How should F1 be made exciting again?

[GraemeH]

Great to see everyone putting forward sensible ideas

Everyone seems to be in favour of getting rid of restrictions. While yes it sounds appealing it would be just deadly. The rate of development now is too fast. We would be seeing 1000kw within a season.

There's a difference between limitless development and allowing designers to reach the limits in their own way. Whether a team went with a 1.5l turbo with 12k redline or 2.5l NA with 19k redline, they'd all have about the same ultimate performance that we have now. The difference is some engine types would suit some tracks better, suit certain driving characteristics, suit certain corners etc. We'd see less of the 80 lap parades, and more evident differences between cars and drivers. Which I think is what the sport needs.

 

[YF19pilot]

Yeah but all those races would be extremely costly. Teams would have to pay two sets of pitcrew because otherwise the mechanics would all just burn out. Teams would be forced to pay for the extra rounds out of their own pockets and can you see them agreeing to that? Three cars again ensures the teams' workload is effectively doubled and it would be very costly again, especially seeing as the cars arent eligible for points.

NASCAR runs a 37 race season with one pit crew for each team. F1 teams are fucking pampered compared to those guys. I can see what you mean about transportation costs, but having a schedule that puts geographically close races next to each other should help out with that.

What if they just take the curves lol out and make it one full high speed track with lions and booby-traps?

So it'll be like NASCAR/Indy only with lions and booby traps?

 

[Necx0]

There's a difference between limitless development and allowing designers to reach the limits in their own way. Whether a team went with a 1.5l turbo with 12k redline or 2.5l NA with 19k redline, they'd all have about the same ultimate performance that we have now. The difference is some engine types would suit some tracks better, suit certain driving characteristics, suit certain corners etc. We'd see less of the 80 lap parades, and more evident differences between cars and drivers. Which I think is what the sport needs.

Yes! I like that. Especially with more tracks it would lead to a more topsy-turvy season. However I think you might find that parity would be amazingly difficult to achieve. I.e One type of engine/chassis would probably be the one to have.

As for the costs of more races. Well read my epic post again and you will see testing at other locations is banned. Therefore all the money saved by shipping a whole different team (test team) around the world can be put into actually going racing.

It's also why I tried to group that calendar geographically.

 

[Red_Bull]

NASCAR runs a 37 race season with one pit crew for each team. F1 teams are fucking pampered compared to those guys. I can see what you mean about transportation costs, but having a schedule that puts geographically close races next to each other should help out with that.

I know sod all about NASCAR, but they're not travelling all over the world, putting up with the different timezones, working conditions, hours, stresses of being in foreign country, etc. Steve Matchett details the life of an F1 mechanic in his book 'Life in the Fast Lane', and while the regulations have probably eased their workload in recent years, it would still be very demanding.

 

[Devon]

The next thing is, drivers get paid based on their position in a race, better you do the more you get paid. The driver that wins the title at the end of the season, gets a bonus. As a kicker, the bottom few places don't get a damn dime, if you are consistently at the back of the pack... you lose your license.

That wouldn't work, if the driver has a crap car, it will be difficult for them to perform. How do you determine whether it's the car or the drivers performance which is bad?

Making F1 green.....the hard bit. I hardly think myself qualified but had an idea nonetheless. A certain percentage of each teams budget (probably 5-10%) goes to environmentally friendly research. As the cars will be running on biofuel. Obviously bio-fuel needs to be grown and harvested and refined. I'm not sure how much that will all cost but considering 10% of all F1 teams budgets would be around the $200-250million mark. I'm going to take a punt that that will cover a fair chunk of it!!!! This will actually have a decent effect on road car technology as it will quicken the rate at which cars are effectively made "carbon neutral".

That a good idea, why not that money go towards a fund which the FIA uses to run it's own bio-fuel production, instead of relying on third parties, so to speak. Don't know if there would be any sense in that...but it's an idea.

But if F1 cleans itself up and can't attract new sponsors, then pay drivers will become extinct.

This is where the FIA needs to be tougher. Ferrari still have Marlboro sponsorship, even though it's banned. There are many sponsors, Virgin etc who refuse to enter F1 as a sponsor until ALL tobacco sponsors are gone.

My personal F1 decision if I was boss would be to make all teams run 3 cars, with the highest two cars scoring team points and all the drivers scoring championship points.

It can be done. Garages are big enough. Imagine 36 cars on the grid

On the sponsors, I agree, Ferrari should not be allowed to still have Malbaro sponsor them.

On the more cars on the grid, I disagree, I think there can be too many cars on a track. With the V8 Supercar series in Australia, I personally think there are too many cars on the grid, some of the teams/drivers are there just to make up numbers and do nothing to improve the race. It's also easier to keep a track of what's going on with every team/driver during a race with lesser cars on racing, with more cars racing it's hard to cover everyone and therefore you don't even hear about a team/driver during the race. I think the same would happen with Formula 1 if there were alot more cars on the grid, i.e 36.

Finally, they should make it more affordable to be a fan. We shouldn't have to pay hundreds of dollars to go and see a race, we shouldn't have to pay $74 for a cheap cap that doesn't even fit on my giant head and that will be out of date in less than a year anyway. Have you looked at the merchandise at F1.com? It's just fucking outrageous what they'll charge. Thirty pounds - Pounds - for a T-Shirt! Fifty pounds for a keyring! Fifty pounds!

I agree, the Merchandise prices are ridiculous.

I also like the idea of more GPs during a season, it looks like over the next few years the number of GPs during a season is going to continue to increase.

 

[phuckingduck]

I know sod all about NASCAR, but they're not travelling all over the world, putting up with the different timezones, working conditions, hours, stresses of being in foreign country, etc. Steve Matchett details the life of an F1 mechanic in his book 'Life in the Fast Lane', and while the regulations have probably eased their workload in recent years, it would still be very demanding.

If CART's teams are in any way representative of pit crews in F1, these guys have no room to complain. I got to stay in a hotel up in Vancouver that also was housing the Rahal team crew. These guys were out late each night, and all had women on their arms when they returned. Hellooooooo, women on every continent? I don't think the McLaren and Ferrari boys have much trouble in the bars (unless the drivers show up :lol

The hours are probably long, sure. But the aero guys wont be working on the tranny when its borked, and vice versa. The trucks are really quite stellar in this day and age, and so are the garages. So I don't think the conditions are that bad. You have a great diet while at the track; all teams bring chef's for the crew. And when you're all out of things to do (work, hob nobbing, women), there's still the option to just be a tourist in a very diverse series of nations all around the world - and the chance to win races there too

 

[Necx0]

Phillip Morris are giving way too much money to Ferrari for them to give them up though. Someone will have to force the issue. I don't know why they are concerned. Coca-Cola or Virgin would surely fall over themselves to put their logo on the car. THERE is some money!!!

 

[HondaF1]

^ Like I said before, Virgin for example, want in on F1, but not until Tobacco sponsorship has been eradicated from the sport. Ferrari are once again doing things that arent in the best interests of the sport.

 

[KaJuN]

That's something I don't understand about sponsorship in motor racing. In most countries you aren't allowed to advertise tobacco because it's bad for you, but having alcohol company ads on cars that are going very fast is perfectly acceptable. :?

 

[AnGuRuSO]

That's something I don't understood about sponsorship in motor racing. In most countries you aren't allowed to advertise tobacco because it's bad for you, but having alcohol company ads on cars that are going very fast is perfectly acceptable. :?

hahahahaha never thought about that.

 

[Necx0]

Except in the middle east. Alcohol advertising is banned there.

 

[thedguy]

That wouldn't work, if the driver has a crap car, it will be difficult for them to perform. How do you determine whether it's the car or the drivers performance which is bad?

There have been plenty of cases in history where a driver took an inferior car and beat ass. If he still can't win, then he's obviously not the best driver, or he should have found a better ride.

If the driver feels the car sucks than either A) he can go find a better ride or B) leave the series for one that will get him a better ride or C) Put something in his contract that says if he's given an uncompetitive car then they can pay him $X.

That's something I don't understand about sponsorship in motor racing. In most countries you aren't allowed to advertise tobacco because it's bad for you, but having alcohol company ads on cars that are going very fast is perfectly acceptable. :?

A few drunk driving groups have pointed that out to budwieser.

 

[HondaF1]

I think it's generally accepted that there is greater chance of death or serious illness in regards to tobacco, so they have stop promoting it, whereas with alcohol, it's more a lifestyle choice to drink it.

Ok, so people go overboard and can get killed or seriously injured if they drink drive, but to me, I see no problem with the alcohol companies sponsoring F1. They all promote the safe drinking message in their promotion anyway.

 

[Devon]

^ I don't have a problem with Alcohol companies sponsoring F1 or any other sport for that matter either.

 

[Austere]

I don't have a problem with tobacco companies sponsoring F1...