[Thomas Baer]

This forum is for people to post how they would define the X-factor, or lack thereof, of all the different race-tracks. What i mean is how would you describe what a track is like in all its glory to a mate who has seen the track layout, but never been there and experienced it.
e.g:
– Monza- Full of passion

[necrodethmortem]

Many people won’t like to hear this, but the x-factor is danger. Simple as that.

[Thomas Baer]

i can agree to that as one of the parts of the x-factor, it definently is a major part. But there are other tracks that do have x-factor without the danger. As with my example, part of monza’s x-factor is the passion of the tifosi.

[necrodethmortem]

Monza has more fatalities than any other circuit currently on the calendar. There’s no way anyone would be ‘passionate’ about cars driving around in circles without any danger, unless they are geeks that love all the tech involved, which excludes most tifosi.

[necrodethmortem]

I suppose a picturesque backdrop is also a factor, think of Potrero de los Funes (lake), Francorchamps and Nurburgring (foresty hills), Monaco (little town on a rock by the sea — awful 60s buildings though), Singapore (modern architecture — don’t like Abu Dhabi and Shanghai, they’re just disgusting displays of wealth), …

[Bob]

If you’re talking about each track’s unique characteristics:
Monaco/Singapore – Glitz and glamour, or, driving between perilously close walls
Spa – Undulating, Fast, Remorseless
Monza – Blinding fast, or as mentioned above, fan passion and loyalty

It’s undeniable that the inherent danger of racing fast cars centimeters from each other is a major draw of motor racing. However, one must also consider another source of the “passion” – the desire to see one’s favourite driver push himself and his machine to the limits, in a test of mechanical and physical endurance, to triumph over all others. Fierce fan loyalties are to be found in many sports – manic football fans come to mind. The tifosi and their fervent passion for Ferrari are no different.

[Bullfrog]

@bobthevulcan mentioned “Undulating” for Spa, and following the natural contours always adds to a track’s character. Interlagos has it, and the Nürburgring to some extent, but sadly many of the tracks like this are no longer used for F1: Imola, Brands Hatch, Bathurst, Laguna Seca and the Österreichring (not so much the slower Red Bull Ring – speed helps as well!)

One or two newer tracks do it properly: Turkey, Portimao and Motorland Aragon. But some of Tilke’s F1 tracks just seem to have a calculated “elevation change” for a corner: Shanghai, Korea, Buddh. The Circuit of the Americas looks promising, we’ll see shortly.

[Bob]

some of Tilke’s F1 tracks just seem to have a calculated “elevation change” for a corner

That’s exactly problem with the Tilke circuits, and why they’re deemed so lacking in “X factor”. Tilke designs circuits as if it were a science, thinking that long straights leading into hairpins, variable corner radii and clinical “elevation change” will definitely make for good racing. However, this approach has only produced formulaic track designs subject to constant criticism. (To be fair to Tilke, the “characterless” nature of his designs is due in some part to restrictive FIA regulations.)

That’s not to say all of Tilke’s circuits lack the “X-factor”. He got it right at Istanbul by modeling the track after the contours of the land, evident in the downhill sector 1 and uphill sector 3. He’s apparently doing the same thing with COTA, so we’ll see how that turns out.

As for other potential X-factors, why not difficulty? Spa and Monaco are perennial fan favourites. Both are hard for drivers to master: Spa has Eau Rouge, Pouhon, Blanchimont, Monaco is… Monaco. These tracks punish the smallest of miscalculations, be it with scarce run-off area, or omnipresent armco barriers. It’s these defining features that make them so special.

[the_sigman]

@necrodethmortem
It is logical for Monza to have the most deaths since it’s the circuit with most races, with Silverstone and Monaco. Also only 10 circuits in this year’s calendar had hosted a GP before 1995, with the big improvements in safety.

[necrodethmortem]

@sigman1998 Are you suggesting that Monza is just as safe as the modern tracks and that the only reason it has more fatalities is because of the number of races? And besides, how many of those 10 modern ones would you describe as fan favourites?

Anyways, I think @bobthevulcan worded it better when he said it’s ‘difficulty’, rather than ‘danger’, but in F1 those two are always connected. Though I think removing the tarmac run-off at, say, Blanchimont, wouldn’t necessarily make the corner more difficult, but it would make it a lot more dangerous and (imo, I guess) a lot more charismatic.

[Author]

Posts