Printable View
The DRS has nothing to do with dirty air. Dirty air has a big influence on the front wing and the stability of the front of the following car.Quote:
Originally Posted by christophulus
DRS has been introduced to artificially create overtaking, overtaking moves void of any overtaking skills as the driver only needs to push a pedal/button to get extra 20km/h on the straight and breeze by the car in front. Apparently it's some kind of entertainment that I fail to grasp.
Which it did because it thought it served a purpose for a while. Now it seems to be realising that it no longer suits its needs and is moving away from its pro-diesel stance. This has often been the FIA's way in the past, not least in terms of the process that led to the three new teams joining the grid.Quote:
Originally Posted by wedge
There are petrol, diesel and hybrid engined cars in the ILMC/ALMS/LMS series while in F1 teams are playing in teh sand with frozen V8s, very imited KERS and a gimmicky DRS.Quote:
Originally Posted by wedge
Let's be honest, it is difficult to compare the level of the two regulation sets.
You're missing the point.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
The point I'm making is that if you look at the major international championships there is an 'equivalencey' formula - nee formula to manipulate the competition in their respective regulations.
I think that this is the absolute crux of the argument:
:up: Hear hear.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
I understand that the FIA wants a better "show", but I tend to ask is that the point of Formula One? Motor Racing at its heart is about who can build the best machinery or in a spec series, who happens to be the best driver. I don't think that either the DRS or the KERS push to pass buttons meet these ends.
Such a thing works very well on video games like Daytona USA or Mario Kart, but the point is that motor racing is neither a video game (although Petrov did try to throw his PS3 controller away in yesterday's race); nor is it played "for fun".
One analogy that I've heard is that it's a bit like the “Hot Ball” in the old Amiga game Speedball 2.
Even with things like extra ballast penalties in Touring Car racing, they don't actively change the behaviour of the car mid-race and mid-lap. A car following already gets a benefit by following in the slipstream of the car in front because the car in front has already punched a hole in the air, giving the following car a second benefit of the DRS is a wee bit silly in my not very paid opinion.
We saw a few great scraps yesterday. Alonso versus Hamilton. Webber versus Kob. Schumacher versus Kob.
We wouldn't have seen the the great battle between Alonso and Hamilton if the Ferrari DRS was working. He would have sailed past and Hamilton wouldn't have been able to defend regardless of how many 'moves' he made.
The Webber versus Kobayashi scrap was made because Marks KERS wasn't working. Without DRS Webber wouldn't have been able to fight back.
I think that the tyre regs and smaller diffusers are enough to make the cars capable of passing more this year. I'd be in favour of getting rid of DRS and keeping KERS.
A driver needs to be intelligent to use his KERS in a way that gives him the best possible advantage. But I'd like to see slacker retrictions on how team can develop their KERS. A technological breakthrough with KERS could really benefit road car efficiency.
I've never moaned about the lack of overtaking on some of Tilke's circuits such as Sepang or Shanghai in previous years, but maybe our view on DRS will change after Catalunya and Valencia.
For me, DRS should act like a dating agency: make the introductions but leave it up to the two people concerned to hit it off.
DRS should give a driver an opportunity to make a pass, but it should still be up to the driver to do the hard work once he's close enough. In Malaysia this worked, more or less. If it simply results in one car breezing past another down the straight then that's artificial.
DRS should act like a forum? :P
I agree absolutely. However, there seems to be an increasing realisation that the endless march of progress has diluted the racing (as opposed to 'show') element to such an extent as to render the sport boring. I can well understand this view, because my interest in Grand Prix racing has nothing to do with strategy or technology. I don't think this makes me the sort of moronic casual viewer these new 'innovations' are supposed to appeal to.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
And F1 has always been an equivalency formula, on top of which we get crappy KERS and gimmicky DRS.Quote:
Originally Posted by wedge
I guess I'll continue missing your point unless I agree with you.