• Coelacanth@feddit.nu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    5 months ago

    Don’t know what people were expecting, but this all seems like good and/or interesting changes to me and definitely steps in the right direction. Like sure, I’d also love cars as small as the 2006 cars or whatever, but that was just never going to happen overnight. Let’s hope this is the start of F1 reversing the trend towards ever bigger cars and the start of going in the other direction.

  • kbal@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    That they lowered the fuel flow limit instead of eliminating it is a disappointment. Road relevance has been replaced by greenwashing relevance. But the active aero is an interesting choice.

      • kbal@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Oh, I see what you mean about going all-electric. I think there are other reasons why they can’t do that. Formula E cars would be completely unable to complete anything like an F1 race. We’d need some revolutionary new storage tech for that to happen.

        I’m of the opinion that the fuel flow limit was a bad idea from the start. Fuel efficiency is a worthy engineering goal even if its relevance to “sustainability” is pretty negligable, but restricting the total amount used and basically anything else makes more sense to me rather than constraining the instantaneous fuel flow rate. But I suppose it’s seen as a cost-cutting measure: Low-revving engines are less likely to blow up.

        • Olissipo@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          restricting the total amount used and basically anything else makes more sense

          Oh you meant eliminate the flow limit, I thought you meant eliminate the fuel itself. And I agree (with the caveat you said, also limiting the total amount).