F1

What happened to catching / outbraking?

Viewing 9 posts - 16 through 24 (of 24 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #165696
    butterdori
    Participant

    Kobayashi did it spectacularly in Suzuka last year

    Anyway, I think it’s because of the turbulence and the heat coming out from the rear. Cars cannot get as close nor can they slipstream and get a tow.

    Also, on the supposed ‘block pass’, I would like to quote Senna: “If you no longer go for a gap that exists, you are no longer a racing driver”

    The point of outbraking is, you brake to the speed capable of turning in a corner without running wide in a shorter time period. Because it depends on whether your car is grippier or you simply have better car control, it’s not ‘unsportmanlike’.

    #165697
    Doance
    Participant

    Well maybe they should look at changing the turbulence, instead of the silly DRS that only the car behind can use

    #165698
    butterdori
    Participant

    They are trying. That’s why they changed the rear wing to today’s short, tall form. But there’s only so much they can do, especially with the development levels of aerodynamics in F1 today.

    #165699
    Icthyes
    Participant

    So what you’re saying in effect is that if we didn’t have these nasty rules a car like the Prost would be able to pass a car like the McLaren? Erm, no.

    Ironically this is the kind of situation the new tyres are meant to bring about, an inferior car temporarily faster than a superior one.

    #165700
    Doance
    Participant

    The video didnt matter what the cars were it just highlights how back then cars that were 3 seconds behind could catch the car ahead and then out brake them. Nowadays cars dont close the gap

    #165702
    Icthyes
    Participant

    At one point in the last race Hamilton closed more than 3 seconds on Vettel, but then the stops came. Alonso would have caught Petrov but he ran out laps. It’s just circumstance and a bit of rose-tinted viewing. In 90% of the other races Coulthard would have pulled away from Panis at the same rate, the reason it was more dramatic back then was because of greater performance gaps. I’m not sure of the circumstances of that race but that probably wasn’t natural pace making the Prost faster.

    #165703
    Asanator
    Participant

    Oh what a difference a tyre war makes!

    Wasn’t ’97 Bridgestones first year? And I recall them being initially quick then going through quite a long graining period, which is probably what Couthard was experiencing compared to Panis’ ‘Fresh’ rubber.

    #165704
    Dan Thorn
    Participant

    It was pure pace – Panis finished 2nd in that race ans was catching Villeneuve for the lead before he go caught up in traffic – Bridgestone’s tyres worked very well compared to Goodyear at some tracks that year.

    #165705
    Doance
    Participant

    Its not just that one overtake there was generally a lot more position changing and difference in pace back then. So its because of tyres and aerodynamics that made the cars more different in speed and times during races back then? Alright then. They should look at what was happening before instead of introducing new rules imo.

Viewing 9 posts - 16 through 24 (of 24 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.