Alfa Pages

[gritsop]

Hi,

Well after all, Monaco GP was not boring as the Spanish was.

Schaumacher bros were out, and Trulli was the true winner.

It is a pity how Alonso wrecked his F1 for Michael's favor...

It looks like Italy is always the winner...






Regards,
_________________
Thanassis Gritsopoulos
1991 Alfa 33 1.4 IE
2001 Alfa 147 1.6 Distinctive

http://www.alfa-restoration.co.uk
Parts Shop: www.alfa-restoration.co.uk/shop

[Ian M]

We seem to have short memories dont we.
Every year at this time we are berating F1 as boring and its always after the Spanish race.
Since they revised the track to make it safer and also the way modern F1 cars are designed the circuit has become boring for F1.
Wasnt always that way,who can forget Senna & Mansell banging wheels down the main straight?
The Monaco race was exciting & everyone is now saying F1 is not so boring after all.
_________________
Presntly own
Red Abarth 500c

[lesthegringo]

Get ready for a little rant......

I have to say that the only reason for the Monaco Grand Prix being interesting is due to the accidents..... If they hadn't happened, due to the track and backmarkers it would have been fairly straightforward to predict the result.

We only saw two proper overtaking manouvres during the entire race, that didn't occur in the pits. Quite simply, it is next to impossible to overtake at Monaco, and extremely difficult in most of the other races.

I'm one of those 'stupid' people who want F1 to be dumbed down. I know that F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of spectator sport, but we seem to be forgetting the 'spectator' bit too much in favour of the technical annd sport bits. The trouble is people say that the technical advancements will flow down to production cars...... bullshit!

I cannot conceive of a production car using Carbon brakes, carbon fibre suspension, titanium fittings, 19,000rpm, front wings, barge boards, rear wings, diffusers, pneumatically operated desmodronic valves.... and remember that the specifications of all these vary from race to race.

I don't think anyone wants to have to make a choice of tyre, downforce, brake compound, running height, fuel mixture settings, fuel quantity settings and all that jazz every morning before they go to work!

So to think that these features will appear on mass production cars is folly. Take carbon brakes. EXTREMELY expensive, and with operation characteristics that are only suited to F1 cars and aircraft. When they are cold they grab, and their friction coefficient is not actually that high. so thay are not very controllable. My Alfa Sprint, with some hard AP Lockheed pads fitted was great when they were warmed up, but gave me heart attacks when having to slow down quickly coming off motorway junctions. Imagine that characteristic twenty times worse?

Some items are more acceptable for road use, ie traction control, ABS, variable assistance power steering.... but why do we have them? Because we are not as good a driver as these F1 guys are, so it's to stop us becoming another statistic. But when you are good, then the only way to really prove it is by taking away all of the gizmos that sanitise cars. Remember that they don't have to deal with traffic coming the other way, pedestrians crossing the road etc.

I want the following:

1)Foot operated hydraulic clutch, with no electronic intervention
2)No traction control ( the idea of a standardised ECU with controlled inputs and outputs sounds good for that)
3)No ABS
4)Mechanical throttle linkage with no electronic intervention
5)Mechanical 'H' pattern hand operated gear shift, with (you guessed it) no electronic intervention
6)Massiveley reduced downforce through very tight regulation of wings
7)Controls on bodyshape to prevent wing cars, with ride heights increased
8)Conventional materials in brakes, with exotic materials banned
9)Composites banned in suspension components
10)'Conventional' engines, ie mechanical valvetrain, cams, belts or chain drive, with extreme materials (like lithium alloys, or superallys) banned
11) Standard fuel

I am not a Schumacher fan, I will be up front about that, and I think that the dominance or Ferrari (or any other team really) is not a good thing. However, I do think that it is up to the other teams to come up to Ferrari's level, rather than it being Ferrari's / Shu's fault for being so good.

The trouble is that the difference is so large due to the super duper technology involved, so the smaller teams just don't have the open ended budgets of the bigger teams that allows them the final 0.1% that money brings. As a result, they will never realistically be able to compete on the same level, so they will always just be there to make the grid look a bit fuller. If the likes of Toyota, Ford (Jaguar), BMW Williams and McLaren Mercedes struggle, imagine what chance Minardi, Jordan etc have.

The BTCC and the aussie V8 brutes series are great to watch. A bit of bump and grind, lots of overtaking and quite a few spills, all exiting stuff. It also allows a chance to get back into the race if you get punted off, or clip another car, get blocked etc. It also seems to be fairly open, in that one of quite a number of cars have a chance to win. What we need is some of those elements to be introduced into F1.

I'll step down off the soapbox now.

Les

[Wizz]

Whoa, that was quite a rant indeed. Enjoyed reading it. =)
Just on the topic of Ferrari's dominance of the F1 show, one of my dads collegues went to Ferrari to show them some new gadgets (microphones).
They have 3 windtunnels down there (!), as far as I know, some of the other car-companies have to book time well ahead in order to aero-test their new car design. The 'regular' Ferrari factory is about 1600 people, if I remember correctly, while there is 800 alone working on their F1 cars! 800 People!!.. 2 cars! No wonder they dominate..

However, I agree with you Les, they should make some restrictions to the F1 cars.
_________________
//Wizz
Alfa 33, 1.5 IE (1992) (Series 3)... now with 1.7 IE

[GaryUK]

Les I only half agree with you, the list of technology you want to ban are all present on ALL high performance road cars and the majority are in your standard production cars.

And all the Gizmos in modern cars have been developed in F1 first ABS Traction Conrol, Stability Control (Banned in the 90's) etc.

So yes there need to be changes mainly to aerodynamics but not to technology F1 is meant to be cutting edge stuff not Grass Track.

You will still have a huge gulf between the rich and poor teams the rich teams with computer modelling and experimentation find new loop holes to exploit. Do all the teams have wind tunnels no so the ones that do will always be at an advantage.

[lesthegringo]

ABS, power steering, traction contol, electronic stability programming are all there to compensate for the fact that we are poor, or fallible if you prefer, drivers. Yes they were developed in F1 cars, but that doesn't mean that they should stay on them.

I repeat the issue - F1 is a SPECTATOR sport. If there are no spectators because F1 is too predictable, then the 'sport' withers and dies away. I want very powerful cars that are unruly and don't brake like they have just hit a brick wall, and demand a lot of effort and skill from the drivers. Though it pains me to say it, look at the states with their awful oval circuit racing - they get capacity crowds because of thrills and spills, close racing, unpredicatble outcomes and they apparently have shitty specification cars.

I don't want technology to go away on F1, I just want to see it used to improve what the sport is all about - thrilling the spectator

Les

[Dave (Minari)]

I also, have become disillusioned with F1. I turned off the Spanish race, and flitted between Monaco and the gardening, this Sunday.
I also want to see overtaking (other than in the pits), and have to make do with an annual dose of Le Mans. Since my first trip in 2001, when it rained enough to cancel an F1 race. I have been hooked.
You have technology in abundance; you have pit stops for fuel, tyres and driver changes. Also for running repairs in the event of a shunt or break down. If a driver goes off, providing the car can be got back on the track it can carry on. (Didn't Kimi R. withdraw from Monaco when his rear wing was broken, because it would have taken too long to change for him to stand a chance of points? What an insult to the paying fans!)
Not only that, there is a great difference in the vehicles as there are different classes all on the track at the same time. Even within a class there will be overtaking, a slower reliable car will beat a fast fragile one. So plenty of passing. and overtaking. There is even nighttime racing, you see the glowing brakes and fire spitting exhausts, and overtaking too in the dark.
I won't mention the atmosphere, and entertainment, in case the family sees this!!!
I’m not permitted enjoyment!!!!!!!
I only hope Bernie E. doesn't cast covetous eyes on Le Mans.
I will miss this year’s race as I did last year, but next year, over to France in the Minari again to camp in the Houx Annex, to eat BBQ’s every day, to drink lots of beer and loads of atmosphere, all while the race is going on around you. I hope.
Oh I nearly forgot, there is the free pitlane walk on Friday when you can get close to the cars, almost within touching distance, and talk to the drivers and mechanics. And very polite jostling with like minded enthusiasts as you take your photos.
Now if Alfa were to …… (sigh)
Dave
_________________
Retired and working harder than when employed!!! Crap at golf- "Stupid Bl**dy game!"

[lesthegringo]

Ok, let's look at this from another angle.

You don't want restrictions on the tech etc.

Ok, in that case, let F1 have turbos (banned) Wankel engines (banned) Gas Turbines (banned) unlimited capacity engines (restricted) unrestricted weight (have to be a minimum of X) alternative fuels (rocket motor anyone?) unlimited positive downforce devices like fans, ground effect, unlimited wings with variable geometry (underbody shape controlled, wing sizes controlled, active devices banned) Tyre sizes unlimited (grooved, max width and diameter), constantly variable transmissions (banned) retro rockets and air brakes................

Now that would be a spectacle, especially in the first years when everyone rushes around with all the new inventions trying to make them work

What do you think?

Les

[GaryUK]

I think the answer lies in restricting the aerodynamics so a car running behind another is less hindered by it's wake. Maybe it will not be necessary to ban or lessen the allowable surface area but having the elements placed in such a way as to minimise turbulence in the wake.

[Ken McCarthy]

I think this is heading in the right direction. As I see it there are two things restricting overtaking which is what we all want to see, I think. Firstly the cars depend so much on aerodynamic downforce and this is reduced in the disturbed air behind another car. Secondly, on most courses there is only one racing line even where the track is wide, either because of alignment for corners or because the track surface is dirty.

Perhaps one answer is to do away with the wings and use a mechanical downforce such as fan powered suction under the car (would that also clean the track surface? Maybe it would find some new sponsors such as Electrolux?)
_________________
Ken McCarthy - 16V Sprint

[Ken McCarthy]

Actually Hoover was the name I was looking for.
_________________
Ken McCarthy - 16V Sprint

[lesthegringo]

remember the brabham fan car?

les

[Ian M]

The Brabham fan car.
It was outlawed for safety reasons because the fan sucked up all the crap from the track and blew it straight in the face of the guy behind.
Actually it could work if they fitted filters or those paper bags.
The excitement would come as the filter got clogged and the downforce fell away.
Who knows sometime in the future the world chamionship might be won by a Dyson or a Kirby
_________________
Presntly own
Red Abarth 500c

[paddy granger]

I actually came up with 2 new ideas for f1 cars this week. One is a new flywheel design that I want to develop, the other a new front wing idea. I think that the front wing downforce (or angle in other words) should depend on the speed and steering angle of the car. With a larger steering angle, downforce should be greater. On straights, less front downforce is required so that higher speeds can be achieved. I think that a servo operated front wing will offer considerable advantages for increasing laptimes. What do you guys think?

I also think that F1 has become an increasingly boring spectators sport, although Monaco was a great race I must admit. The development of technology is good, as our cars have become better because of it. Issues such as the qualifying session have to become more exciting, and the rules (which pretty much design the F1 cars in themselves) should be more open with more options avalailable. All of the cars are the same nowadays in their basic concept - they all have the same shape and v10 engines etc.... In the past, there was a variation in the design - that it what I miss.

[Graham]

I have to say being the biggest Tifosi in the Universe as I am and M Schumachers biggest fan in the world yes I have all his hats, T shirts, Jackets, Remote Control Car, Die Cast car , Posters, Autographs, Stamp and the list goes on. Im quite happy to stay up late every Sunday Night and watch the mighty red car roar around the track eating all behind it. All of us here on this group drive and own at least one alfa some like me having several and it worries me that you all dis our mightier big brother this way. F1 is fine the way it is although I wish they would be aloud to go back to slicks and push the speed higher. Max Mosley is a tosser who should go back to walking everywhere as he clearly misses the point of F1 and Bernie is a gay old man who should get over himself. They should get rid of all the hopeless drivers in F1 like Montoya(useless has been stupid cart driver), Coultard, the 2 Mindardis as they clearly cant afford to be there same for the Jordans. and Let the real teams with the real money race and see what can be achieved by such a spectacle. I say bring on the GWPA Solution and take F1 back to what it should be the pinnacle and best of motor racing anywhere in the world.
_________________
5 Alfa 33's, 2 Suds God there is no help for me

Also own 2 Complete 16V Engines(Spare) And Have a Sud Rally Car in Production

[lesthegringo]

Yes, quite obviously when all logic fails, a bigoted senseless abusive rage will do the trick.

Has it ocurred to you that perhaps the reason Jordan and Minardi can't compete is that the costs have spiralled out of control?

Oh, no, probably you just want to see one car, a Ferrari, with Schu (who I agree is a very good driver) on the race track. All those other cars cluttering up the race track for him, gosh how nasty.....

I reckon that Schu, being the quality driver that he is, would relish the chance to prove he was better against some real competition when the playing field was more level, and that it was him, not the Ferrari, that brought victory. I remember Nigel Mansell, after the season when he and the Williams basically whitewashed everything, saying that a trained monkey could have driven the car. If that was me, I'd be thinking "was the victory down to me or the car?" I'd never be happy until I knew for certain.

I commend Schu for his bravery in moving to an unreliable Ferrari team all those years ago - that showed that he had utter faith in his own abilities (not to mention the money, but he ain't stupid!) and the desire to prove himself to the F1 community.

But now F1 is in a bit of a rut, as now I always think "well, put Raikkonen in the Ferrari and Schu in the McLaren and Raikkonen will win". You only have to look at Rubens Barichello, who really is not in the same league as Shu, but look where he finishes. It's the car more than the driver.

So lets shuffle the pack a little, bring it back to where people are fighting for victory, not second place..............

Les

[GaryUK]

Don't know about the Hoover idea but the reintroduction of skirts (similar in that they create a semi-vaccum under the car with similar effects) and active stability control. These will aid overtaking but the skill of the driver dictates his lap times, they must choose the correct line and braking/accelaration points etc. This coupled with slicks, wider tyres and changed, most likely reduced areodynamics (to minimise the wake turbulance).

[RFlower]

How about having the drivers swap teams evey race ? Then we'd see how much depends on the car
_________________
Dick Flower, Nr. Carcassonne. '94 Trofeo 1.4 ie (F), '93 Imola 1.3/1.4 ie (now for breaking) (F), '91 1.7 ie (GB)(spare car), '86 Sprint 1.5 QV (F). '87 VW Syncro camper (F), '73 NSU Ro80 (F), '99 Fiat Seicento (F)

[Matt Stolton]

One for Les to argue over, as whether it should be kept or disallowed.....

If you look at the exhaust exits on the Ferrari, and since a few races ago, several other cars, you will notice they now exit into the wind flowing into the rear wing. In my mind this has two effects when compared with exiting in the older traditional place of under the rear wing and axles:

1) The more laminar air flow over the car, and the angle of the exhaust exits, helps extract the exhaust gases from the pipe, possibly bringing the engine on cam earlier? At least it leads to a cleaner intake charge, with less exhaust gas being in the chamber. Hence more power, etc, etc

2) The downside of this, is that you get a lot (19000 rpm of a 3.0L V10) of very hot exhaust gas flowing into your rear wing, which must reduce its effectiveness, as it would work best (produce most downforce/drag) with cold, and therefore dense, air. But wait a moment, surely this hot gas is only being expelled when the throttle is open, if you were to brake (take your foot off the accelerator), the charge over the rear wing cools, and therefore becomes dense again - so along a straight, at full throttle, the drag of the wing is reduced, but when you start to brake, the downforce is maximised for the rate of air over the wing.

How can you legislate against an active rear wing design, that doesn't use any moving parts, no electronics, and doesn't deform under (wind) load.

I think this is an example of the genius of F1 to overcome legislation which tries to limit it. Whilst I agree with Les, that F1 needs to change, as it has become too predicatable, I feel any changes imposed will be overcome with clever bending of the rules.

The main reason for Ferrari's domination, isn't just driver or just car. It is there overall package, car/driver and some amazing brains building the machines and coming up with new concepts that stretch the rules to the limits.

It is this rule stretching that should be encouraged, as it is cheap (good ideas come to the gifted, not necessarily the rich). Further more, these novel ideas can be spun off for commercial profit, which can help fund any team.

The problem with that is, human greed. The most intelligent designers know what they are worth, and can only be afforded by the richest teams. However, all it needs is one of the smaller teams to get lucky with that years YTS intake, and away you go.

I hear apprenticeships are coming back to the UK.....
_________________
Regards

Matt

Ex Alfa 33 'GTA' (P4 with Knobs On)
Now cruising in a 166 3.2 Ti!!