all WDC’s needed the WCC winning car, or a very closed second place one, to win the WDC. For the two years JV had the equipment he didn’t squander it and managed more than most F1 drivers have or will accomplish in their whole careers. Four podiums in crap cars in the Haakinen/McLaren MS/Ferrari era is actually amazing.

            1. Just wanted to add, after JV stopped driving in F1 he got involved with a group that was trying to enter F1 as a brand new team. They were potentially going to have the last Toyota chassis that got built but never raced and was highly touted as one with great potential. Three potential entities went to the FIA with their proposals and all were rejected like they were never serious about new entrants at that time to begin with. JV has many many friends in F1 who regard him highly, in fact regard anyone with a WDC highly, and one of his best friends remains his Williams race engineer Jock Clear who has an amazing resume himself, and currently works with SV at Ferrari. To suggest JV is out of touch with F1 could not be further from the truth. I would not at all be surprised if he badly wants to see F1 become the sport it can be for one of his son’s sake. Just a personal dream of mine.

    4. God bless him. Salute Jacques!
      Never a dull moment with this guy

      1. He’d be a great replacement for BE

        1. Imagine him and Eddie Irvine in charge.

        2. Classic!

    5. ColdFly F1 (@)
      11th April 2016, 0:22

      If (ex-)drivers had shut up then the round-up would be 1 lonely article. ;-)
      (not even a twitter reference or caption competition)

    6. More calls to not overly increase down force levels.

      Most of us already know that too much down force for next year would pretty much seal the lid on a season of processional racing.

      I can’t help but feel that F1 is walking right in to the next PR disaster here.

      1. Aryton Senna said you should drive as slow as you can to win the race, but the new rules will give more emphasis on “slow” than Senna ever imagined.

        1. Of course it was Fangio who famously first said that, @drycrust are you sure Senna also said it? That seems totally against his whole ethos to me.

          1. Maybe after Monaco ’88 he changed his mind a bit?

          2. Doh! I’ve done it again: I was sure I had read somewhere in the last week or so someone reputable using it as a quote from Senna, and now can’t find it. My thanks to Paul, Jordi, and Matthijs for saying I was wrong. In hindsight, and looking at other Senna quotes, it doesn’t appear to have been the sort of thing Senna would have said.
            I wasn’t able to find a source that said Fangio said it first, but I Google did have a result with Lauda saying it.

        2. It wasn’t Senna who said it, it was Lauda.

          1. @matthijs

            But famously Fangio originally.

    7. I dont really get why the drivers are complaining about the 2017 rule changes. from what has been suggested it looks like most of the increased grip is going to come from the tires and the cars would only have 25% more downforce which isnt necessarily bad i’d like the cars to go through the corners a little faster and racing wasnt much worse before 2014 with more downforce. what we really need is better tires that last a little longer than they do right now and allow the drivers to push.

      1. RaceProUK (@)
        11th April 2016, 0:39

        It depends on how that downforce is generated. If it’s done with underbody techniques like ground effects, then it could work. However, if it’s done through bigger wings and stuff like that, then it won’t, as wings don’t work nearly as well following another car as they do in clean air, especially front wings (something that’s been a factor for many years now).

        1. The regulations are focusing on larger floor, larger diffuser, and more freedom for designers in the barge board area.

          All three of these areas are safest to develop with regards to dirty air.

          1. Larger diffuser safe for dirty air? Come on.

            1. Makes dirty air, but also produces df very well.

              Diffusers really help floor generate downforce.

              Now we just need Pirelli to make excellent front tires….

            2. Diffuser is a bit of a good idea/bad idea. The good thing is the efficiency. Ground effects are more efficient way of producing downforce than wings. The bad side is that ground effects are really really sensitive. Back when ground effects were the big thing to have in f1 the focus was to get the cars to drive as close to the ground as possible. If you touch the ground you lose downforce. Too high and you lose downforce. The problem is that we are talking about really really small distances here. At optimal level it is down to millimeters.

              This makes the ground effects to not be the silver bullet for overtaking and following other cars. Because the car is sitting on tires and springs. The more downforce you have pushing the car to the ground the closer the car is going to be. So if at medium speeds you follow another car your car will produce less downforce which will pull down the car less. So your ride height increases and with that your lose ground effects to some degree.

              I think more ground effects would be a good way to go if we also had active suspension. That way the cars don’t lose as much ground effects when following other car. There is also the safety aspect when the f1 cars are driving behind the safety car the tires lose tire pressure which will bring the cars too close to the ground. This has a nasty possibility to cause high speed spins due to the cars bottoming out. Again, another problem easily solved by active suspension.

              Another important thing to notice is that more ground effects means stiffer car. And if you add active suspension to the equation the cars will be stiffer still. This will make the car more physical to drive. The current cars are too easy to drive physically compared to what f1 was just 10 years ago.

          2. @Jimmy Price, They moved away from a lot of the proposals looking at the floors/diffusers some time ago, The primary focus is now purely on more downforce from the wings.

            Should be noted that its not just the drivers raising concerns, Even those within the teams who are proposing the regulations have been pretty open in saying that they will not improve the racing & that at best things will be no different to now when it comes to the difficulties cars have following closely. Thats why one of the less talked about things been done for 2017 (Because they know it isn’t popular) is that the DRS will be made more powerful to counteract the increase in aero.

            1. Again, we see all the people who know their stuff say that we will be in for fast cars spaced out on track with 2-3 second gaps again with these changes. But F1 goes ahead with changing things because hey, they decided that this change was needed, so no matter what the effect the change will will be coming.

              I can already see Bernie and Tod calling for even more DRS and other gimmicks to then try to juggle the order once it becomes clear that the new rules indeed do what is predicted – get rid of close racing again.

      2. The problem with the rules isn’t actually about the ability to go around corners, it is about the ability to race. The new rules look like they’re intended to require a greater difference in power output will be required to successfully execute an overtake than is now required. My guess is this would work best when the racing grid is determined by a ballot or something akin to a reversed grid.

      3. Go back and watch a race from pre 2009 and then tell us that’s what you really want to see – cars that can’t get within 2 seconds of the car in front.

    8. Neil (@neilosjames)
      11th April 2016, 0:35

      I’m assuming this is the same Jacques Villeneuve who once got summoned by the FIA to explain himself because he was so loudly critical of the 1998 rule changes and who was unhappy the drivers weren’t being listened to.

      http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns01119.html (from 1997)

      1. As a Canadian, I’ve been a huge JV fan and have loved him for his willingness to say what’s on his mind.

        As soon as I saw his comments today I knew he was likely contradicting himself because there was no way he’d have kept his mouth shut as a driver, I just couldn’t find a specific article. Thank you for finding it!

        JV needs to find a balance between making “headline” grabbing comments and sharing his opinion because however many valid opinions he has, they are overshadowed or dismissed because he’s got just as many or more “sensational” ones.

        He’s still my favourite driver, I just can’t support him blindly anymore.

        1. It’s ok to disagree with what someone says but still like them.

          He certainly does seem to shoot his own credibility in the foot however.

      2. @neilosjames Even as an 8 year old I could see those rule changes were bad for the racing! Shame the FIA couldn’t..

      3. I really don’t see what’s wrong with JV complaining about technical regs, nor that drivers weren’t being listened to. LH has complained of the drivers not being listened to within F1 still to this day, What’s that got to do with drivers complaining publicly about the show?

        JV didn’t want narrower cars nor grooved tires. That’s a far cry from saying what the show should be. His concern was with what he would be driving. He wasn’t trying to form the show to the public and opine on what it should look like on TV.

    9. RaceProUK (@)
      11th April 2016, 0:40

      Actually Jacques, it is their problem, as without the fans, there is no sport.

      1. Maybe JV’s concern is that drivers publicly diminishing the product is exactly what will diminish the crowd? I’m sure JV is not suggesting the drivers shut up completely. Speak out and rally the drivers together to the FIA about technical stuff all day long. He is speaking of public opinions of what the show should look like, and that can vary amongst the 22 drivers as it is, so is therefore how constructive?

        Notice he also speaks of rules stability, simplification, and a return to something more ‘normal’ and old school. Something we almost universally agree on these days. All things that would improve the sport.

      2. @raceprouk Actually, a sport didn’t need fans or people watching them to continue being a sport…

        1. RaceProUK (@)
          11th April 2016, 16:52

          But without the fans, there’s no-one for the sponsors to advertise to, and the manufacturers can’t use F1 to boost their image, so the sponsors and manufacturers leave, the money dries up, and no-one can afford to go racing anymore.

          1. @raceprouk Ah you mean there is no F1 as a business then. F1 as a sport doesn’t need sponsors or spectators, just drivers and teams who want to build and race cars according to the F1 specs. Granted it took a lot of money and probably there is no rich enough people who want to throw that kind of money for fun. But hey, they did it in 50-80’s before Bernie took over and create THE F1 as a business.

            1. RaceProUK (@)
              12th April 2016, 13:19

              Sponsorship started long before Bernie got his hands on the commercial rights

    10. Caption competition 101 there from @andae23 ;)

    11. Wait a minute! Where are the cries from people saying that Jenson needs to focus on his racing and stop traveling around the world to exotic places and driving hypercars? That in order to be a success he needs to spend every minute of his life between races back at the factory improving himself and his team and forget about social media and the fans??
      OBVIOUSLY I’m playing but I do wonder what the reaction would be of Lewis posted something as innocent as that picture

      1. Lewis would probably post a pink LaFerrari, and we would wouldnt know where to start.

    12. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3405648/Lewis-Hamilton-swaps-silver-Mercedes-red-rivals-Ferrari-pulls-Beverly-Hills-restaurant-stunning-1-1-million-supercar.html

      Beat me to it @jureo

      Frankly I don’t care about Lewis’ jet setting, but I would expect some loyalty to his manufacturer and sponsors (wasn’t there an article where he doesn’t even wear his contracted sponsors clothing on GP weekends)?

      1. @johnnyrye, well, other drivers have become associated with brands that they do not represent – Button, for example, likes to collect classic cars and is fairly well known for his love of the 1970’s Porsche 911 Carrera. Vettel and Alonso, meanwhile, are both massive fans of the classic Fiat 500 and are both members of clubs dedicated to the Fiat 500 in their home nations.

        1. Vettel is a big fan of Porsches too.

        2. Yeah but that is a lot different from Jenson turning to a photo session in a LaFerrari or Vettel turning to an event in P1 McLaren…

          Lewis just doesnt give a darn.. Hugo Boss complained about him endorsing another brand etc.

          Nico meanwhile drives around in a sleeky AMG GT-S…

          1. @jureo To be fair, Lewis is not attending a photo session or scheduled public appearance in that the Ferrari. The photos on the article itself looks like captured by bystanders, and it not posted in his social media nor for an advertising campaign.

      2. This may be what you were looking for re Hamilton not wearing clothes from the team’s partners @johnnyrye. The relevant section is a fair way down in the article.

        http://www.telegraph.co.uk/formula-1/2016/03/17/lewis-hamilton-refuses-to-answer-questions-on-motorbike-selfie/

        1. @geemac, that’s the exact one I was thinking about. Thanks for the find!

      3. And Lewis did have the common curtesy to be driving a Pagani Zonda when he crashed in Monaco…

    13. Villeneuve should shut up, it’s not his problem how good or bad the comments from current drivers are on the sport they actually are still in.

      1. So you’re saying he should have declined the interview with Autosport? Or simply said ‘no comment’ when asked his opinion? Why should he? And why do you think he thinks it’s his problem? He was merely asked his opinion.

        1. @robbie

          I’m saying, by basically taking exactly what he said and changing the subject from other drivers to him, and the topic from other drivers commenting on the sport to him commenting on other drivers is that there is a fat piece of irony in his own comment.

          It’s an even greater piece of irony though that you disagree with my satire of Villeneuve’s talking out against drivers talking out.

    14. Hypocrite … If I remember right when Villeneuve was in F1 he had the biggest mouth around, only one thing has changed, now it’s just full of BS …… of course it has a lot to do with the drivers, they are the guys who put on the show.

      1. So you think the drivers should indeed publicly run down the show? Or decide what the show should be? It’s their job?

        1. That is not what I said, but I think they should have a greater input into the overall picture and Yes if it’s wrong they have a right to say so. Ecclestone’s comment “the drivers are windbags’ just demonstrates the respect he and many others have for them.

    15. A more dictatorial running of F1 is all well & good when the things been done are positive & would otherwise have been blocked by the more democratic running of things…… The problem comes from when the person acting as dictator is pushing through unpopular & downright idiotic things.

      Running a dictatorship & forcing through something like cars that race better or positive safety measures is one thing, But been the dictator & forcing through things like reverse grids, success ballast, medals instead of points, sprinklers, short cuts, double points & all the other nonsense that Bernie tends to propose/push for is something very different.

      People in some of the articles & TV features often talk about how it needs to be run by 1 person or as a dictatorship & then often push Bernie as been ‘The guy’ need to sit back & look at what he says he wants to do & then consider how 99% of what he says is nonsense that nobody other than him thinks is a good idea. And while yes some of it is just to push teams to do something else, He is actually quite serious about a fair bit of it.

      1. indeed @GT_racer. If we need a “dictator” to run the sport, it should defenitely NOT be Bernie.

        Instead we should have an idependant FIA that employs a few people and gains information and opinions from team insiders, from stewards as well as from tracks and commercial partners and formulates clear rules, that are published well in advance and stay put for a reasonable time period, doing so as transparently as possible.

        And we should have an orginasation doing REAL promotion, thinking of new ways to get people involved, and incorporates drivers, teams, local people/tracks and commercial partners to do so, while it keeps a fair share (5-15%) to run the “show”

    16. Recent studies done on 2017 proposed changes.

      Quoting user “Blackout” on the F1technical forums:

      RacecarEngineering (2016 digital edition) recently did very interesting CFD simulations and studies about the possible 2017 rules and the needed changes to make the cars follow each other more closely and overtake… They used a 2013 car for comparisons.

      Their 2017 car has a better L/D ratio (L level is close but their 2017 car has same tire sizes as 2013 as far as I understand + 25mm skirts on the floor sides) and it generally loses a slightly smaller amount of DF than a 2013 car when chasing an identical car (it would loose much less DF when the separation equals 8 car lengths and a bit more DF at a half car length). 2017 car also looses less drag when at a 4 and 2 car lengths which would make splipstreaming less effective, but who cares…

      More important is the fact that there is no aero balance shift with the 2017 car, no matter the separation.
      So there is far less understeer when chasing another car and less DF loss. Good for the tires, the drivers, the racing…

      http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=23606&sid=39bcc74eb35241b0f1a8558b6cedcf3f&start=165

      1. Thats what I’m talking about all the time.. Good find.

        Downforce is not a bad thing, you just need to generate it correctly not to be affected to much by folllwing another car.

        Now problem is, they make sensible rules, then teams come and try to find most optimized front wings they can do and provide even more downforce… Then balance the car to cope with front end, and loose all balance when following another car…

        So 2017 regs should make overtaking better, but how much?

    17. I’m not sure if JV is right or not about the effect (allegedly negative) drivers will have on the image of F1 by complaining publicly about the show, but I don’t think he is being hypocritical. I don’t think he publicly complained about or criticized the show so much as the technical reg changes to the cars he wanted to enjoy driving on the edge, which he was concerned about diminishing with the changes to grooved tires and narrow cars. He didn’t diminish whatever the show was that was being presented in whatever year. He may have spoken about the effects of any technical changes that he disagreed with, but that doesn’t mean he publicly complained about how the product looked on TV.

      And if you read the article surely everyone can agree with his comments near the end. He speaks of rules stability but also simplification and a return to something more old school, which is what we basically have all been crying for too. It is what he wanted back in 97 when he didn’t want the changes to narrower cars and grooved tires for 98. He probably considered them gimmicks or gadgets that made for less ‘pure’ racing for the drivers. He called the grooved tires a joke, but that doesn’t mean he called the show a joke too. He wanted rules stability, and who wouldn’t, having come off a Championship?

      So I don’t think JV is saying the drivers should shut up completely…just not publicly run down the show. JV always provides great food for thought. That’s why he gets asked his opinion.

    18. Spot on from Honey Badger.

      Aero needs to be coming “off” the wings and going “on” the floor. The FIA regulate a plank to maintain ride height, so starting a pair of tunnels either side of the driver, “X” mm forward of the rear axle is plenty enough to get some decent ground effect going. Can run a much simpler diffuser profile as a result.

      Cars don’t need to be faster in the corners, they need to be slower. Or at least, rely on their mechanical grip, NOT their aero grip.

      Low-drag is the way to go. You’re slower in the corners, faster on the straights, which means your braking zones are longer, which means you have more room to overtake. And that’s before you start playing around with reducing max. brake pressures by regulation, for example.

      1. F1 should be slower than LMP1 then in your opinion?

        1. RaceProUK (@)
          11th April 2016, 12:51

          He never said that

          1. Slippery slope.

            1. RaceProUK (@)
              13th April 2016, 11:11

              Don’t try to excuse your lying with pathetic strawmen

    19. F1 rule makers need to open their eyes see what’s happened in NASCAR’s Cup series this year. For all that NASCAR has done wrong for this year (introducing the Chase to its second and Truck series & the caution clock in the Truck series), one thing they’ve got right is the aero package at Cup level. They’ve taken downforce away, I think Goodyear have given drivers softer tyres, and now even P2 can take it to P1 without having the dirty air affecting them too badly.

      So why do F1 kingmakers want to pile on downforce? Simply, short-termism. They haven’t got a plan to make racing better, to the point we could possibly bin DRS. More a response to issues that didn’t exist in 2014/15 for political reasons. If anything, 2014 was an awesome year for racing, where less aero compared to ’13 played its part!

      Just take the mechanical grip improvements for 2017 whilst thinking hard to produce a racy set of aero rules F1, please. Probably what most drivers would want is less aero and more mechanical grip! And if you’re in doubt F1, look at NASCAR’s YouTube (another thing NASCAR gets right is social media!) and compare the racing 2015 v 2016! I know which year of racing I’d go watch.

      1. I think its even more simple @hosty96xd – Bernie wants to give Red Bull the advantage again, both to keep them on “his” side and to break down a Mercedes / Ferrari dominance he sees.He couldn’t care less about exciting racing.

        And that is exactly why, while I agree there should be one body to determine the rules, it should certainly NOT be Bernie or someone like him.

        1. ColdFly F1 (@)
          11th April 2016, 10:52

          I also agree there should be one body to determine the rules, @bascb.
          This should be the FIA. But their head lacks a backbone, and they gave away their decision making power to the Strategy Group and Formula Commission.
          The only thing that FIA has created for F1 recently is a bunch of loopholes, most likely due to translating the regulations between French and English.

      2. @hosty96xd It was something that was much easier for Nascar to do because there cars were never that reliant on aero to begin with. Yes they had some aero & yes it did affect the cars but nowhere near to the same degree as F1.

        As such you can take some aero off a Nascar & it won’t make a great deal of difference to overall performance, But if you take even a small amount of aero off an F1 car (Or any open wheel car that has wings) & your going to lose a lot of performance.

    20. Villeneuve’s and Jones’s comments indeed prove that at least ex-drivers should keep quiet. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but media should not publish everything ex-drivers say because they often do not follow F1 anymore, have generally less understanding of the sport than the fans and often just seek attention.

      F1 does not need ‘dictatorship’ (not that it has ‘democracy’ now). F1 needs a sensible and independent governing body that treats it as a sport and cares about its long-term future.

      1. F1 needs a sensible and independent governing body that treats it as a sport and cares about its long-term future.

        Exactly that @girts.

      2. @girts So you are for censorship and against freedom of speech? What is wrong with each person having an opinion? Why do you assume these ex F1 icons are out of touch with the sport? Less understanding of the sport than the fans? You can’t be serious.

        So JV calls for rules stability, is against over complication and thinks they need to simplify and get back to something more normal and old school and you disagree? And as to Jones’ comments, while I don’t think the term dictatorship is necessary, do you disagree that there are too many individual entities with their own agendas making the decisions, such that it’s become a mess?

        Where is this ‘sensible and independent governing body’ to come from, and whose to say their definition of sport will be any better?

        1. ColdFly F1 (@)
          11th April 2016, 13:22

          @robbie, you’ve been busy today. Though I think you missed the point in this question loaded reply.
          Why would @girts be against freedom of speech when writing “Everyone is entitled to their opinion but media should not publish everything”. Or are you upset het used the wording “ex-drivers should keep quiet”? Which is merely a more polite version of JV’s “F1 drivers should shut up”!

          1. @coldfly Thanks, that is indeed what I meant to say. “Ex-drivers should keep quiet” was just a dig at Villeneuve.

          2. @coldfly Yes I have been busy lol. I’m not sure saying everyone is entitled to their opinion, but only some opinions should be publizied counts as everyone being entitled to their opinion. It was the ‘but’ that got me. Why shouldn’t all opinions be expressed to be then discussed and agreed or disagreed to with reasons for said opinions? I wholeheartedly reject the notion that ex-f1 drivers opinions are not relevant to the current times.

        2. @Robbie Of course I am serious. The opinions of ex-drivers are mostly irrelevant or indeed prove that these guys are out of touch with the sport. All I am saying is that media should not publish their thoughts on things that they clearly do not understand. It is not about free speech, it is about professional journalism. For sure, everyone can post their opinion on their own website but media should be able to distinguish between experts’ views and views of people, who were involved in the sport 10 or 40 years ago but now have no idea what is going on. Rules stability is obviously important but that is about the only thing in the article that I can agree with. (And the round-up said nothing about that.)

          As for dictatorship vs democracy, Ecclestone loves to use these terms but they have nothing to do with F1 governance and it is sad to see people falling for his demagogy. F1 would be a democracy only if the fans could elect representatives, who would then make decisions on rules, commercial rights, prize money etc. It will never happen. No sport works that way. The FIA should consult the teams and drivers before writing the rules. Ecclestone/FOM should do the commercial deals and quietly promote the sport instead of coming up with absurd ways to punish the best competitors, which would be unthinkable in almost every other sport.

          1. @girts As I just said to @coldfly I completely reject your notion that ex F1’ers opinions are irrelevant and that they are out of touch. To claim someone like JV is not an expert floors me. My goodness what does a bloke have to have on his resume then to qualify as an expert? He has to only be driving currently? No way, never ever, in my books anyway. No idea what is going on? Sorry but I have to repeat, you can’t be serious. To me you are saying experience counts for nothing and people can’t learn and grow from their experiences and observations. As soon as a driver leaves F1 his racing experience and knowledge is erased and is irrelevant? Please.

            Regarding the word dictatorship I was referencing Jones using that term. In general the only time I am in favour of something that resembles a dictatorship is when someone is democratically elected to lead, thus giving him/her a mandate to do just that, rather than having many entities able to influence things simply because of their own selfish means to an end in which case often nothing gets done. I’m not sure that democracy can only occur if fans get to vote. I think it can occur within F1 by all the teams being able to democratically vote for a leader based on what he has said he or she will do, and when elected by the majority of voters then the mandate has been decided. Those that didn’t vote for that leader have to just suck it up as the majority rules. I don’t think we disagree on this issue.

      3. “F1 needs a sensible and independent governing body that treats it as a sport and cares about its long-term future.”

        -so in otherwords, a dictatorship.

    21. I’m looking forward to see how Haas develops over the next few races. A lot of us criticised them when they said they had a chassis comparable to Ferrari, and when Gene Haas said they could be in the points from the start. There is no doubt they are a Ferrari B team, with probably even more collaboration then even Toro Ross has with Red Bull, nonetheless, they are a brand new outfit, and they still will make huge improvements operationally and strategically that will fine tune their race performance overall.

      I think if they keep their development schedule ahead of Toro Rosso, Mclaren and Force India, they are genuine contenders for the #5 spot in the WCC. It really hurts them to have a driver of Esteban’s quality though. A slightly more competitive driver could have made their chase for the #5 spot much easier.

      1. Driver like Vandoorne….

        1. Even Vergne would do a better job

      1. [quote]test[/quote]

        1. Someone’s a little testy this morning…

    22. How anyone wants dictatorship in F1 after all the rubbish that’s come from FIA and FOM over the years is beyond me. Didn’t they see for example how the token system stifled competition, kept possible entrants out and needed the teams to sort out? The qualifying change? Teams sorted it. etc etc.

      I don’t even have enough skin on my fingers to start a list of the Mosley years..

      1. so what do you propose that would work more efficiently than one person, not involved directly with the teams, telling everyone what to do?

    23. Am I the only one humoured by the license plate of Jenson his car, 959? One of the best Porsches of all time, a car McLaren will never be able to reach. On top of that the P1 has been outdone by the 918.

      1. I’d rather have the P1. It’s clear to see from your name that you are somewhat biased. McLaren had already reached and outdone the 959 with their F1 from the 90s. And personally, I think that the 959 looks ugly.

        1. That they did and look at values of McLaren F1’s nowadays, 2nd only to classic Ferraris.

      2. You are not alone.. Spoted right away…. P1 is better than anything else performance wise… But 959 is a better name…

      3. @xtwl Like others said, McLaren F1 is above 959 on history book of greatest car of all time.

        Also between the P1, LaFerrari, and 918 they all great car that have their own strength and weaknesses, but from car communities that I follow, what I usually see is P1 is ahead of the rest, but there are people who will still pick LaFerrari because it’s a Ferrari (and the combustion engine part) or Porsche because it’s Porsche (or because it’s the best daily driver compared to the rest). In short, fanboy will pick their own brand and nothing wrong with that ;)

        1. @sonicslv You can pick whichever you want but in many tests the Porsche has come out on top as the best overall, fact neither McLaren or Ferrari want to share Nurburgring laptimes says it all. And it was only when a whole team of enigneers came to the track that both cars could outdrive the 918 whilst there was nobody to be seen from Porsche.

          Also the F1 was built 7 years later, technology wise surely it had to be better but it wasn’t as iconic to sportscars as the 959 I’ll tell you that.

          @ultimateuzair Yes, I am biased. I I were to choose on pure taste I’d go for the Porsche. Where I to choose between a 959 and a P1 I would have it a bit more difficult I’ll admit but as I said above the 918 is overall a better car than the P1, though I am not biased enough to say I still think the P1 is a brilliant piece of engineering and art.

          1. I thought this tedious debate had ended, they are road cars not race cars so very subjective. I like paul Baileys idea just buy all 3 job done.

          2. @xtwl Now please do tell me where you got this tests, I’d love to read them. Paul Bailey’s independent test and Top Gear one is done with consumer cars without any engineer and they show consistent results: Porsche has the best launch (but still gonna lose over 1/4 km drag strip), McLaren will beat others on practical use at the track, Ferrari can only win with the sound or if they have super long stretch of smooth road like in Dubai. Chris Harris’s test have some engineer although their involvement is minimal (primarily gathering data not tuning the car) and showing the same result.

            Also 959 is purpose build Group B rally car designed to race in mind and even then failed to finish few races at its debut. F1 is designed as road car, McLaren never intend to race it until a private owner asking them to make a race version, and history were born. Dominance in group B rally versus dominance in 24h LeMans against purpose built racing cars, I think it’s obvious who’s the better iconic sportscar ;) Also it hold the record of fastest production car for 7 years and still hold the record for fastest naturally aspirated engine production car.

    24. Villeneuve:

      “In a classroom, how many of your classmates would be able to make educated decisions? Not many.”

      “In all the noble sports like tennis and football, the rules haven’t changed in 100 years, even when it is boring, and people respect it.”

      I am not sure these are very valid argument MR. Villeneuve…..

      1. Classic sports like Tennis and Football aren’t run by a lunatic

    25. Can anyone answer this for me. I left it on another thread but no replies:

      When do people think that the rules allowed the best balance between downforce, ability to follow he car in front and speed then? There must have been a time when this was better than it is now. Or not? I don’t know and my technical knowledge is not good enough to form an opinion.

      1. The racing was at its best way back in the day when engineers had no idea what downforce was. Of course it’s impossible to go back to that kind of racing so we have to live with what we have now.

        Anyway, I don’t mind to additional downforce to much, especially if they manage to generate it with ground effects. I’m tired of this engine-dominated formula we have now. Even if Red Bull dominates next year (which is doubtful, given the Renault engine), it would still be interesting given both their drivers have no experience in fighting for a championship at the highest level.

    26. Ricciardo should give it a go 1st as most the drivers on the grid have not felt 2004 levels of speed, it may shake up the order of who fans rate. Only Alonso, Massa, Raikkonen and Button have experience of this. Then again there’s always a chance only 1 of those maybe racing next year.

    27. Everyone has the right to say his/her opinion!
      I think drivers have to say what they think about the sport especially they say their OWN opinion not their team opinion. Drivers know much more about the sport than we (fans) know. But most of them say the same.
      – Increase the mechanical grip/ aero downforce rate. More mechanical grip and less or same aero downforce.
      – Push on the limit as long as possible and save (with fuel and tires) as short as possible during races. The lap times during races are much more slower than it was in 2004 and it is a big problem! (Maybe we have to bring back refueling but I don’t know.) They are fast enough (maybe the fastest ever) in 1 lap in 2016 and it is awesome.
      – Drivers need more challange and cars are harder to drive phisically (more G force) and mentally (self decision-making and strategy).
      +Moreover if we want to see close racing we need little differences between cars in lap time. So we need stable technical regulations in long term. ( I think we should use +weight/point system in short term to decrease the differences and dominance.)

      1. Little difference in lap times throughout a race will make overtaking nearly impossible. If 2 objects are at the same speed one cannot overtake the other. You need at certain points of a race 1 car to be faster than another by a good amount to overtake that’s why I think the various strategies on 3 tyres is great. F1 has to be a balance of incredible speed, interesting strategy and a few overtakes in my opinion.

        1. Ok. Let see the big differences in lap time for example Manor and Mercedes. The fastest starts first (Mercedes) and the slower car back. We can see Manor has no chance to overtake Mercedes.
          Then let see an other situation. Mercedes is behind Manor. We will see Mercedes easily overtakes Manor (not too interesting) and reach a significant gap (not too interesting).
          It is (little differences) why we can see good battles in the middle. (and the different strategies of course)
          So I think we need little differences in lap times and it would be ideal if some cars are faster in the straight and others are faster in corners. Moreover we (maybe) should use active aero elements (no DRS) to decrease the following car disadvantage in the corners.

          1. How would you decrease the disadvantage of following in corners? Slightly faster on the straight won’t cut it as Drs does not always work and that gives 10mph plus. A lunew under braking works but no one would dare as a collision now results in a penalty and points on your license. You cannot manufacture close racing it just happens every so often so just let them go as fast as they can, keep stable rules for a number of seasons and the cars will get closer.

    Comments are closed.