Shorter races to be considered as noise fix

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Daniil Kvyat, Toro Rosso, Sepang International Circuit, 2014In the round-up: F1 stakeholders will discuss whether shorter race distances coupled with scrapping fuel flow restrictions could increase engine noise.

Links

Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

A big month ahead, behind the scenes in Formula 1 (James Allen on F1)

“From a simple raising of the engines’ decibel level, to more radical ideas like shortening the races and abandoning the controversial fuel flow meters, it seems that discussions held so far will channel into a significant meeting of teams, FOM and FIA, a gathering of the F1 Strategy Group to frame a new policy and then possible ratifications of any changes at the next FIA World Motor Sport Council meeting on April 11.”

Renault says F1 noise can’t be changed (Autosport)

Renault head of track operations Remi Taffin: “There’s nothing you can do with exhaust profiling because again you’ve got both exhaust pipes running into the same tailpipe after it has run through the turbo, so it is what it is.”

Monisha Kaltenborn Q&A: Sauber must keep the faith (F1)

“We managed last year to secure our deal with Telmex, which was an important step, and now we are taking it step by step. Not so much is visible now, but you can rest assured that a lot is going on in the background and we will hopefully be able to tell the public soon. I hope it will be an easier year than 2013 was.”

Michael Schumacher latest: Fans complain over German magazine cover that depicts smiling F1 star and wife with ‘AWAKE!’ headline (The Independent)

“A quick flick through the issue promptly revealed that the headline bore no relation to Schumacher at all, but instead to a number of stories about different individuals who had woken up after a coma.”

Spray in Sepang (ESPN)

“Rosberg was his usual exuberant self but I sense there’s a bit of tension brewing between the two drivers. Obviously one has more points than the other and everyone wants to win every race.”

Hansard 1st April 2014

Richard Burden (Birmingham, Northfield, Labour): “The UK, however, is the home of motor sport not only in Formula 1, but in so many other ways. The national and grass roots series are among the building blocks that make our motor sport and performance engineering industries as world-class as they are.”

Tweets

Comment of the day

Does it matter if F1 cars are six seconds slower than they were nine years ago? Not everyone thinks so:

I don’t care if the lap times are slower.

Drivers fighting their cars is much more entertaining than the previous formula where drivers just put their foot to the floor and they remained glued to the track.
Steven (@Steevkay)

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Jt19 and Shreyas Mohanty!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is by emailling me, using Twitter or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Mark Webber planted his Red Bull on pole position for the Malaysian Grand Prix with a superb lap using intermediate tyres on a very wet track today in 2010:

Promoted content from around the web | Become an F1 Fanatic Supporter to hide this ad and others

Advert | Go Ad-free

143 comments on Shorter races to be considered as noise fix

  1. Todfod (@todfod) said on 3rd April 2014, 6:03

    Shorter races to be considered as noise fix

    In other news, foot amputation was used as a solution for fixing a broken toe

  2. David Not Coulthard (@davidnotcoulthard) said on 3rd April 2014, 6:03

    @keithcollantine I think the shorter races was suggested to “fix” the fact that races are “too boring” (as in processional), not necessarily the engine noise.

  3. Lustigson (@lustigson) said on 3rd April 2014, 6:33

    ‘Shorter races to be considered as noise fix’? Is it that bad? That no noise is better than low noise? :-D

  4. Lustigson (@lustigson) said on 3rd April 2014, 6:35

    Perhaps I already posted something similar some time ago: I think that races shouldn’t be shorter, but they should be longer. With laptimes having gone down over the years, the races have become shorter. Monza in 80 minutes, many others finished in 90 minutes. Why not add 15 to 20 km to the minimum race distance, save Monaco, to have races of an hour and 45 minutes or more, again?

  5. David (@mansellsmoustache) said on 3rd April 2014, 7:32

    Tell me this is an April Fool’s joke that got stuck in somebody’s outbox?

    Shortening the Grand Prix distance to change the engine sound? One of those is rather fundamental to what a Grand Prix means, the other an annoyance. Have those in charge totally lost the plot?

    • Timothy Katz (@timothykatz) said on 3rd April 2014, 8:22

      You ask if those in charge have totally lost the plot. That assumes that-
      A) There are people in charge
      B) That there is an overall plot
      I do not see any evidence in support of A or B.

      • Keith Campbell (@keithedin) said on 3rd April 2014, 10:10

        nice ;)

        Although i think there is some evidence for A). If there wasn’t people in charge, there wouldn’t be new rules appearing out of nowhere between seasons and being written into the rules with no heads up, let alone a consultation, with the fans. i.e double points.

  6. Jason (@jason12) said on 3rd April 2014, 8:27

    For more noise teams can just mount loudspeakers on the cars.

    This whole noise thing is just childish really.

  7. Patrick (@paeschli) said on 3rd April 2014, 8:38

    Can’t we just leave F1 alone for a moment? We’ve just had the biggest rule change in 20 years and now they want to change the rules again? Let’s see the whole 2014 before speaking about changing the rules again.

  8. DavidS (@davids) said on 3rd April 2014, 8:42

    Remove the fuel flow restriction, leaving only the 100kg for the race rule.
    Don’t shorten the races, that is one of the things that has remained unchanged over the years.
    Allow twin turbo configurations in the rules, allow the teams to reintroduce dual exhaust exits with short exhaust lengths, although there will still need to be restrictions to prevent blown diffusers. Some engine manufacturers may opt to continue using a single turbo for packaging reasons.
    De-restrict engine RPM, they are already able to build engines that spin at 20,000rpm, surely with a lower capacity (less rotating mass) they would easily reach that.

    While you may not get back to the same noise levels (due to smaller engines, turbo acting as a muffler) they should become significantly louder and sound more highly strung.

  9. Bradley Downton (@bradley13) said on 3rd April 2014, 9:29

    What a fantastic idea! Not only do we already have the amazing double points rule but now but they’re considering shortening races to fix a problem that isn’t really a problem. Tell you what, while they’re at they should make the races half distance and instead have two over a weekend, with the grid for the second being a reverse of the result of the first! That’ll improve the spectacle no end!

    Please note the above is sarcasm.

  10. dirgegirl (@dirgegirl) said on 3rd April 2014, 10:10

    Am I the only one who found Remi Taffin’s imagery in the Autosport article a little disturbing?

    The other item is the turbo. You put one thing through the path of the exhaust gases, which is like if you would put a pillow on someone’s face. It acts as a muffler.

    I wonder who he imagines silencing with a pillow?

  11. Optimaximal (@optimaximal) said on 3rd April 2014, 10:18

    @keithcollantine Isn’t the title of this Round-Up misleading? The Shorter Races aren’t a solution to the noise, it’s the fuel flow.

  12. Corrado (@corrado-dub) said on 3rd April 2014, 10:18

    Shorter races ?!?!? Woooooow, things are getting worse and worse !

  13. Ricardo Ferreira (@yes-master) said on 3rd April 2014, 10:21

    OMG, in what F1 got in to! Bad rules, but worst, they insist in talking publicly about how to fix them.
    I can’t say what is best or not for stockholders, but I’m sure that for me, as a fan, the fuel control rule is rubbish, the double-point last race is also rubbish, and the sound of the engines is rubbish.

    As for the engine sound, why don’t they talk to DTM? Have you heard the sound of their motors for 2014?

    • Adam Hardwick (@fluxsource) said on 3rd April 2014, 23:14

      @yes-master

      The fuel control rules (by which I assume you mean the fuel flow rate limit) is essential to limit the power output of turbo engines. The double points rule is retarded, but the cars sound amazing.

      Am I the only one who is capable of appreciating a sound for more than just its volume? The new engines are cutting edge technology, that produce more power than the old ones. They have a voice, rather than just a scream, and I find them a pleasure to listen to.

      As someone with damaged hearing from various types of engines over the years, I promise you there’s nothing good about an engine being loud.

      I’ve heard that many people (quite sensibly) wear ear plugs while attending a Grand Prix. Hey, here’s an idea for those complaining they’re too quiet. Take them out.

  14. JerseyF1 (@jerseyf1) said on 3rd April 2014, 10:24

    I hate this knee-jerk reaction to things in F1. The season has started, the rules are fixed and there should be no discussion about changes until 2015 earliest and ideally later to give the teams a chance to plan for them. Double points, DRS, fuel levels, fuel flow – whether you like or loathe these elements none of these things should now be touched this year as changing any one of them will lead to an advantage/disadvantage and worse than any of these individual issues to me is the prospect of the championship being manipulated.

    Any changes should be left for another season when the impact of the change is less clear in terms of individual gains and losses and ideally at least a couple of seasons ahead where it relates to technical changes to the car/engine design. It also avoids panic over ridiculous issues such as engine noise which raises its head whenever the engine formula is changed and then quietly falls away over time. I remember the fuss over how bad the V8 engines sounded after the V10 switch and yet there now seem to be people queuing up to say how great teh V8 engines sounded – complete hypocrisy!

    • Robbie (@robbie) said on 3rd April 2014, 13:59

      @jerseyf1 I don’t entirely disagree with you, however, I wonder if they are that concerned about ratings that they already feel they CAN’T wait until next year to amend some current rules and regs.

      And while I’m not whatsoever bent out of shape about the current sound, I do acknowledge in fairness that the switch from 12’s to 10’s to 8’s still had loud screaming cars even if a slightly different scream. They just don’t scream anymore, and to many that is not right. I would simply mic the cars and tracks better for the TV audience. They still sound high tech…and different…and new. But that’s me, and I cannot at this point determine if, and how much, the quieter engines are negatively affecting the ratings, which is of course the main concern to FIA and FOM and the teams’ sponsors.

  15. “I hate this knee-jerk reaction to things in F1″

    Just before i read this, i read on autosport that ecclestone/montezemlo etc are meeting to discuss what could be done about the ‘specticle’ of F1. Seriously? one race and its like oh nozzz criziz meeetinggg!!

    This is whats wrong with F1. People ******* with it because there is one race that isnt a 10 out of 10 on the excitment scale. If you want F1 to be close racing from lights to flag every race without fail, make it a single spec series where you cant develope the cars. otherwise, STOP ******* MOANING.

  16. Lemon (@lemon) said on 3rd April 2014, 10:56

    I have an idea, why don’t they just speed up the TV coverage? that will produce shorter races, faster laps and a higher pitched engine note similar to last years. Everybody wins…

  17. Eric Morman (@lethalnz) said on 3rd April 2014, 11:58

    well reading this thread right through has given me heart now,
    the last couple of threads on this site had me wondering if i was the only one standing up for the sport but now i see more and more coming out of the woodwork and supporting the new format,
    that pack of moaners that attacked this site with no understanding at all of how F1 works,
    is this the way of the future?
    the young are so quick to put anything or anyone down these days, it makes no sense,
    things need to be given a chance to iron out there problems and F1 teams need time to catch up to one another.
    its like people are loaded up on R/B drink and over reacting to everything they see because their tean is not at the front at the moment.

  18. Phenom said on 3rd April 2014, 13:50

    Trade 10-15 laps off the end of the race in order to have cars gain an additional 5000rpm? I don’t know what you’re all moaning about I’d take that in a heartbeat, I detest fuelsaving F1!

    • drmouse (@drmouse) said on 3rd April 2014, 14:21

      I detest fuelsaving F1!

      Then you detest F1. Fuel saving has always been a big part of F1, even when refuelling was allowed.

      • colin grayson (@lebesset) said on 3rd April 2014, 21:26

        yes , shorten the races to avoid fuel saving
        the teams want to plot the fastest way to the finish , won’t they …and so they will start with a reduced fuel load and carry on fuel saving…just like they always did ; the great champions were always the ones who were also the best at fuel usage and tyre usage …what a coincidence

  19. DaveW (@dmw) said on 3rd April 2014, 15:39

    There is no problem with the noise. Regarding the volume, the cars are now still able to cause pain and temporary hearing damage at a spectator’s range. What do people want? And on TV, you can’t tell what the volume is. Regarding the quality of sound, there is nothing magic about the sound of normally aspirated v8 as standing for Powerful Engine. In fact, a true fan may consider that the high pitched sound of the engine signaled that this was a fundamentally low-tech motor that produced power primarily by engine speed, because it lacks torque. An F1 V8 had the torque of a sporty road car. And Look at road cars, to which F1 must relate at some level. Turbos and energy recovery are now the standard, even for supercars. From a McLaren P1 to a BMW M3, modern performance road cars are using sophisticated turbo and/or energy recovery systems. Getting power by revving a NA engine to the threshold of failure of reciprocating parts is old hat. Let’s live in the present now. F1 is not to enshrine cliches about automobile performance and technology. It is supposed to set the standards. Finally, with really sophisticated energy recovery, F1 is doing that, or at least joining prototypes on the forefront. The old KERS was kind of a gesture toward modernity, but not the real thing.

    As for the show, let’s be honest, the only reason RBR and Ferrari are mad is because their engines underperform. They want to shorten the races….because they use too much fuel. Boo hoo. It’s like a soccer team saying the game is too long because their players are out of shape. Get on the dyno and do some work.

  20. javlinsharp (@javlinsharp) said on 3rd April 2014, 18:35

    If the problem is points, the scoring of them and allowing one driver to collect too huge of a percentage too soon, I offer the solution of more point scoring chances.

    5 points for the fastest lap of the race will have teams going after something in the backfield. Even stresses the leader who might be trying to conserve the car with a comfortable lead.

    2 points for P1 and 1 point for P2 in every Quali session give the teams something to shoot for on Saturday, several bites at the cherry and is a chance to gain points in conditions other than race day (Hulk’s P1 in the rain).

    Getting a bit nutty here, but how about deducting(or adding) a point for every place lost(or gained) from start position over the course of the race.

    Surely, the quantities should be balanced to reward the greater portion of points for the activity that is more difficult. Im no F1 insider, but if I can come up with this, I dont see why others in FIA, and FOM cant do the same…

    Every year, there are several teams that will NEVER be on the podium nor score any points at all. From the perspective of the championship(s) they have ZERO impact except to perhaps slow the leaders while they are being lapped. By offering more opportunities to score points, their impact on the championship becomes substantial and to me, thrilling.

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.

Skip to toolbar