What I think needs to be done with F1

"Robert Maxwell" (madmax13d) 10/02/2013 at 03:04 • Filed to: F1, AmericanRacing

0

0

There is two fronts that needs to be addressed with F1. One is it's distribution of races and the particular venue that are raced in. The second, is that the technical regulations are misguided in reference to the competition between the different constructors. Third, I think there needs to be a way to redress the balance to get North Americans and Asians into F1.

First, I'll start with the venues. I think there are some Grand Prix that simply don't have the fan base to support it year in, and year out, but are supported by the massive backing of the government, and look at it as a prestige event. Shanghai, Bahrain, and Korea, I'm looking at you. Singapore, Australia, Japan, and Malaysia already have the the Far East covered, and make it easy to for a racing fan in Asia to go to a bar, and watch it in person, or in a public place. (I know Australia is far away from the others, but I'm referring to similar time zones) A least a decent percentage of GPs should be able to be watched live without staying up or waking up at an ungodly hour. Its much easier for a Asian or European fan to be engrossed in F1, because they get more exposure to it over the course of the year. F1 was at its peak in North America when there were three races in North America, with fields that featured North American drivers who were developed locally.

My proposal is simple. Have 4 Grand Prix in North America. Keep Austin, but add one on the East coast. As a venue, I think Watkins Glen would be great (I know, the FIA wouldn't like it because a lack of luxury amenities, and its decidedly old-school). However, I think its a worthwhile addition because of the fact that it's character (which is lacking in most F1 courses), and its (relative) proximity to the East Coast megalopolis. Also, Add another roving one split between the USA and Canada, entitled the "North American Grand Prix," and have it be a roving event between three or four world class courses in the USA. My five suggestions would be Indy(yeah, I know), Mosport (I think the development of safety features in the cars mitigate safety concerns), Leguna Seca (I know, a longshot, but still a beautiful course that already has FIA approval), Road America(our Spa), and Road Atlanta( just an awe inspiring course next to a growing city).

Also, the Canadian GP needs to be made secure, and really, the only place for it is the Circuit de Gilles Villeneuve. Is this an over-saturation of our market? Probably. However, for F1 to compete with NASCAR in any reasonable way in the hearts and minds (and wallets) of racing fans, is for it to be more then a stranger that comes around twice annually. They need to cater to us, not vice versa. Its a big deal to chase fans, not investment. I think Bernie has lost his way with this attitude, previous dropping the popular Canadian GP for Abu Dabi, and expanding to Korea and Shanghai.

I think that the limitation on technical advancements to cut costs is actually counter productive. I think more money now is being thrown at smaller technical problems, rather then having an innovative piece of engineering dictate overall progress. I think its a big reason Williams is on a slow downhill trajectory. I suggest the following technical changes.

Have engine design be open. I think that having a displacement limit and nothing more is more entertaining for the fans of the sport. The current stringent limits make reliability the primary factor in engine design, rather then high performance. Next years regulations are even more limiting. So, lets try this, Lets go to an open, 3.0 liter N/A, 1.5 liter Forced induction engine formula. No cap on Redline, no cap on boost pressure. I think mechanical problems make the racing more interesting, and add something more for drivers to be concerned about, adding another ripple of strategy. The added wrinkle of having the choice between V-6, V-8, V-10, or V-12 adds a bit of much needed character to the cars that is sadly lacking.

Second, lets make tires competitive again. F1 goes on and on about being the pinnacle of motorsports. Let the tires reflect that. Like Bridgestone, Michelin, or Goodyeear take a crack at Pirelli. Make the car start on the tires it qualified with, but leave actual rubber choice open to the teams.

Do away with DRS and KERS. Do not artificially stoke passing, the reason why will be covered in the next point.

Limit down force and aerodynamics. Find a way to reduce downforce by 40%. Cars that operate on mechanical grip makes the drivers job more impotant, and makes it more fun to watch for the fans. Cars that look like they are handling on rails are not particularly interesting. The field of formula car aerodynamics have advanced more in the last 10 years then the previous 30. Its made the racing duller and more remote from the average fan. Having less downforce puts less in the hands of the designers, and more in the hands of the drivers. It would reward racers rather then drivers. I want to see how great Vettel is when he doesn't have the best car in the field. I also want to see Alonzo without any room to make excuses.

Here are some suggestions, possibly counterproductive, but I think may be worthwhile to consider. I welcome your comments, and will try to respond to them in turn, as best I can.