If you could make the regulations regarding design....

[cformula1]

If you could make the regulations regarding design, what would your design be.
Take into account:
-cost
-safety
-looks
-overtaking ability
-speed
-durability
-reliability
-2010 sporting and fuel regulations

I would get a 2006-spec GP2 chassis, enlarge it 15%, have 1991-spec F1 wings and have large slicks that go off after 40 minutes of high-intensity driving, and 75 minutes of moderate intensity driving. I would give a choice of a 'soft' or 'hard' tyre that is optional to choose between (ie no mandatory tyre stops.

This method would, in my opinion, provide exciting, enthralling and interesting grands prix that captivate the audiences imagination.

Also the cars would look pretty, too .

[phil1993]

I think I'd agree with you there. Or maybe just 2008-spec F1 cars without all the stupid add-ons they had. In terms of speed, I think we need to go back to the days of 370kph at Monza, rather than just 330kph and I'd have the opportunity to do 0 stops (ie have a fuel tank capable of doing this) but the opportunity to refuel during the race; so you could qualify on low fuel (have low fuel quali too) and get pole, say, at Monaco. Then put on the tyres and never stop. It would create a cracker of a race if there were people stopping once/twice behind trying to overtake

[Ferrariman60]

I would use 2008 spec cars on the current slicks with teams allowed to run turbocharged 4 and 6 cylinder engines, as well as naturally aspirated V8's, V10's, and V12's, all with no rev or power restrictions. Other engine designs like Wankel rotaries and gas turbines could also be permitted, so long as they ran on what would be considered "Gasoline" or standard "Petrol" (for my European friends) Teams would also be allowed to run KERS. There would be no real aerodynamic restrictions (other than the cars must remain in an open-wheel configuration) with movable front and rear wings allowed as well as electronic gizmos like active suspension, traction control, launch control, and engine braking allowed. No anti-lock brakes allowed. Gearboxes could be standard H-pattern manuals all the way to the current 7-speed semi-automatic, no automatic or CVT systems allowed. Safety regulations would be up to current 2009 regulations in terms of restraints, anti-penetration panels, etc. In terms of cost.....I don't care!

[MavF1]

Would be enough for me to go back to 2004-spec cars with V10s and slicks (although cornering-speeds would probably go through the roof). Ban KERS (I never liked the idea to press on a button and get more bhp) but keep aero restrictions (the shark fin is the worst aeropart I've ever seen on a F1 car, HORRIBLE!). In-season testing should be reallowed (yet restricted), engine-development should be freezed.
Beneath the refuelling ban there should be also a tyre-changing ban like in 2005, so the battle is fought only on track. Only big problem to remain is the overtaking-mess, sry, but not even the F1 engineers and officials seem to know a solution, so I don't know what to do either.
And then FIA should stay with certain regulations and not changing them every year!
Oh and cost reduction (as safety) is an issue that should be pushed further, so that new teams can step in as happens next season.

[cformula1]

In terms of speed, I think we need to go back to the days of 370kph at Monza

330kph is an outrage.
It should be 370kph minimum and up to 400-430kph.
As road cars get faster, F1 cars should get faster accordingly.

[MavF1]

As road cars get faster, F1 cars should get faster accordingly.

Yeah, but somewhere you have to draw the line, right?
400-430 kph? Aren't IndyCars doing these speeds? Yet they're racing on ovals and I don't know if brakes could handle this over 60-70 laps.

[Ferrariman60]

I think F1 always was about and should always be about the talent of the driver, the dynamic of the team, and the courage of the engineers to push the envelope of what is thought to be possible. F1 cars 18 years ago were more high-tech than the cars of today. To me, that's a real shame.

[MavF1]

F1 cars 18 years ago were more high-tech than the cars of today. To me, that's a real shame.

How do you mean that? Do you mean technical development in relation to what was possible in this period of time? Yeah, could be so....

[impatientinventor]

I think F1 always was about and should always be about the talent of the driver, the dynamic of the team, and the courage of the engineers to push the envelope of what is thought to be possible. F1 cars 18 years ago were more high-tech than the cars of today. To me, that's a real shame.

I would have to put it at the early 1990s which wasn't... wait a sec... HOLY c**p was that 18 years ago??? Wow!!!

I agree... 1993 the last year of traction control was the pinnacle of the technology controlling the cars. We have much more on the cars today but they aren't allowed to controll anything so it only means that the pit engineers have more ability to tune the car, if they know what they are looking at and then know what to do or if they can even change anything to fix the problem, but the ability of the engineers back home to do some good programming and design better systems has been thrown out the window completely now that testing is effectively eliminated. Now it is build and guess which was just as bad as in the 1970s. We have definately taken a few steps backwards.

I would drop the engines down to 1.8 liter but let them do whatever they want with number of cylinders, configuration, max rpm, variable runner length, injection location, traction control, turbos, KERS... everything is allowed but the engines suppliers are separate from the teams. So STR and Ferrari get the same engine, ecu, transmission, KERS controls packages. I would reduce the minimum weight down to a level such that that teams deciding to run a NA setup have a significant advantage in fuel demands (which comes down to weight) as well as total package weight ove those with KERS. Soooo Turbo teams would have to start with probably 30% more fuel, KERS teams would end the race with a 80 or so KG penalty and NA teams without KERS would start and finish the race lighter and their tires would last longer. O' yea I would tripple the KERS per lap alowance but dissalow chemical energy storage systems. I would keep the aero rules from this year aside from dissalowing any airfoils above the centerline of the wheels. Only a rear diffuser system is allowed.

Hows that for some ideas?

[newtrex]

I think F1 always was about and should always be about the talent of the driver, the dynamic of the team, and the courage of the engineers to push the envelope of what is thought to be possible. F1 cars 18 years ago were more high-tech than the cars of today. To me, that's a real shame.

I would have to put it at the early 1990s which wasn't... wait a sec... HOLY c**p was that 18 years ago??? Wow!!!

I agree... 1993 the last year of traction control was the pinnacle of the technology controlling the cars. We have much more on the cars today but they aren't allowed to controll anything so it only means that the pit engineers have more ability to tune the car, if they know what they are looking at and then know what to do or if they can even change anything to fix the problem, but the ability of the engineers back home to do some good programming and design better systems has been thrown out the window completely now that testing is effectively eliminated. Now it is build and guess which was just as bad as in the 1970s. We have definately taken a few steps backwards.

I would drop the engines down to 1.8 liter but let them do whatever they want with number of cylinders, configuration, max rpm, variable runner length, injection location, traction control, turbos, KERS... everything is allowed but the engines suppliers are separate from the teams. So STR and Ferrari get the same engine, ecu, transmission, KERS controls packages. I would reduce the minimum weight down to a level such that that teams deciding to run a NA setup have a significant advantage in fuel demands (which comes down to weight) as well as total package weight ove those with KERS. Soooo Turbo teams would have to start with probably 30% more fuel, KERS teams would end the race with a 80 or so KG penalty and NA teams without KERS would start and finish the race lighter and their tires would last longer. O' yea I would tripple the KERS per lap alowance but dissalow chemical energy storage systems. I would keep the aero rules from this year aside from dissalowing any airfoils above the centerline of the wheels. Only a rear diffuser system is allowed.

Hows that for some ideas?

Impressive analysis.

Are u an engineer or what??

[impatientinventor]

yup

[cformula1]

As road cars get faster, F1 cars should get faster accordingly.

Yeah, but somewhere you have to draw the line, right?
400-430 kph? Aren't IndyCars doing these speeds? Yet they're racing on ovals and I don't know if brakes could handle this over 60-70 laps.

Yes, but as the world speeds up, the pinnacle of motor racing should speed up at a comparable rate.

[Totopupu]

I would prefer that the car like tourism cars (DTM, WTCC, ...) to have more overtakes.

The speed must be increased (hard with tourism car).

And this must can be watchable at free tv.

I know the F1 I dream is unreal but ...

[cformula1]

I would prefer that the car like tourism cars (DTM, WTCC, ...) to have more overtakes.

The speed must be increased (hard with tourism car).

And this must can be watchable at free tv.

I know the F1 I dream is unreal but ...

What, you mean, F1 cars become touring cars?

Or do you mean have similar aerodynamics to a touring car?

[jianh]

i say bring back V10 !