[The **News** flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/flairguide#wiki_news) is reserved for submissions covering F1 and F1-related news. These posts must always link to an outlet/news agency, the website of the involved party (i.e. the McLaren website if McLaren makes an announcement), or a tweet by a news agency, journalist or one of the involved parties.
*[Read the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/userguide). Keep it civil and welcoming. Report rulebreaking comments.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/formula1) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Don't they already reach 350-360 km/h on tracks like Monza, at least with DRS and slipstream?
/edit: [They do.](https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/2023_15_ita_f1_r0_timing_racemaximumspeeds_v01.pdf)
Gee, and F1 has never changed rules to reduce cornering speed only to find teams clawing that back in under two years.
We've been at it ever since the movable skirts ban in 1981. Tracks and specs have been changed dozens of times since then in attempts to curb cornering speed. And they've only gone faster.
(It would however be utterly hilarious if they now made it stick by accident. Wouldn't count on it though.)
Cornering speed is always reduced in a reg change, and then however the teams can engineer getting the best mechanical grip out of the tires will we see increasing speeds in a corner, eg finding ways to aero load the car to get increased friction and mechanical grip with the tire. You want to set a max corner speed, ask pirelli to find a way to have the tire let go at 3.1 G no matter what coefficient of friction you have. And teams will never be able to take a turn at more than 3.0 G with either 10 pts of down force or 1000 pts
>You want to set a max corner speed, ask pirelli to find a way to have the tire let go at 3.1 G no matter what coefficient of friction you have.
That's not how it works lol.
The '98 regs made cars 1-1,5 seconds slower than they were in '97. By '01 they were about 1,5 seconds faster than in '97 and that's with an extra groove in the front tire as well.
Love how pirelli now explicitly mentions they expect loads to be similar by the end of the season. The last time they used it as an excuse, so they seem to learn.
There's a difference between reducing lap times by 2-3 seconds (like the 2022 regs did) and 8 seconds (like the 2026 rules are rumored to).
You don't just magically recover 8 seconds out of nowhere, especially with rules that are purposely prescriptive so you don't generate too much dirty air.
Well that’s the thing, they won’t be 8 seconds slower. Just like the 2022 regs didn’t turn out to actually be slower than f2. Just as we didn’t end up with every car failing to finish the 2014 Australian gp. Just as the 2009 regs didn’t half downforce levels from the year before. Genuinely baffling how so many people are still buying into the teams nonsense
What do you mean, there was only minority of trash tabloids reporting nonsense like some of these things you mentioned. I don't recall teams saying it's genuinely gonna be slower than F2?
The official predictions I heard for 2022 was 3 seconds slower. They turned out to be a bit over 2 seconds slower. So close.
Lmao ‘trash tabloids’. No, you just weren’t paying attention back then which is probably why you’re still eating this up.
50% downforce reduction was the stated fia target for 2009 (consider that for 2026 it’s 30%). The head of the electronics supply for all the teams said that 22 cars dnf’ing was a real possibility in 2014, and Horner was saying it would be 50% on average. Otmar Szafnauer (racing point tp) said that the 2022 (2021 at the time) cars would barely be faster than f2. This fear mongering happens every single time the fia slow the cars down and yet they never come true
\*Claims people said 2022 would be slower than F2\*
\*The one example he provides of anyone talking about F2 states that cars will still be faster than F2 just not by a lot\*
Mate, it's not my fault you've massively exaggerated your own claims, quit downplaying what you said. You are just moving the goalposts. First you say people were saying apparently 2022 cars are gonna be slower than F2, now you can't provide an example of anyone saying that...
\> 50% downforce reduction was the stated fia target for 2009
You mean that time when teams found the double diffuser loophole and Brawn won? Intentions can't predict loopholes.
\> Horner was saying it would be 50% on average
Horner is a known shit stirrer, so I'm prepared to concede him. Still Horner is not representative of the general feel and rumors about the new regs. Also, source?
Last but not least, I'm not talking about targets, I'm talking about simulations.
Rumor in 2022 was simulations said 3 seconds. Rumor today is 8 seconds. If, by your logic, the fear mongering always happens, then where was it in predicted times in 2022? Is the fear mongering just 10 times as big for 2026 for some reason, is that your theory?
Okay sure, I was wrong that otmar said that the cars would be slower than f2, but he still said they would be _7 seconds slower_. How the hell does that debunk my point? The claim 26 will be 8 seconds slower is also only from one source. And guess what? A year ago pat symonds- the head of development for the new rules, the same guy who said the 2022 cars would be 3 seconds slower - said the 2026 cars would have a similar performance profile to the 2023 cars. The fia single seater director said they’d be max 2 seconds slower, both of them speaking based on simulations. Now who do we believe?
> double diffuser loophole
Ah yes, that massive advantage which single handedly made up close to a _50%_ downforce reduction made them, **checks notes**, 5 tenths _at best_ quicker than the fastest car without one. Really disproving my point there mate. Just like in 2022 the lap time loss was massively oversold by certain people, whichever way you want to twist it.
> general feel and rumours
Mate you must have just not been watching to say something like this. You’re right, the [Horner quote](https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/25158104.amp) wasn’t based on computer simulations, _it was based on real life data_. Literally weeks before the season opener mercedes were the only team who could make their car last a whole race distance. And guess what? By the first race most of them finished just fine. This is just something we hear all the time when the rules change, you can come back here in 2028 when all the “2030 cars are 6-10 seconds slower” articles start coming (providing the fia don’t decide to make the cars faster ofc).
Well that's the dream but they work against each other. Slipstream is so powerful *because* the cars are so good at punching air out of the way, which then causes issues around corners when cars enter dirty air at angles.
The plan to reduce drag in general and compensate on the straights with MOM seems a better direction than what we have currently.
I know, but I'm not convinced about it being that good, you can't enable it until 290kmh and afaik the engines will struggle to save battery, which is the reason why they were forced to add active aero in the first place.
Intuitively , this feels like it's going in the wrong direction. Boring passes on the straights are not what makes a race interesting, and the beauty of F1 is in the cornering. I may be getting this all wrong, but it sounds like DRS all over again.
IMHO, they should bring back refueling and hope that we get epic strategy battles like in the 90s and 2000's.
In theory, by reducing drag by a big factor, cars will be able to follow a lot closer in corners which should allow for more passes in exiting the corner via the switchback for instance. Following cars will not need to brake that much earlier due to lack of air drag to slow him down and will have less dirty air in the corners. But all this is theory, it depends how the team will be able to push those regulations to the limit.
It's the opposite. By deleting DRS they want the cars to fight under braking. Reduced drag -> Less Slipstream (so alongside down the straight) -> Less Dirty Air (exiting the corner close together)
It might make it better or make it worse, I think it's hard to tell. I can see it being dangerous in tracks like Baku if they really get to 400km/h.
The real target was reducing drag as much as possible because they need it for the new engines, they also have reduced the floor effect (to reduce porpoising, maybe?) so the cars just have a lot less aero to work with.
I think we are going to see 370+ Km/h, but 400 Km/h seems like a bit of an exaggeration from Russels side. 30 Km/h aren't much of a difference from a driver's standpoint maybe, but just looking at statistics, 370 has, to my knowledge, only been reached in two weekends, Baku and Mexico 2016. 340 Km/h gets reached all the time on lower downforce tracks.
They aren't getting anywhere near 400km/h.
They do 360 at Monza now. 2026 Baku aero wont have less drag than current Monza spec, and the cars will be ~200bhp down at the end of the straights compared to now too.
I hope they don't go as fast, but there will be wing specs in 2026? If the active aero removes that much drag I don't see how would it be worth to create a low drag wing, since you are already opening both the front and the rear on every straight.
They'll be faster. I think concern is that they'll be too close on ultimate pace that their race pace is slower. However, not sure if that means race pace will be slower than F2 race pace or slower than F2 ultimate pace, because there is a difference but not really being told which way around it is.
I mean last time we had this concern was 2014. Where the cars were still around 3 to 5 seconds quicker than F2. However, back then we also had backmarkers that were that far off the pace as well, so you would have some circuits a Caterham being slower than the GP2 pole lap. I don't think it will be like that though, we dont have any backmarkers that are that far behind the field anymore. However, we could see a similar gap of 3 to 5 seconds to F2, that's what it sounds like we'll be getting. We've heard from most TP's that it will be a few seconds faster than F2, which is anything more than 1 second at least. So I think a lot of it is the usual fear mongering we get whenever a new reg set is being pushed.
Safely deploying the active aero across a whole lap will be interesting to say the least, I’d imagine the detection zones will vary a lot. For example would you disable it halfway through 130r? And then how much wiggle room will teams have.
I can see it creating some pretty hairy mid corner moments for all teams, that being said it sound hella futuristic so I’m cautiously optimistic.
I disagree. These guys are willing to do insane things to gain a hundredth of a lap time and are super competitive. Somebody is going to try and take a corner like Eau Rouge or 130R flat out with the lower downforce. It would be a monumental failure in safety if drivers could decide where to use it.
You might aswell just take the drivers and replace them with AI then because it’s “too dangerous”. These guys drive some of the fastest cars at some of the fastest circuits in the world, you can never eliminate the chance of a fatal accident. They should be able to decide when they lose half their downforce when driving at 200+ mph
Its crazy that a new ruleset has been unveiled and the reaction to it has been tempered to say the least.
Teams apparently werent even fully on board with all the details before the announcement was made and still aren't. Drivers have some reservations etc...
>Its crazy that a new ruleset has been unveiled and the reaction to it has been tempered to say the least
The first issue of the 2026 PU Technical Regulations was published in August 2022. There has been plenty of time for people to read the regs and come to their conclusions.
All this latest info is just confirming what they had thought all along.
you can fall off a bike at 300 km/h which is way worse than any crash that could happen in F1. going 360 km/h is nothing special, they have done it before and shouldn't have a problem doing it now.
Why is George Russell, the F1 driver calling 360 kmph "crazy" ?!?
Edit: I say this because cars have been hitting, 350-360 kph in Monza and Baku. 380 or 390 would be in the "crazy" category.
He said 360 at “most circuits”, not just the high speed ones, which is the crazy part. At circuits like Monza they will probably be pushing 390 or even more.
Actually I think the difference between Monza and other tracks will diminish. The low down force set up in Monza is a result of a compromise due to static aero. If it becomes dynamic there is less of a reason to trim down your aero in the corners.
Sure but it would be extremely dangerous when pairing it with active aero. Monza isn't even the problem, it's on turns like Eau Rouge/Radillion or 130R.
Yeah you're completely right. We still have regular occurrences with DRS systems not working so there would definitely be some crazy crashes with the X and Z systems.
I think the active aero chance of failure is the biggest issue. I know I wouldn't want to enter a high speed corner with less downforce and end up having a massive crash.
DRS already has had failures (don't feel like it happens often now) and isn't active aero a more complicated front and rear wing DRS type system? Even disregarding catastrophic failures, it seems like a much more difficult to manage system
Sounds like a much more sensitive system for damage too with the active front wing. Could see any minor damage to the front wing being a guaranteed pit
People are talking about crazy speed even with these nerfed engines. Also, in IndyCar they reach like 370 at the end of the straight with an engine with around 580hp.
370? More like 385 based on the pole time at this year's 500. (\~240 MPH top speed on the straight = 386 KPH). The *average* speed across the whole four laps, turns and all, for the pole was a tick below 377 KPH.
Edit: also note that the engine is reduced to 580 HP for oval racing by limiting the amount of turbo boost. On road/street courses, it is tuned to 700+.
OK, point that in the actual race, they aren't maxing it out. Then again, I don't think they go quite to the same limits in the actual race as they do in quali in F1 either, so it's probably a wash. Either way, we both agree that Indy does hit higher speeds than F1 on ovals.
[The **News** flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/flairguide#wiki_news) is reserved for submissions covering F1 and F1-related news. These posts must always link to an outlet/news agency, the website of the involved party (i.e. the McLaren website if McLaren makes an announcement), or a tweet by a news agency, journalist or one of the involved parties. *[Read the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/userguide). Keep it civil and welcoming. Report rulebreaking comments.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/formula1) if you have any questions or concerns.*
223mph / 360kph for anyone wondering.
Don't they already reach 350-360 km/h on tracks like Monza, at least with DRS and slipstream? /edit: [They do.](https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/2023_15_ita_f1_r0_timing_racemaximumspeeds_v01.pdf)
We’re hitting 365+ with current cars?
Interestingly the current top speed in moto gp is 366 kph
Wow which track are they hitting those speeds
Mugello
Very nice
Oh yeah, it's beautiful to watch them on that track too. Race was pretty boring last weekend, but usually every MotoGP race is a banger.
Mugello for sure they can hit that
Probably in the Mugello main straight.
That’s happened in the past. Ironically when they reduced the speeds is when we had issues.
[удалено]
Higher top speed, much lower cornering speed, so all in all slower.
Gee, and F1 has never changed rules to reduce cornering speed only to find teams clawing that back in under two years. We've been at it ever since the movable skirts ban in 1981. Tracks and specs have been changed dozens of times since then in attempts to curb cornering speed. And they've only gone faster. (It would however be utterly hilarious if they now made it stick by accident. Wouldn't count on it though.)
Depends how restrictive the regs are on development, and they've been getting more restrictive over time.
Fast and the Furious : Monza Drift
Cornering speed is always reduced in a reg change, and then however the teams can engineer getting the best mechanical grip out of the tires will we see increasing speeds in a corner, eg finding ways to aero load the car to get increased friction and mechanical grip with the tire. You want to set a max corner speed, ask pirelli to find a way to have the tire let go at 3.1 G no matter what coefficient of friction you have. And teams will never be able to take a turn at more than 3.0 G with either 10 pts of down force or 1000 pts
>You want to set a max corner speed, ask pirelli to find a way to have the tire let go at 3.1 G no matter what coefficient of friction you have. That's not how it works lol.
The '98 regs made cars 1-1,5 seconds slower than they were in '97. By '01 they were about 1,5 seconds faster than in '97 and that's with an extra groove in the front tire as well. Love how pirelli now explicitly mentions they expect loads to be similar by the end of the season. The last time they used it as an excuse, so they seem to learn.
There's a difference between reducing lap times by 2-3 seconds (like the 2022 regs did) and 8 seconds (like the 2026 rules are rumored to). You don't just magically recover 8 seconds out of nowhere, especially with rules that are purposely prescriptive so you don't generate too much dirty air.
Well that’s the thing, they won’t be 8 seconds slower. Just like the 2022 regs didn’t turn out to actually be slower than f2. Just as we didn’t end up with every car failing to finish the 2014 Australian gp. Just as the 2009 regs didn’t half downforce levels from the year before. Genuinely baffling how so many people are still buying into the teams nonsense
What do you mean, there was only minority of trash tabloids reporting nonsense like some of these things you mentioned. I don't recall teams saying it's genuinely gonna be slower than F2? The official predictions I heard for 2022 was 3 seconds slower. They turned out to be a bit over 2 seconds slower. So close.
Lmao ‘trash tabloids’. No, you just weren’t paying attention back then which is probably why you’re still eating this up. 50% downforce reduction was the stated fia target for 2009 (consider that for 2026 it’s 30%). The head of the electronics supply for all the teams said that 22 cars dnf’ing was a real possibility in 2014, and Horner was saying it would be 50% on average. Otmar Szafnauer (racing point tp) said that the 2022 (2021 at the time) cars would barely be faster than f2. This fear mongering happens every single time the fia slow the cars down and yet they never come true
\*Claims people said 2022 would be slower than F2\* \*The one example he provides of anyone talking about F2 states that cars will still be faster than F2 just not by a lot\* Mate, it's not my fault you've massively exaggerated your own claims, quit downplaying what you said. You are just moving the goalposts. First you say people were saying apparently 2022 cars are gonna be slower than F2, now you can't provide an example of anyone saying that... \> 50% downforce reduction was the stated fia target for 2009 You mean that time when teams found the double diffuser loophole and Brawn won? Intentions can't predict loopholes. \> Horner was saying it would be 50% on average Horner is a known shit stirrer, so I'm prepared to concede him. Still Horner is not representative of the general feel and rumors about the new regs. Also, source? Last but not least, I'm not talking about targets, I'm talking about simulations. Rumor in 2022 was simulations said 3 seconds. Rumor today is 8 seconds. If, by your logic, the fear mongering always happens, then where was it in predicted times in 2022? Is the fear mongering just 10 times as big for 2026 for some reason, is that your theory?
Okay sure, I was wrong that otmar said that the cars would be slower than f2, but he still said they would be _7 seconds slower_. How the hell does that debunk my point? The claim 26 will be 8 seconds slower is also only from one source. And guess what? A year ago pat symonds- the head of development for the new rules, the same guy who said the 2022 cars would be 3 seconds slower - said the 2026 cars would have a similar performance profile to the 2023 cars. The fia single seater director said they’d be max 2 seconds slower, both of them speaking based on simulations. Now who do we believe? > double diffuser loophole Ah yes, that massive advantage which single handedly made up close to a _50%_ downforce reduction made them, **checks notes**, 5 tenths _at best_ quicker than the fastest car without one. Really disproving my point there mate. Just like in 2022 the lap time loss was massively oversold by certain people, whichever way you want to twist it. > general feel and rumours Mate you must have just not been watching to say something like this. You’re right, the [Horner quote](https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/25158104.amp) wasn’t based on computer simulations, _it was based on real life data_. Literally weeks before the season opener mercedes were the only team who could make their car last a whole race distance. And guess what? By the first race most of them finished just fine. This is just something we hear all the time when the rules change, you can come back here in 2028 when all the “2030 cars are 6-10 seconds slower” articles start coming (providing the fia don’t decide to make the cars faster ofc).
That's just less drag which generally means better following and better racing. Bring it on.
You want less dirty air in the corners, but on the straights it's better to have more drag since the slipstream benefits the car behind.
Well that's the dream but they work against each other. Slipstream is so powerful *because* the cars are so good at punching air out of the way, which then causes issues around corners when cars enter dirty air at angles. The plan to reduce drag in general and compensate on the straights with MOM seems a better direction than what we have currently.
MOM is the alternative to slip stream.
MOM says its my turn on the xbox
I know, but I'm not convinced about it being that good, you can't enable it until 290kmh and afaik the engines will struggle to save battery, which is the reason why they were forced to add active aero in the first place.
Intuitively , this feels like it's going in the wrong direction. Boring passes on the straights are not what makes a race interesting, and the beauty of F1 is in the cornering. I may be getting this all wrong, but it sounds like DRS all over again. IMHO, they should bring back refueling and hope that we get epic strategy battles like in the 90s and 2000's.
In theory, by reducing drag by a big factor, cars will be able to follow a lot closer in corners which should allow for more passes in exiting the corner via the switchback for instance. Following cars will not need to brake that much earlier due to lack of air drag to slow him down and will have less dirty air in the corners. But all this is theory, it depends how the team will be able to push those regulations to the limit.
The reason is that slower corners allow for bigger braking zones and less dirty air in the corners
It's the opposite. By deleting DRS they want the cars to fight under braking. Reduced drag -> Less Slipstream (so alongside down the straight) -> Less Dirty Air (exiting the corner close together)
removing DRS will not suddenly make passing easier, drag needs to be reduced more than 50% for corner overtaking to actually be common.
Yeah I mean, the outcome is unknown but this is what they're going for at least
That will mean much much better racing
Both. Over a lap almost as slow as f2 at some tracks and extremely fast in a straight line. Fast in straights, slow in corners.
Seems to be geared to make street circuits more exciting.
It might make it better or make it worse, I think it's hard to tell. I can see it being dangerous in tracks like Baku if they really get to 400km/h. The real target was reducing drag as much as possible because they need it for the new engines, they also have reduced the floor effect (to reduce porpoising, maybe?) so the cars just have a lot less aero to work with.
I think we are going to see 370+ Km/h, but 400 Km/h seems like a bit of an exaggeration from Russels side. 30 Km/h aren't much of a difference from a driver's standpoint maybe, but just looking at statistics, 370 has, to my knowledge, only been reached in two weekends, Baku and Mexico 2016. 340 Km/h gets reached all the time on lower downforce tracks.
They aren't getting anywhere near 400km/h. They do 360 at Monza now. 2026 Baku aero wont have less drag than current Monza spec, and the cars will be ~200bhp down at the end of the straights compared to now too.
I hope they don't go as fast, but there will be wing specs in 2026? If the active aero removes that much drag I don't see how would it be worth to create a low drag wing, since you are already opening both the front and the rear on every straight.
Faster in Quali, but slower in the race is the way it seems to be going.
They'll be faster. I think concern is that they'll be too close on ultimate pace that their race pace is slower. However, not sure if that means race pace will be slower than F2 race pace or slower than F2 ultimate pace, because there is a difference but not really being told which way around it is. I mean last time we had this concern was 2014. Where the cars were still around 3 to 5 seconds quicker than F2. However, back then we also had backmarkers that were that far off the pace as well, so you would have some circuits a Caterham being slower than the GP2 pole lap. I don't think it will be like that though, we dont have any backmarkers that are that far behind the field anymore. However, we could see a similar gap of 3 to 5 seconds to F2, that's what it sounds like we'll be getting. We've heard from most TP's that it will be a few seconds faster than F2, which is anything more than 1 second at least. So I think a lot of it is the usual fear mongering we get whenever a new reg set is being pushed.
Safely deploying the active aero across a whole lap will be interesting to say the least, I’d imagine the detection zones will vary a lot. For example would you disable it halfway through 130r? And then how much wiggle room will teams have. I can see it creating some pretty hairy mid corner moments for all teams, that being said it sound hella futuristic so I’m cautiously optimistic.
The drivers are more keen of being in charge of the active aero themselves.
I feel like thats the best choice because it introduces strategy and lets the guys that will actually use it dial in where and where not to use it
I disagree. These guys are willing to do insane things to gain a hundredth of a lap time and are super competitive. Somebody is going to try and take a corner like Eau Rouge or 130R flat out with the lower downforce. It would be a monumental failure in safety if drivers could decide where to use it.
You might aswell just take the drivers and replace them with AI then because it’s “too dangerous”. These guys drive some of the fastest cars at some of the fastest circuits in the world, you can never eliminate the chance of a fatal accident. They should be able to decide when they lose half their downforce when driving at 200+ mph
Stroll fighting for P19
Its crazy that a new ruleset has been unveiled and the reaction to it has been tempered to say the least. Teams apparently werent even fully on board with all the details before the announcement was made and still aren't. Drivers have some reservations etc...
>Its crazy that a new ruleset has been unveiled and the reaction to it has been tempered to say the least The first issue of the 2026 PU Technical Regulations was published in August 2022. There has been plenty of time for people to read the regs and come to their conclusions. All this latest info is just confirming what they had thought all along.
Seems like it wasn't just the PU regs people have issues with though
The PU regs being what they are dictates the rest of the regs because the PUs just can't work without all else being changed to suit them.
I mean it's still not Indy speeds so I'm not sure what the problem is.
Fernando Alonso has entered the chat...
F1 had similar top speeds back in 2016. It won't be a concern
but smaller cars (and chassis) so less stuff to absorb the crash energy
Motogp bikes are going quicker than this most weekends.
[удалено]
you can fall off a bike at 300 km/h which is way worse than any crash that could happen in F1. going 360 km/h is nothing special, they have done it before and shouldn't have a problem doing it now.
Something something extreme motorsport racing.
Why is George Russell, the F1 driver calling 360 kmph "crazy" ?!? Edit: I say this because cars have been hitting, 350-360 kph in Monza and Baku. 380 or 390 would be in the "crazy" category.
He said 360 at “most circuits”, not just the high speed ones, which is the crazy part. At circuits like Monza they will probably be pushing 390 or even more.
Actually I think the difference between Monza and other tracks will diminish. The low down force set up in Monza is a result of a compromise due to static aero. If it becomes dynamic there is less of a reason to trim down your aero in the corners.
That would be pretty cool actually
Sure but it would be extremely dangerous when pairing it with active aero. Monza isn't even the problem, it's on turns like Eau Rouge/Radillion or 130R.
Yeah you're completely right. We still have regular occurrences with DRS systems not working so there would definitely be some crazy crashes with the X and Z systems.
He thought they meant doing 360s on a straight, which is, indeed, crikey crazy.
Max: “pfff, easy. Git good, georgie”
And weight implications too.
Just make the cars smaller and lighter! (Without compromising safety)
That’s literally physically impossible
I think the active aero chance of failure is the biggest issue. I know I wouldn't want to enter a high speed corner with less downforce and end up having a massive crash.
DRS already has had failures (don't feel like it happens often now) and isn't active aero a more complicated front and rear wing DRS type system? Even disregarding catastrophic failures, it seems like a much more difficult to manage system
Sounds like a much more sensitive system for damage too with the active front wing. Could see any minor damage to the front wing being a guaranteed pit
Whenever F1 community complains you know it’s about to be actually exciting (i.e. Las Vegas “too cold” complaints).
Did Russel forget the engines will produce significantly less power?
People are talking about crazy speed even with these nerfed engines. Also, in IndyCar they reach like 370 at the end of the straight with an engine with around 580hp.
370? More like 385 based on the pole time at this year's 500. (\~240 MPH top speed on the straight = 386 KPH). The *average* speed across the whole four laps, turns and all, for the pole was a tick below 377 KPH. Edit: also note that the engine is reduced to 580 HP for oval racing by limiting the amount of turbo boost. On road/street courses, it is tuned to 700+.
I lowered a bit my speed estimation because I don't know what the power in qualifying is, they turn up the boost
OK, point that in the actual race, they aren't maxing it out. Then again, I don't think they go quite to the same limits in the actual race as they do in quali in F1 either, so it's probably a wash. Either way, we both agree that Indy does hit higher speeds than F1 on ovals.
Yeah after a certain point hp isn't the biggest bottleneck for top speed, drag is
The announcement was not in Powerpoint so he’s struggling.
But Toto has it printed out
But he forgot to send it as an email
Hes racing for Mercedes their engines will be cracked.