[Dave Baumann]

Honda launched their new livery today for the 2007 Forumla One season, which appears to be a quite horrendous display of eco friendly bandwagon jumping (replete with the "the children are our future" photo opp):



However, curiously it transpires that despite its image as not necessarily being a particularly good idea for an environmental sport, F1 has actually been "carbon neutral" since 1997:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/56953

The FIA offsets the greenhouse gas emissions of the two world championships through buying credits in the project's trust fund, the Fonfo BioClimatico.

The fund operates a number of different schemes, including the establishment of tree plantations, growing timber and fruit trees, and protecting threatened forests.

The FIA has purchased credits to offset carbon emissions in F1 since 1997 and the WRC since 2001. This has been undertaken independently without contributions from the teams involved.

It is understood that the offsets include not only the emissions of the competing cars but also, and more importantly, the worldwide travel of personnel involved in both championships.

[Tahir2]

So who do you think are going to be the forerunners for the Constructor and Driver championship?

My guess:

Renault for the constructors
Raikonnen for the championship

I predict Button will win 3 races this season... who wants to play?

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

There was some statement bandied about last year when F1 was being criticised for it's eco impact that all the emissions from a year of F1 was about the same as a single jumbo jet trip across the Atlantic.

[Dave Baumann]

Originally Posted by Tahir2

So who do you think are going to be the forerunners for the Constructor and Driver championship?

McLaren and Alonso, although Hamilton will begin to stress him more by the end of the season!

[V3]

So what's happening on the engine development being frozen. Is that for real ? So are they using last year engine for this season ?

[tongue_of_colicab]

Originally Posted by V3

So what's happening on the engine development being frozen. Is that for real ? So are they using last year engine for this season ?

Yep. Well, not exactly the same engines as they are allowed to change some things but I guess you could say they are pretty much the same.

I personally think they are screwing up F1. F1 should be the pinnacle of motorsport wich means using the latest and greatest available. But they are setting to much lame rules for almost everything. Its stupid that a sport like F1 has a engine freeze. They should just stop with all the rules and make F1 fun again. I want V12 turbocharged engines, I want slicks, and I want a ban on things like traction controll. Why do they have to ban all cool cars like the one with 6 wheels? the one with the fan on the back? or the one with the sideskirts? I really dont understand why they are trying to slow down cars so much. I doubt the increase in speed is really all that dangerous. You have most risk of crashing in corners, I doubt that if you lose controll in a fast corner and you crash at 200Kmph and survive you are going to die crashing in the same corner but now at 220 - 240Kmph with the ''unlimited'' F1 cars. Besides, wernt the cars using the ground effect actually safer? because they could generate insane amounts of downforce.

Anyway, more tech, less rules.

I personally am a big Ferrari fan so im really looking forward to see if Ferrari managed to build a car Kimi cant wreck Im also keeping an eye on Spyker. I dont think they'll do very well because they are still using last year chassis and since Aguri en STR are probably going to use Honda and RBR chassis Spyker is pretty much F*cked.

[_xxx_]

Bahh, it'll be Ferari and Renault again.

[Simon F]

Originally Posted by Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.

There was some statement bandied about last year when F1 was being criticised for it's eco impact that all the emissions from a year of F1 was about the same as a single jumbo jet trip across the Atlantic.

How do they ship the cars from continent to continent?

[tongue_of_colicab]

by plane :P But ofcourse they were talking about the cars itself.

[Simon F]

Originally Posted by tongue_of_colicab

by plane :P But ofcourse they were talking about the cars itself.

So it's about as green as the paint on a Ferrari then? (unless they are planting a lot of trees each year).

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

Originally Posted by Simon F

How do they ship the cars from continent to continent?

That's a good point. They have all those massive trucks, mobile homes and media centres in the paddock, so I presume they don't ship them by air, although a lot of the people must travel by air. Even so, the point was about the cars themselves, which was what was being criticized at the time.

[DJ12]

Originally Posted by tongue_of_colicab

Yep. Well, not exactly the same engines as they are allowed to change some things but I guess you could say they are pretty much the same.

I personally think they are screwing up F1. F1 should be the pinnacle of motorsport wich means using the latest and greatest available. But they are setting to much lame rules for almost everything. Its stupid that a sport like F1 has a engine freeze. They should just stop with all the rules and make F1 fun again. I want V12 turbocharged engines, I want slicks, and I want a ban on things like traction controll. Why do they have to ban all cool cars like the one with 6 wheels? the one with the fan on the back? or the one with the sideskirts? I really dont understand why they are trying to slow down cars so much. I doubt the increase in speed is really all that dangerous. You have most risk of crashing in corners, I doubt that if you lose controll in a fast corner and you crash at 200Kmph and survive you are going to die crashing in the same corner but now at 220 - 240Kmph with the ''unlimited'' F1 cars. Besides, wernt the cars using the ground effect actually safer? because they could generate insane amounts of downforce.

Anyway, more tech, less rules.

I suppose if they allowed every technological device the F1 people have ever invented there would never be any braking and the cars will go top speed even round corners

I share your sentiment though, F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of motorsport, I doubt the cars these days are that much faster than indycars.

Bring back all the aids I say.

If the top teams trickle down technology to the crapper teams there shouldn't really be a problem.

They should also allow turbos again.

[_xxx_]

Turbos why? They make the engine much less responsive.

The artificial tech equity is there in order to let the smaller teams with less money come along, otherwise they'd never even come near the top few.

[DJ12]

I like turbos.

Modern turbos, especially ones that would be considered for F1 cars wouldn't suffer from enough lag to hamper it compared to a normally aspirated engine.

Didn't the old turbos produce way over 1000 bhp from tiny 1.6 engines?

Probably better for the environment

[Dr Evil]

I'd be disapointed if Kimi doesn't win the championship...But we will have to wait for the season to start to truly see which teams are competitive. So I'm thinking Raikkonen for the win, Kovalainen second and maybe that half Finnish Rosberg for third

I also agree that slowing down Formula 1 cars is a bad idea and FIA sucks ass. Why the hell for example the engine has to last more than one race? cost cutting is not something that I want to see in F1.

[atlantis]

LOL @ Honda

[tongue_of_colicab]

I share your sentiment though, F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of motorsport, I doubt the cars these days are that much faster than indycars.

Well we dont really know because F1 and indy dont drive on the same track. But I remember an old article wich was from a time F1 and Indy shared 1 track and Indy basically got their ass kicked.

Bring back all the aids I say.

Except for the drive aids. I want to see man racing a machine. Not a computer driving the machina with the ''racedriver'' as a passenger to push a button once in a while.

The artificial tech equity is there in order to let the smaller teams with less money come along, otherwise they'd never even come near the top few.

F1 is the pinnacle of motorsports, if you dont have the money, than, to put it blunt, you should just fuck off and find yourself a cheaper racingclass.

Didn't the old turbos produce way over 1000 bhp from tiny 1.6 engines?

Yeah that old BMW had 1500Bhp from a 4cilinder engine I believe.

[_xxx_]

Originally Posted by DJ12

Modern turbos, especially ones that would be considered for F1 cars wouldn't suffer from enough lag to hamper it compared to a normally aspirated engine.

You're wrong, sorry

Originally Posted by Dr Evil

I'd be disapointed if Kimi doesn't win the championship...But we will have to wait for the season to start to truly see which teams are competitive. So I'm thinking Raikkonen for the win, Kovalainen second and maybe that half Finnish Rosberg for third

I also agree that slowing down Formula 1 cars is a bad idea and FIA sucks ass. Why the hell for example the engine has to last more than one race? cost cutting is not something that I want to see in F1.

I bet you'd find it ok if they slow all of them down except for the Finnish drivers, heh?

[DJ12]

Originally Posted by _xxx_

You're wrong, sorry

Maybe so, but a variable vein turbo would be enough. The gain would far outweigh the loss in my opinion.

I don't remember why Turbos were banned originally but I am positive it wasn't because they made the cars slower.

[Dr Evil]

Originally Posted by _xxx_

I bet you'd find it ok if they slow all of them down except for the Finnish drivers, heh?

Well the Finnish drivers are so fast that I almost feel like somebody is actually slowing the others down

Heh to be frankly I'm little bit nervous right now... Massa has been quite fast during the winter tests, also you can't rule Alonso/McLaren out either... It's going to be an interesting season that's for sure. I hope it won't take long for Kimi to make Massa his pet dog!

[Simon F]

Originally Posted by _xxx_

Turbos why? They make the engine much less responsive.

Really? I don't think I'd like my car so much without its turbo (except, perhaps, every year at insurance renewal time ).

[DJ12]

There is very little lag in my car. Of course if you are a complete tool and only drive in top gear, put your foot down and expect it to just go then yes there is lag, but if you use the gears it's barely noticeable.

My car is at full boost at about 2,500 rpm.

Anyway, I have just found this......

Max Mosley, president of the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile (FIA), recent comments to the sporting press have finally brought us long-awaited evidence of the “greening” of the sport. Mosley envisions three distinct, overlapping sets of regulations, two of which should emerge by the 2010 season. First, in 2009, they’ll introduce “energy-recovery and re-use from braking.” Then, in 2010, teams must work on “recovery and re-use of excess heat or waste heat from the engines.” In the longer term, Mosley wants “a completely new F1 engine reflecting the industry tendency which is to have a downsized, turbo-charged engine.” That’s right; the Turbo’s back.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=2701

I hope it's true, get some speed back into F1. Wastegate chatter, I just love it.

[_xxx_]

Originally Posted by DJ12

Maybe so, but a variable vein turbo would be enough. The gain would far outweigh the loss in my opinion.

In terms of raw power, could be. But think about fuel consumption

Also, you'd need heavier engines and bigger tanks etc. It's not that easy.

[Simon F]

Originally Posted by _xxx_

In terms of raw power, could be. But think about fuel consumption

Are you basically saying that if you want a high power output all of the time (as is typical with a racing car), you are simply better off with a bigger ( normally aspirated) engine? (Unless, I suppose, F1 starts running on high-altitude circuits)

[Dr Evil]

Originally Posted by DJ12

I hope it's true, get some speed back into F1. Wastegate chatter, I just love it.

I woulnd't hold my breath... FIA will find a way to limit the power to unnecessary low levels.