[Ben]

This is my yearly job of starting the prediction thread for the next season.
I'll start off by saying the title will probably end up with Hamilton again, I suspect Brawn will have another strong year, but not strong enough to win the titles, Red Bull will be strong too, but Mclaren will be the dominant force. Ferrari SHOULD be better but I am weary of them therefore, my pre off season testing prediction will be that Mclaren will win the title, followed by a close battle for 2nd with Red Bull and Brawn, with Ferrari nipping at their heels!!!




(one of the mods please pin!)

[maurethegreat2]

Waaay too early to decide! 2009 season is just over & no 2010 pre-season testing has been done!

[The Professor]

I expect Mclaren will win both titles. Ferrari may also produce a strong car but I don't see them winning it somehow, Brawn will be there or thereabouts, and Red Bull won't.

Roll on 2010 and the next set of controversies

[Ben]

mikathegreat2, on 01 November 2009 - 09:36 PM, said:

Waaay too early to decide! 2009 season is just over & no 2010 pre-season testing has been done!

Who cares, it's all fun. Plus I am already having withdrawal symptoms and this helps a little with my addiction...

[maurethegreat2]

Fun?? OK, de la Rosa FTW!!! Hope he gets a seat in Campos!

[Ben]

Here are the bookies early odds...

William Hill

Lewis Hamilton
9/4
Fernando Alonso
7/2
Sebastian Vettel
11/2
Kimi Raikkonen
11/2
Felipe Massa
7/1
Jenson Button
9/1
Mark Webber
14/1
Nico Rosberg
16/1
Robert Kubica
25/1
Rubens Barrichello
40/1
Nico Hulkenberg
66/1
Nick Heidfeld
80/1
Heikki Kovalainen
100/1
Jarno Trulli
100/1
Timo Glock
100/1
Adrian Sutil
100/1

Ladbrokes

L Hamilton 5/2
F Alonso 7/2
F Massa 6/1
K Raikonnen 6/1
S Vettel 6/1
J Button 9/1
N Rosberg 12/1
M Webber 16/1
R Kubica 25/1
R Barrichello 40/1
A Sutil 50/1
N Heidfield 80/1
J Trulli 100/1
T Glock 100/1
H Kovalainen 150/1

This post has been edited by Ben: 01 November 2009 - 09:46 PM

[lewisthegreat2]

[Ben]

Thats the spirit!

[AleHop]

Ferrari started working on the new car some months ago. When such a big team works for so long on a design it can only bring two things: a beast or a beuty. Same thing applies to Renault. Massa/Alonso, Kubica/??? any of them could win the title but...

On the other hand McLaren-Mercedes is probably the best car at the moment and they proved they know how to develop the car during the season even with no testings at all (simulator?). Mercedes engine will be a guarranty of success and Hamilton/??? could have a very relaxed season but...

Brawn and Red Bull will keep the goods of 2009 car and they might still improve a little bit. I'd say Red Bull will be stronger than Brawn but both of them will do well. Button/???, Vettel/Webber have showed they know how to drive but I'd say only Vettel can really win next year.

If I had to pick just one driver I would say Hamilton.

The winner could be Vettel, Massa, Raikkonen, Kubica, Alonso or Hamilton.

[maurethegreat2]

[Insider]

Ben, on 01 November 2009 - 09:45 PM, said:

Here are the bookies early odds...

William Hill

Lewis Hamilton
9/4
Fernando Alonso
7/2
Sebastian Vettel
11/2
Kimi Raikkonen
11/2
Felipe Massa
7/1
Jenson Button
9/1
Mark Webber
14/1
Nico Rosberg
16/1
Robert Kubica
25/1
Rubens Barrichello
40/1
Nico Hulkenberg
66/1
Nick Heidfeld
80/1
Heikki Kovalainen
100/1
Jarno Trulli
100/1
Timo Glock
100/1
Adrian Sutil
100/1

Ladbrokes

L Hamilton 5/2
F Alonso 7/2
F Massa 6/1
K Raikonnen 6/1
S Vettel 6/1
J Button 9/1
N Rosberg 12/1
M Webber 16/1
R Kubica 25/1
R Barrichello 40/1
A Sutil 50/1
N Heidfield 80/1
J Trulli 100/1
T Glock 100/1
H Kovalainen 150/1

I'll take JB at 9/1 any day ! He's already won me a fortune and I'm happy to put some back. He's learned how to win and he's the best overtaker in the business. He's going to be the KIng of tyre wear and brake management. Hamilton @ 5/2 - they're having a laugh!

[lewisthegreat2]

mikathegreat2, on 01 November 2009 - 10:57 PM, said:

World Constructors' Championship
1. Prodrive Rainmasters
2. USF1

Oddly enough, Raindrive Promasters and Team US F1 will have the same exact car: none. Hehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehelolol.

[F1 FANatic]

ok, I was thinking of this. First lets look at the picture as it is right now.

Ferrari: They have totally dropped developing their car since mid July. Hungry was the last race Ferrari had any form of update to their car that was not a one-off piece like a Monza wing or brake ducts because of more or less cooling needs. Kimi has been making clear that Ferrari have been developing the 2010 car ever since that without the distractions of this season. They are also getting Alonso, and though I think he is an over-payed prima donna who whines way too much about irrelevant crap, he knows how to make a car go FAST given the chance and a team that can pull its resources together.

RBR: The problem that they have had is the Renault lump. They have had the best car on the grid since Britain with the exception of a race or two. All of their troubles have been because of the engine. With Adrian Newey behind the design they can expect another good year, especially with Vettel being just as good and twice as fierce as either Alonso or Hamilton.

Merc: Their pace has been because of KERS. Without it they are dead in the water and they wont have that advantage next year. I can already see Hamilton contemplating leaving seeing that Merc is not the place it once was, especially if Stutgart pulls out.

Brawn: they have lacked development ever since Britain. The fact they won 6 of the first 7 has really masked the fact that they had a mid-field car since the middle of the season. I think they will really have a shock next year when the funds dry up and they are stuck down by Williams hoping enough people mess up to scrounge a point or two.

Toyota: They have really done well the last bit of the season. They need better drivers. Ones that can both race and develop a car, a Heidfield could do that and KK has shown he has the stones to go balls to the wall

Renault: They are loosing Alonso, thats a big loss, and they have already lost their chief designer from the WCC years.

And let's look at next year. Most people think the rules will stay the same but there are a few BIG things that will dramatically impact next year.

1. KERS is finally gone after being the most expensive cost-saving measure of all time. No more pulling a Merc like this race of setting the car up for one sector and just hoping the time you gain is more than the time you loose in the other two sectors. No more: I-cant-be-passed button. And no more: I-get-a-free-pass-on-a-1.3km-strait-even-though-my-car-is-crap button.

2. No refueling. Now, this might sound simple but in a modern F1 car this is a tremendous task. You think, oh, just make the fuel tank twice as big, right? Wrong!! The entire rear end needs to be completely redesigned to account for all that extra volume. Also, the weight distribution will be thrown way further back during the early race, a nightmare for the team. Tire wear, even when driving so as to protect them will be horrible. And as the fuel drains then the balast will be way too far forward and you have the same problem but in reverse.

3. double defusers will play a big part. most teams have had jerry-rigged versions on their cars this year. Next year will mean that all the teams will have had the concept in the original design. And so thanks to double defusers there will be almost no overtaking.

Next year will be almost just like this year in that the cars will be almost completely different fundamentally.

[Insider]

Of course, the tail end of the cars will look a little more bloated but all the teams have known about the new regs for a long time and consequently, ballast re-alingment and balance criteria has been at the top of their design teams' agenda from Day One. Ferrari may have shifted their resources to the 2010 car but that's because the 2009 car was virtually undriveable. A complete re-think was clearly required - a clean sheet of paper but with no Rory Byrne. I think his retirement has impacted on the team enormously. Massa and Alonso will drive the wheels off whatever they are given but don't hold your breath. McLaren's 2.8 sec, late season improvement cannot be solely attributed to KERS as they basically re-built the car from scatch, aero-wise plus a complete new floor! However, the lack of KERS will be a major challenge for them, I believe. Both JB and KR must have this fact at the back of their minds. RBR's mid-season re-surgence is almost certainly down to the fact that they basically morphed the 09 car into a Brawn albeit, with a slightly different nose which, I have no doubt the BGP002 will be sporting next year. I am not sure Stuttgart will give them an engine, especially if Daimler take a stake in Brawn. Nevertheless, they are sure to be one of the main protagonists, along with a re-vitalised Toyota, I hope. Kobayashi has been a revelation and has clearly showed the potential of the car and engine - Kovi or Sutil would be a good partner there. The real downside of the 2010 reg changes for me is that they will probably turn Q1/2 & 3 into 3 lap sprints on fumes. Hey ho, we'll see.

[Ben]

So do we all believe the rumours that Mercedes are going to drop Mclaren and shift to Brawn? If this is the case, and with the might of Mercedes behind them, I think Brawn could be a major force for a number of years to come!

[Persevere]

Lot's of interesting comments coming so soon after the end of the 2009 season and, yes, it can be fun to speculate so why not. If I can interpret the rumors and hints I think the McLaren-Mercedes partnership will continue for one more season. That should provide stability to the team and you would expect them to be strong next year. For a number of reasons mostly stated above I also think Ferrari will re-bound. Does anyone know for a fact if Red Bull will indeed continue with Renault? If they could stick a Mercedes lump behind young Mr. Vettel I would rate his chances for a championship very high. Brawn?? I wish them well but wonder if they will suffer from the sophmore slump. They were so fast and so dominant at the start of the season that they were allowed to have some middling race weekends thereafter. I don't think the big boys will be caught with their pants down again. By the way, has everyone heard that Bridgestone is pulling the plug after 2010? After being treated so shabbily only a few seasons ago I wonder if Michelin is interested and will be courted by the FIA via Mr. Todt?

[Insider]

Ben, on 02 November 2009 - 09:31 AM, said:

So do we all believe the rumours that Mercedes are going to drop Mclaren and shift to Brawn? If this is the case, and with the might of Mercedes behind them, I think Brawn could be a major force for a number of years to come!

Haug has put the dampers on this rumour today, saying the Merc/McLaren tie up is long term project. OK, it might be - on paper. There is little doubt in my mind that McLaren are developing their own engine. I expect to see it in the new roadcar by 2011 and in F1 by 2012. Merc may own 40% of Macca but it does not mean they won't get more involved at Brawn. It makes good business sense. They just won the WDC for them. JB stalling on a new deal is all about getting the best car available to him - not money. The position of Mercedes with regard to BGP is crucial to this.

[AleHop]

Mercedes will continue two more years (2010 and 2011) with McLaren. That's what I read on the newspapers in Spain. I think Mercedes is the best engine. I hope the rest of the teams can improve theirs or we could see a boring competition between McLaren-Mercedes, Brawn-Mercedes...

No KERS, it won't be a problem for any team, they know how to be fast without that piece of crap. No refueling will have a big impact but most of the teams, engineers, etc. know how to minimize it. They did it in the past, they still have the data somewhere (mind or computers). No fuel-race qualifying, it might be good for some drivers and bad for some others but it's not big deal from a team point of view.

Brawn, RBR and McMerc have a good car. Brawn had the best car at the start of the season and they couldn't improve too much because of money and because they were very good. The other two have proved they know how to develp their cars without testing. and they have the best car of the grid. Renault and Ferrari were unable to develop their cars without testing.

[F1 FANatic]

Insider, on 02 November 2009 - 07:14 AM, said:

Of course, the tail end of the cars will look a little more bloated but all the teams have known about the new regs for a long time and consequently, ballast re-alingment and balance criteria has been at the top of their design teams' agenda from Day One. Ferrari may have shifted their resources to the 2010 car but that's because the 2009 car was virtually undriveable. A complete re-think was clearly required - a clean sheet of paper but with no Rory Byrne. I think his retirement has impacted on the team enormously. Massa and Alonso will drive the wheels off whatever they are given but don't hold your breath. McLaren's 2.8 sec, late season improvement cannot be solely attributed to KERS as they basically re-built the car from scatch, aero-wise plus a complete new floor! However, the lack of KERS will be a major challenge for them, I believe. Both JB and KR must have this fact at the back of their minds. RBR's mid-season re-surgence is almost certainly down to the fact that they basically morphed the 09 car into a Brawn albeit, with a slightly different nose which, I have no doubt the BGP002 will be sporting next year. I am not sure Stuttgart will give them an engine, especially if Daimler take a stake in Brawn. Nevertheless, they are sure to be one of the main protagonists, along with a re-vitalised Toyota, I hope. Kobayashi has been a revelation and has clearly showed the potential of the car and engine - Kovi or Sutil would be a good partner there. The real downside of the 2010 reg changes for me is that they will probably turn Q1/2 & 3 into 3 lap sprints on fumes. Hey ho, we'll see.

I think the amount of fuel that needs to be carried next year is way more than people realize. Right now F1 cars have a capacity of about 90-100kg of fuel. this lasts them a bit more than 1/2 race distance because one stoppers usually make it a few laps further than half distance. This would mean that next year cars need to carry 170-190kg of fuel for the entire race. Lets calculate the volume of a current fuel tank then. Normal road gasoline density is about .71-.77 that of water, so for easy math lets split the difference at .75.

simple physics says D=m/V, we know density and mass so volume is a no brainer. I left out units because its a pain to write it all down.

.75=95/V
.75V=95
V~126L

Now litres to m3

1L=1000cm3
126L(1000cm3/1L)=126000cm3
126000cm3=.126m3

lets simplify .126m3 to .125m3 for easy math. To find a realistic example of the size of such a box take out our tape measure and measure out the length of one side of a box with a volume of .125m3. To find that distance just take the cube root of .125m3 and you get .5m. So a box that's half a meter on each side or roughly 1.5ft for the Americans here. Now for next year you somehow have to find the space in an F1 car to put another box like that so you don't run out of fuel.

As for the weight distribution, here we go. Next year the cars will be allowed to run at a minimum of 620kg without gasoline i think, or maybe 615kg, I know they upped the limit a bit. Cars always run with a slightly rearward distribution of weight. Since the fuel tank is behind the center of gravity it acts as natural ballast there. To counter too much of a rearward balance teams use ballast to move the balance back toward the front. If we look at this year, on a full fuel tank teams will have ~95kg on the rear of the car. This, at 605kg+95kg=700kg, is approximately 13% of the total car weight at full tank. If the car is set up for 48% front weight then that means the car is running 336kg in front and 364kg in the back. As we loose fuel the car slowly moves to 336kg front and only 269kg in the back. Now you are running at 55% front distribution. Not too bad, thats 7% of change of weight distribution over 1/2 race distance.

Now, lets look at fuel in 2010. 615kg+185kg=800kg. Still starting at 48% front distribution we get 384kg in front and 416kg in the back. Subtract 185kg from the back and you are left with 231kg in the back of the car. that moves your over all distribution from 48-52 to 62-38. And that means a 14% change of front-rear distribution over the entire race. Not only that, the amount of weight you loose as to the total weight of the car increases dramatically. at 95kg fuel you loose 12% of your over all weight of the car. At 185kg of fuel you loose around 25% of your over all weight.

What kind of impact will this have? A lot. Team still need to run both compounds of tire per race. But to counter act the massive shift in Weight distribution teams will have to run much more back weighted to begin with so the car does not become extremely oversteery toward the end of the race. This also means way more rear tire ware in the first half. I bet you you will never see anybody use the soft tires at the start because the cars would just shred them to bits with all that weight, no matter how carefully a driver drives. That means that almost all the strategy from pit stops is eliminated. No refueling means no chance to over take in the pits. And therefore everybody has to pretty much use the same tire strategy as well. This all means that far from increasing overtaking anywhere, we will see far less.

If people remember, why was refueling introduced again? Answer: because a lack of refueling as cars became ever more aero dependent meant three seasons before 94 that saw so little action that refueling was introduced as a way to ad spectacle. So now, somehow, in an era ten times more aero dependent, with no development of engines, and no driver aids, and no mechanical solutions like mass dampers to counter the effects of aero turbulence, the lack of refueling will make drivers overtake? Don't make me laugh.

/*end rant

[JHS]

mikathegreat2, on 01 November 2009 - 10:57 PM, said:

Wow Eric, that's actually a pretty accurate prediction.

Wow, so you really are Doctor Who! Nice to meet you!

Darn it, you've just ruined next season for us now!

My predictions:
Somebody will win
Somebody will come second
Somebody will score no points
Some drivers will get fired.
Whitmarsh will be the next big F1 name to be banned for life
Controversy will arise mid season as Briatore is spotted sneaking into a track and handing a mysterious peice of paper to Alonso......
Soon after, Alonso will retire and go and form a new series, FA1 and see the end of F1 as we know it.
Briatore will do a manic, madman laugh when this happens, Bernie will cry, Todt will go off and find the ladies that carried out Max's spanking. He has nothing else to do now after all.

[Jean Todt]

F1 FANatic, on 02 November 2009 - 06:58 PM, said:

I think the amount of fuel that needs to be carried next year is way more than people realize. Right now F1 cars have a capacity of about 90-100kg of fuel. this lasts them a bit more than 1/2 race distance because one stoppers usually make it a few laps further than half distance. This would mean that next year cars need to carry 170-190kg of fuel for the entire race. Lets calculate the volume of a current fuel tank then. Normal road gasoline density is about .71-.77 that of water, so for easy math lets split the difference at .75.

simple physics says D=m/V, we know density and mass so volume is a no brainer. I left out units because its a pain to write it all down.

.75=95/V
.75V=95
V~126L

Now litres to m3

1L=1000cm3
126L(1000cm3/1L)=126000cm3
126000cm3=.126m3

lets simplify .126m3 to .125m3 for easy math. To find a realistic example of the size of such a box take out our tape measure and measure out the length of one side of a box with a volume of .125m3. To find that distance just take the cube root of .125m3 and you get .5m. So a box that's half a meter on each side or roughly 1.5ft for the Americans here. Now for next year you somehow have to find the space in an F1 car to put another box like that so you don't run out of fuel.

As for the weight distribution, here we go. Next year the cars will be allowed to run at a minimum of 620kg without gasoline i think, or maybe 615kg, I know they upped the limit a bit. Cars always run with a slightly rearward distribution of weight. Since the fuel tank is behind the center of gravity it acts as natural ballast there. To counter too much of a rearward balance teams use ballast to move the balance back toward the front. If we look at this year, on a full fuel tank teams will have ~95kg on the rear of the car. This, at 605kg+95kg=700kg, is approximately 13% of the total car weight at full tank. If the car is set up for 48% front weight then that means the car is running 336kg in front and 364kg in the back. As we loose fuel the car slowly moves to 336kg front and only 269kg in the back. Now you are running at 55% front distribution. Not too bad, thats 7% of change of weight distribution over 1/2 race distance.

Now, lets look at fuel in 2010. 615kg+185kg=800kg. Still starting at 48% front distribution we get 384kg in front and 416kg in the back. Subtract 185kg from the back and you are left with 231kg in the back of the car. that moves your over all distribution from 48-52 to 62-38. And that means a 14% change of front-rear distribution over the entire race. Not only that, the amount of weight you loose as to the total weight of the car increases dramatically. at 95kg fuel you loose 12% of your over all weight of the car. At 185kg of fuel you loose around 25% of your over all weight.

What kind of impact will this have? A lot. Team still need to run both compounds of tire per race. But to counter act the massive shift in Weight distribution teams will have to run much more back weighted to begin with so the car does not become extremely oversteery toward the end of the race. This also means way more rear tire ware in the first half. I bet you you will never see anybody use the soft tires at the start because the cars would just shred them to bits with all that weight, no matter how carefully a driver drives. That means that almost all the strategy from pit stops is eliminated. No refueling means no chance to over take in the pits. And therefore everybody has to pretty much use the same tire strategy as well. This all means that far from increasing overtaking anywhere, we will see far less.

If people remember, why was refueling introduced again? Answer: because a lack of refueling as cars became ever more aero dependent meant three seasons before 94 that saw so little action that refueling was introduced as a way to ad spectacle. So now, somehow, in an era ten times more aero dependent, with no development of engines, and no driver aids, and no mechanical solutions like mass dampers to counter the effects of aero turbulence, the lack of refueling will make drivers overtake? Don't make me laugh.

/*end rant

[AleHop]

F1 FANatic, on 02 November 2009 - 06:58 PM, said:

If people remember, why was refueling introduced again? Answer: because a lack of refueling as cars became ever more aero dependent meant three seasons before 94 that saw so little action that refueling was introduced as a way to ad spectacle. So now, somehow, in an era ten times more aero dependent, with no development of engines, and no driver aids, and no mechanical solutions like mass dampers to counter the effects of aero turbulence, the lack of refueling will make drivers overtake? Don't make me laugh.

/*end rant

Totalmente de acuerdo.

Double diffusers are the worse piece of crap for overtaking. Why FIA, FOTA, FOM, etc... have decided to keep that next year?

Most of the very few overtakings we've seen this season were lighter to heavier cars, pit stops or bad tyre mangament/selection...

NEW RULES

No KERS
No refueling
No fuel-race qualifying
Double diffusers

[F1 FANatic]

but how can you give a thumbs up to no refueling if it removes 1/3 of the entire overtaking equation.

now we are left with pit stops, which will be far shorter and so have less of an impact, and tire choice will be taken out of the equation just because of the fact that the cars are way to heavy to run on the softs until the end of the race.

[AleHop]

F1 FANatic, on 03 November 2009 - 04:05 PM, said:

but how can you give a thumbs up to no refueling if it removes 1/3 of the entire overtaking equation.

I'm not a big fan of fuel strategies. Proper overtaking must be done on track and I'm sure we would see good racing next year if...

The start and the first few laps will bring some overtaking because with 200 extra kg it will be easy to make a mistake. Then we can have some boring laps, like it happens now. As you said, at the end of the race the car will behave in completely different way. Many drivers will suffer a lot but those who are really good I hope they can overcome the situation with a masterful driving.

The problem will be again the double diffusers, a driver can be a second quicker to realise he can only follow the slower car in front because of the double diffuser lethal weapon. Drivers are used to drive a car set up for a specific amount of fuel, like 50 kg. They'll need to get fitter next year, they'll have to fight the car. It might still be as boring as it was 2009 but the problem will be the f...ing dirty air.

Why FIA got rid of advanced aerodynamics and winglets to allow double diffusers? That's the problem.

[Insider]

F1 FANatic, on 02 November 2009 - 06:58 PM, said:

I think the amount of fuel that needs to be carried next year is way more than people realize. Right now F1 cars have a capacity of about 90-100kg of fuel. this lasts them a bit more than 1/2 race distance because one stoppers usually make it a few laps further than half distance. This would mean that next year cars need to carry 170-190kg of fuel for the entire race. Lets calculate the volume of a current fuel tank then. Normal road gasoline density is about .71-.77 that of water, so for easy math lets split the difference at .75.

simple physics says D=m/V, we know density and mass so volume is a no brainer. I left out units because its a pain to write it all down.

.75=95/V
.75V=95
V~126L

Now litres to m3

1L=1000cm3
126L(1000cm3/1L)=126000cm3
126000cm3=.126m3

lets simplify .126m3 to .125m3 for easy math. To find a realistic example of the size of such a box take out our tape measure and measure out the length of one side of a box with a volume of .125m3. To find that distance just take the cube root of .125m3 and you get .5m. So a box that's half a meter on each side or roughly 1.5ft for the Americans here. Now for next year you somehow have to find the space in an F1 car to put another box like that so you don't run out of fuel.

As for the weight distribution, here we go. Next year the cars will be allowed to run at a minimum of 620kg without gasoline i think, or maybe 615kg, I know they upped the limit a bit. Cars always run with a slightly rearward distribution of weight. Since the fuel tank is behind the center of gravity it acts as natural ballast there. To counter too much of a rearward balance teams use ballast to move the balance back toward the front. If we look at this year, on a full fuel tank teams will have ~95kg on the rear of the car. This, at 605kg+95kg=700kg, is approximately 13% of the total car weight at full tank. If the car is set up for 48% front weight then that means the car is running 336kg in front and 364kg in the back. As we loose fuel the car slowly moves to 336kg front and only 269kg in the back. Now you are running at 55% front distribution. Not too bad, thats 7% of change of weight distribution over 1/2 race distance.

Now, lets look at fuel in 2010. 615kg+185kg=800kg. Still starting at 48% front distribution we get 384kg in front and 416kg in the back. Subtract 185kg from the back and you are left with 231kg in the back of the car. that moves your over all distribution from 48-52 to 62-38. And that means a 14% change of front-rear distribution over the entire race. Not only that, the amount of weight you loose as to the total weight of the car increases dramatically. at 95kg fuel you loose 12% of your over all weight of the car. At 185kg of fuel you loose around 25% of your over all weight.

What kind of impact will this have? A lot. Team still need to run both compounds of tire per race. But to counter act the massive shift in Weight distribution teams will have to run much more back weighted to begin with so the car does not become extremely oversteery toward the end of the race. This also means way more rear tire ware in the first half. I bet you you will never see anybody use the soft tires at the start because the cars would just shred them to bits with all that weight, no matter how carefully a driver drives. That means that almost all the strategy from pit stops is eliminated. No refueling means no chance to over take in the pits. And therefore everybody has to pretty much use the same tire strategy as well. This all means that far from increasing overtaking anywhere, we will see far less.

If people remember, why was refueling introduced again? Answer: because a lack of refueling as cars became ever more aero dependent meant three seasons before 94 that saw so little action that refueling was introduced as a way to ad spectacle. So now, somehow, in an era ten times more aero dependent, with no development of engines, and no driver aids, and no mechanical solutions like mass dampers to counter the effects of aero turbulence, the lack of refueling will make drivers overtake? Don't make me laugh.

/*end rant

Good post. Of course, you could have a point with regard to overtaking. In the early 90s, racing was virtually non-existant but fuel and engine technology has moved on somewhat in the last fifteen years. We know that Formula One fuel can only contain compounds that are found in commercial petrol, unlike some of the more exotic blends used in US motor sport but F1 mixtures can be tweaked and engines made to burn leaner. Mansell and Co had to undergo the terrifying experience of having rubber bladders of fuel running alongside their legs! Now, all fuel must be located to the rear of the survival cell. Clearly then, we'll be looking at a longer wheelbase on the cars to accommodate the new 'double' bag which will play hell with the C.O.G. but there are some massive brains out there who have already worked this one out, I am sure.

[Kopite Girl]

David Coulthard to win. Oh, Sh#t. It can't be his year next season!
In all seriousness - Button to retain his crown, but there will be major scraps between him and Alonso! Yay!

[F1 FANatic]

Insider, on 03 November 2009 - 06:05 PM, said:

Good post. Of course, you could have a point with regard to overtaking. In the early 90s, racing was virtually non-existant but fuel and engine technology has moved on somewhat in the last fifteen years. We know that Formula One fuel can only contain compounds that are found in commercial petrol, unlike some of the more exotic blends used in US motor sport but F1 mixtures can be tweaked and engines made to burn leaner. Mansell and Co had to undergo the terrifying experience of having rubber bladders of fuel running alongside their legs! Now, all fuel must be located to the rear of the survival cell. Clearly then, we'll be looking at a longer wheelbase on the cars to accommodate the new 'double' bag which will play hell with the C.O.G. but there are some massive brains out there who have already worked this one out, I am sure.

I doubt that teams will go for longer wheel bases. The 248F1 proved that it is just not really that feasible with all of the stupid Tilke tracks. The lack of almost any medium or high speed corners makes a longer wheel base less attractive. Most corners are either so slow that you need the short wheelbase or corners are so long and fast that in a modern car they drive like straits. I think far more likely is that teams will have to make the back end less like the so-called "coke bottle".

I think teams that opt for the longer car to keep the narrow rear end will not be as competitive as ones that keep the short wheelbase and make the cars less narrow.

[Insider]

F1 FANatic, on 04 November 2009 - 01:21 AM, said:

I doubt that teams will go for longer wheel bases. The 248F1 proved that it is just not really that feasible with all of the stupid Tilke tracks. The lack of almost any medium or high speed corners makes a longer wheel base less attractive. Most corners are either so slow that you need the short wheelbase or corners are so long and fast that in a modern car they drive like straits. I think far more likely is that teams will have to make the back end less like the so-called "coke bottle".

I think teams that opt for the longer car to keep the narrow rear end will not be as competitive as ones that keep the short wheelbase and make the cars less narrow.

There will obviously be some chassis lengthening - you can only accommodate that much fuel in a short, narrow car - no matter how innovative the design may be. I'm not crazy about any of the new tracks, to be honest. They may please the eye but the penalties for poor driving have almost been eradicated. The deep gravel traps - which slowed the car down - have been replaced with skating rinks, where the errant driver is hurtled towards the tyre walls at terrifying speed - unbelievably stupid, IMHO. With the singular exception of Felipe, most injuries in the past four years have been to the lower back or limbs. The new stadia are all half empty too! I don't know about you but I cannot afford to go to a GP unless I get a freebie. It is horrendously expensive. I digress. I expect the 2010 cars to look a little dart-like. Although originally commissioned by Max to negate the weight distribution anomalies associated with KERS for the 2010 season, [because the FIA only thought to mention it to Bridgestone in March this year when all the cars were at Jerez], narrower front tyres will arrive too. How does that figure in your calculations?

[F1 FANatic]

Narrower fronts will mean that the optimum weight distribution will naturally be pushed back. that is good news for the beginning of the race, but will multiply the effects of the weight loss due to fuel consumption. I think the principle of changing the tire size to move around the optimum weight distribution makes sense and is one of the few decisions the FIA rules makers have made that make sense. But, like always, the execution of the plan was made haphazardly and just screwed F1 up even more.

If you look at the main problem today it is the aero dependency. And now the FIA has reduced grip at the front, making overtaking even harder because the cars will naturally be more understeery. I would have much rather seen the rears become bigger. This would have still moved the weight distribution back if the change in size was proportional to what it would have been with the fronts were made smaller.

Now having the weight further back is useful in the beginning and of course means that over the entire race the shift of imbalance from back to front wont be as dramatic. It will still be the same percentage of some 14% but you could run at 48-52 and end at 62-38 or you could start at 42-58 and end at 56-44. Now when I wrote my first post I didn't think teams would really starts at 48-52 and just let it flop to an absurd 62-36. The new tires solve some of the problems the teams will face but again because of a lack of grip the teams will just rely more on aero and changing the front wing as the race goes on.

I think the FIA has a fundamental problem when making rules. They see a problem with today's cars. Lets take for example the KERS weight thing and the new tires next year. They see the problem as: The cars have too much of the weight distribution in the front. They say: Lets make the fronts narrower and move the distribution back. Here is the problem though, they only think of the problem they solve and not the problems they cause. If the FIA were to say: The cars' weight distribution needs to be moved back. And then they were to come up with different plans, one being smaller fronts, another larger rears. Then they could look at the problems they would cause by implementing each solution. fronts means less grip overall, more aero dependence, therefore less overtaking. Larger rears mean more overall grip, less aero dependence, maybe more overtaking. Larger rears would also probably mean less rear tire ware from the massive fuel loads because the tires are less likely to slide laterally which is what causes all the wear problems.

of course larger rears have their drawbacks too but if you look at the overall mission of the FIA in the last years: more overtaking, safer cars, all those thing. Every moves the FIA has made presently have looked to me like independently thought of solutions to what they think to be independent problems. But what the FIA has done is just negate half their changes with the other half they have made.

As for your points about the new tracks, I agree 100%, the gravel traps made it so that a mistake was a mistake and you probably did not finish the race. I think the race that really demonstrates this is the 07 Belgium GP. Both Hamilton and Massa during the race went wide during the race at Pouhon. And I mean really wide. Hamilton made it almost to the wall and Massa 3/4 to the wall. With a gravel trap there their races would have been done, but with the tarmac they get a free pass. I think the new tarmac run offs have a horrible flaw in the way drivers see them mentally. The tarmac lets drivers take risks that are counter to good racing and just good road safety, something the FIA is very worried about, and quite rightly so. With tarmac the drivers can push so far past the limit with no consequences. I was always taught that when I'm racing I should start well below my limit and work up to it, that is safe for the others and for me. But now drivers seem to start above the limit and then try and dial it back till they find how fast they can go safely. From experience, it is far harder to dial it back then to dial it up.

And tiket prices, dont get me started. I have already made peace with the fact I will never go see a race in my lifetime. Sorry, I have a tenancy to write way too much I think haha...

[Insider]

The funny thing is, the 2010 regs clearly do require considerable changes to the current cars. Strange thing is, all the teams say such changes are minimal. At least, no one has said anything in public against them. Maybe, they know something we don't?