Is F1 a prison sentence for engine manufacturers?

Great article. I would put a horsepower limit and maybe a fuel consumption one and that's it. They rather focus on rules to make sure the cars stay attractive to look at, which they are also failing at as the shlong noses demonstrate...
 
Yes, but the system is basically complementing the engine all the time (except to recharge). So it's an essential part of the PU and not some booster button...

I just can't wrap my head around how one can dislike the idea of taking the wasted energy from braking (for example heat) and turn that into extra horse-power...
 
I stopped watching F1 many years ago due to the egos of the drivers and organizers. I also think the rules make it so I feel they should change the name away from Formula 1. To me, F1 should be the best possible car brought to the track competing against other teams' best possible cars. Tire choice should be made by the teams and there should be rules against exclusive-use contracts (i.e. Ferrari can't be the only recipient of Bridgestone tires, and Ferrari should not be bound to only using Bridgestone via contracts). The rules are meant to slow the cars down, but one look at those balloon tires and I just laugh at the ridiculousness of it all. All advances in everyday car technology are coming from endurance racing at this point, unless you count the cheating that is going on behind the scenes for F1 development like hidden ECU-based traction control. Imagine what the world's best engineers could come up with if allowed to do whatever they want. If it were up to today's F1 organizers, they never would have allowed wings in the first place and the cars would still be sliding around and flipping into the stands.
 

What do you think about subscription models in simracing?

  • It's fine

  • It's fine for hardware

  • It's fine for software

  • I don't like it

  • I don't like it for hardware

  • I don't like it for software

  • Other, please comment


Results are only viewable after voting.
Back
Top