
Formula 1: Building the world’s fastest cars - deegles
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2017/04/formula-1-technology/
======
patrickbolle
I'm a diehard racing fan and F1 is the absolute pinnacle of car technology. I
go to the Montreal Grand Prix every year (Singapore this year) and it's by far
the most exciting point of my year.

The only thing though... with this insane technology, we see less and less
'real racing' which is a shame.

I read an article (will try to find it) that was saying last week at this
year's first race, there was only 1 racing pass the whole race.

It's become a challenge of who has the best first 3 seconds of the race to get
into pole position. Once you are in first, besides a strategical error by your
team, you can essentially stay in first for the rest of the race.

I'm a Ferrari fan and am hoping this year they can shape up, but I want to see
some more passes!

My dad is a Formula 1600 driver here in Canada, and the 1600 races are
ridiculously exciting. Open wheel madness, passes all over the track, so much
fun.

~~~
6stringmerc
F1 is totally _not_ the absolute pinnacle of car technology. It's the premier
_racing series_ but the hypercar projects such as the Red Bull / Aston Martin
and the AMG project will shame any F1 car because they don't have to conform
to a rule book.

Sorry, there's just no way putting a bunch of limits on stuff like traction
control and other "cheats" counts as being the absolute peak when there are
road-going examples of cars with superior tech from an objective standpoint.

~~~
paganel
Nothing can beat how motorsport looked backed in the '80s - early '90s. There
was the B Group rally class, which has since grown into a myth among racing
enthusiasts, there were the really interesting Le Mans prototypes of the late
'80s - early '90s (the Mazda 787B is still considered by many as the car
having the best engine sound ever), the Dakar race was still an adventure in
itself with really intense competition and wonderful cars.

And there was also the greatest pilot that I've ever seen driving (I'm 36
now), Ayrton Senna.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BoukLE8V7M](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BoukLE8V7M)
, you can see that back then drivers had to take their hand off the wheel
while negotiation a curb at 280+ kph in order to change gears (and he was
adjusting his visor at 300 kph). And the sound, the sound is irreplaceable.

Later edit: I forgot to mention DTM. Found this YT video 2-3 months ago
([https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gw-
AxiVqihM&](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gw-AxiVqihM&)) which I now
listen/re-watch every week or so. Almost all the cars in that video are now
car enthusiast classics. If I ever were to become a millionaire I'd buy a 190E
2.5-16 EVO2 in a second.

~~~
6stringmerc
Don't forget the Chapparal cars! The first with active aero (a movable
spoiler/wing), and then also with the famous "sucker car" that had a vacuum
assist for traction.

I'm really with you though that racing series and "progress" also has a big
incentive to increase safety and reliability and blah blah blah. I do very
much love the quote from "Rush" (super well flimed I must say) about how being
on the edge of death "is a wonderful way to live" because of how alive it
makes us feel. I know that hasn't changed in motorsport, but simply evolved.
Nostalgia certainly has its place.

------
elcapitan
I wish the actual Formula 1 race shows would make more use of explanations and
technical details. There's some mentions during the race by the reporters of
some aspects of the technology, but they could do a lot better before and
after with animations etc.

I watched this Top Gear video a while ago, showing one of their guys trying to
drive a F1 car (and one of a slower league) around a race track, which is
pretty tough if you're not trained to do so, because of the massive G-force in
the turns.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9773pisjCSw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9773pisjCSw)

Compared to that, the race reporting often looks kind of dull and slow.

~~~
k-mcgrady
What country are yo watching F1 in? In the U.K. I find there's a fair bit of
technical content (obviously they can't do too much as a lot of people won't
care).

~~~
manarth
For context, which channel?

I watch Sky F1, which provides a decent amount of technical context, but I
don't know what content is delivered by Channel 4, or how it compares to Sky.

~~~
AlecSchueler
Channel 4 coverage is brilliant, especially the technical side which is
covered by Karun Chandhok. I actually watched the Sky stream live last
weekend, and then tonight I watched the Channel 4 highlights as well purely
for the coverage around the race.

Having watched at least a few races from every season since 1979 onwards, I'd
say Channel 4 is the best reporting team Formula 1 has had so far.

------
Balgair
I grew up around racing and cars, not F1, but SCCA, NHRA, NSCAR and the like.

F1 is just plain boring. Yes, the tech is ASTOUNDING and really got me into
engineering to begin with. Taking into account the elasticity of titanium
piston rods, the down force aerodynamics, the regen braking, all that jazz, it
is all SO COOL.

But, as other commenters point out, the race is won in 10 seconds, there is no
passing anymore. Like the recent Pacquiao or Rousey fights, you can't even
enjoy a single beer before the event is done. There is no drama, there is no
excitement, just a ton of talking by boring people trying to fill time. In F1,
it becomes a match of who does not screw up and make a mistake.

Why watch that? How can I get my own kids into that kind of a 'sport', to them
is it their father sitting on the edge of the seat for about a minute, then
hours of nothing. _Why would they want to watch it?_ They know that they will
never be able to compete at that level, as they know it is all about the money
that we don't have as a family. No amount of hard work will get a little boy
into those seats if dad is not a _B_ illionaire. _Maybe_ they can study really
hard and become a person that does CAD models for one of those teams. But
there are no dreams of F1 cars for little boys anymore. So why bother? What
does F1 have that could keep me watching? If you believe the stats, a lot of
people are asking the same thing:
[http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2016/04/20/f1-has-lost-one-
third-...](http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2016/04/20/f1-has-lost-one-third-of-its-
tv-audience-since-2008/)

~~~
k-mcgrady
You say all that like it's fact. Personally I love F1 for the strategy.
Watching a car slowly close on another car 0.25s a lap for 20 laps is
thrilling. Trying to figure out where people are coming out after pit stops
and whether they're lap times are good enough is fun.

I feel like the argument that 'there is no overtaking in F1 so it's bad' is
akin to people not liking Soccer because there are never more than a few goals
a game. There's much more to it than that and their are other series that
cater to people who just want lots of passing.

~~~
Balgair
Yes but in soccer, both teams start with 0 points and can tie. You can't do
that in racing (a tie does happen but is so rare, it might as well never
happen). Would you like to just watch cars draft each other for 3 hours and
never actually overtake or _try_ to win? Because that's what F1 is kinda is, a
15 second death scramble at the front of the poll followed by a non-
competitive Sunday drive at extreme speeds. The damn time trials for poll in
NASCAR are more worth watching, at least they are trying to go fast.

~~~
k-mcgrady
No overtaking != no competition. The competition largely comes down to
strategy now. I find nothing more boring than racing series where cars are
constantly overtaking each other. It just gets boring and repetitive.

~~~
Balgair
Wait, define overtaking. I would define it as: My team moved into 15 place,
from 16th, thereby increasing my chances of winning the race and the season
title. Are you saying that overtaking can _or_ cannot occur due to pit stops
and the like? Because if I am reading you the way I think I am, you are saying
that there can be competition even though no-one changes place in the race. If
you are saying that, we just have fundamentally different ways of defining
entertainment/fun. For me, overtaking and changes in position with the goal of
taking 1st place are _the point_ of racing no matter the venue (foot-races,
boats, etc). For me, if you aren't trying to take 1st, you might as well hold
the competition in your backyard.

------
DVassallo
Here's one lap onboard from last weekend's qualifying, showing 6G+ forces many
times over the course of a single lap:
[https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/features/2017/3/f1-video-...](https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/features/2017/3/f1-video-2017-vs-2016-g-force-
comparison.html)

And that track isn't even one of the most demanding ones.

------
mr_justin
For me, endurance racing (WEC) is quite a bit more fascinating and impressive
than F1. Racing a car on the cutting edge of race technology for 2 hours is
one thing, but 24 hours is a whole different ballgame.

~~~
quanticle
The other thing that WEC has that Formula 1 doesn't is the chaos and
excitement caused by multiple classes of car competing at the same time. It's
not just a matter of negotiating your car around all the other cars that are
pretty much identical to yours. You have to negotiate around cars that are
both slower and faster. Dealing with traffic is a major aspect of WEC, and
it's something that's entirely lacking from F1.

~~~
kirse
If you like the chaos and excitement of WEC you should come on over to WRC.
$5/month for 3-hours of live streaming HD content per Rally, including full
on-board cams for every major driver and stage:

[https://plus.wrc.com/](https://plus.wrc.com/)

I mean c'mon, Kris Meeke with an accidental exit into a car park with just a
few corners to go while leading Rally Mexico. You can't get much more exciting
than that!

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECS_GXIJ200](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECS_GXIJ200)

~~~
quanticle
I already have :) WRC is fantastic.

At this point, I think I'm supposed to whine about how "modern rallying
doesn't hold a shadow to Group B" :)

------
ethbro
If you really want to geek out about F1 (which is incredibly fascinating from
a rules and sheer technical wizardry perspective), I would highly recommend
the F1 Technical forum.

[https://www.f1technical.net/forum/](https://www.f1technical.net/forum/)

~~~
barclay
Though, now dated, I'd also recommend [Steve Matchett's
books]([http://stevematchett.com/](http://stevematchett.com/)). Previous
mechanic, and now commentator (which, yeah, some people hate... but i love the
guy). Interesting insider perspective.

~~~
mikey_p
I don't mind most of his commentary, except for the bit where he calls all the
teams by their home city. People don't really care about Brackley vs.
Maranello.

~~~
AlecSchueler
I've never seen Steve's commentary (although I do love his books), but those
references could be useful in appreciating the lineage of the teams on track,
e.g. the consideration the the team that once was Spyker finished 4th in the
championship last year.

~~~
mikey_p
Yeah, I don't mind it occasionally, but he'll open up qualifying with
something like, "Well today we're going to see if Maranello can take the fight
to Brackley," and I wish he'd just use the team names.

On the other hand, I really look forward to hearing Hobbs go
"Whoeuueeuuueeeoaa!!" midsentence every time someone gets even slightly
sideways.

------
hunterjrj
So much emphasis on Microsoft technology in here. Veiled advertisement?

~~~
LeonM
I thought the same thing while reading the article. The whole part about Power
BI is definitely an advertisement, it has little to do with the rest of the
story.

------
Errorcod3
25 teraflops and not a drop more - I did not expect to see a limit for the
hardware used for simulations!

------
hkjayakumar
Richard Hammond's Engineering Connections on F1 [1] is a great watch for some
of the technical details.

It is however a bit dated; there have been changes to the rules and the cars
themselves since the video was made. The Reddit guide [2] to F1 is more up to
date.

[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QC_gpr2xAjk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QC_gpr2xAjk)

[2]
[https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/newtof1](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/newtof1)

------
myrandomcomment
So both my wife and I watch every race. I have been to the Singapore race in
the past. What an amazing party. The races themselves are getting to be quite
dull. The lack of passing and things like DRS have made the racing all about
the first few seconds. With the exception of Max V. amazing driving in some of
the races last year it is not as fun as it used to be. I really wish they
would mandate a single engine and a singe car type. Lets make it about the
drivers and the strategy. The teams with the money win here.

~~~
DVassallo
But you're missing the point. This sport is about engineering teams competing
to build the best machinery. It's probably the best manifestation of
technology applied as a sport.

~~~
overcast
Then why don't we just forgo human drivers, if it's only about the engineering
teams. Just have self driving cars battling it out.

In my opinion, F1 should go back to manual transmission, and no driver
assists. Do whatever else you want to make the car perfect, but the driver
must be in control of the entire machine.

Just look at the 80's in those monstrous turbo V6's approaching 1500HP, no
traction control, no power steering, and manual transmission. THAT was
driving.

~~~
DVassallo
It's not only about engineering teams... but about teams (engineering +
driver). Obviously the human drivers, and the drama they generate, is what
makes the race worth watching. But giving the driver a good car is a
fundamental part of the game.

~~~
overcast
Thus my response.

------
redtuesday
I hope self driving cars take the crown in the future. The more the F1 is
regulated the more boring it get's (at least for me).

Since no driver is in danger they could make the cars faster and the race
tracks more interesting. Maybe this will revive some of the race tracks that
apparently are not on the F1 list anymore because they are to dangerous.

Or in the far future even high speed racing with weapons like in the games
Rollcage, Wipeout, F-Zero and Extreme-G (of course with technology that is
available...)

~~~
k-mcgrady
Self-driving car races sound like the most boring thing imaginable to me.
Drivers don't have to be risking death (and they are, and they have died
recently) to make the sport exciting. They have to be in immensely good
physical condition to drive those cars and they have to have better race craft
than ever as overtaking has become more difficult too. I'm not saying self-
driving cars couldn't be it's own series but it would never reach the level of
F1/WEC/WRC in terms of popularity. Nobody wants to cheer on a CPU.

~~~
joshu
I have started a competition for autonomous vehicles. I struggle to see much
spectator interest as well. I see it has more of an engineering competition
that happens to culminate in a race.

That said, most of amateur racing has no spectatorship either.

[http://selfracingcars.com](http://selfracingcars.com)

------
yason
Funny title. FIA has, for decades, been explicitly forcing the cars to not be
the fastest racing cars with byzantine restrictions on the design of the cars
and even _how_ they can be designed. I gradually stopped watching F1 races
through the late 90's because there was less and less racing and the winning
cars were more and more determined by how the engineers found loopholes in the
rules for one season until those got regulated or banned for the next season.

If they just gave everyone the same car and let the teams augment the base
construction instead of building a new car from scratch then the drivers'
skills would be more emphasised and leave more room for race action. Also, the
more activity there is during the race the more entertaining.

~~~
fest
I have the opposite impression: it seems to me that FIA regulations are making
the cars pretty much the same for all teams.

~~~
tradersam
That is the main goal, but take the turbo switch in 2014 as a counter example-
Mercedes out their turbo-charger inline with the engine, and no other teams
did this[0], so they dominated for years. So yes, if you have the most money
for engineers and parts, you generally have the best chance of winning.

[0]:[https://www.wired.com/2014/04/mercedes-f1-turbo/](https://www.wired.com/2014/04/mercedes-f1-turbo/)

------
nonsequ
I think PG once wrote an essay explaining that most press is agenda-driven and
there's somebody with money behind the story.

I wonder if that's the case here. F1 just passed out of Bernie Ecclestone's
hands and has a new leadership team as well as shareholder base. They are
aiming to revamp the sport and make it more exciting by addressing a lot of
the issues brought up in other comments, like the rules stacking the deck in
favor of rich teams and the fact that there is no streaming/digital option
available to global fans.

------
WalterBright
If I ruled the world, F1 cars would not be allowed to use any electronics
other than in safety systems. Something about a computer taking the place of
clever mechanics sucks the joy out of it.

~~~
chadgeidel
And no aerodynamics active or otherwise. :-)

~~~
WalterBright
Yes.

Tuning up a race car with a laptop just seems like cheating to me, they should
be tuned by ear :-)

------
fizixer
Clickbait title. (technical deep dive? really?).

~~~
sctb
OK, we've taken that out of the title since interpretations may vary and the
article is represented just fine without it.

~~~
VLM
The irony is there's still a rather obvious factual error left in the title,
in that the slowest top fuel dragsters are well over 100 MPH faster than the
fastest straightaway speeds of F1 cars.

Eventually the title is going to be chopped down to not much more than "F1"
LOL.

Due to continuous modification of the rules, today F1 cars are faster than
NASCAR but its an incredibly close race (LOL the pun) and it seems inevitable
that given the constant turmoil of the rules there will eventually be a season
where the top NASCAR speed is higher than the top F1 speed for that season.

So if its not bad enough that the dragsters are faster than F1, its only via
extensive rules manipulation that the fastest NASCAR cars are not occasionally
faster than the fastest F1.

~~~
soundwave106
The absolute fastest "cars" in the world tend to be the jet-propelled vehicles
solely built to break land speed records (I believe the current holder is this
car:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ThrustSSC](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ThrustSSC))

A jet car isn't going to be able to be driven very easily on a closed race
course, though. :)

Many cars are designed to be fast in one way, but not as quick in other ways.
Cars designed just to go straight (like dragsters) do not need loads of speed-
robbing downforce for taking corners quickly.

Formula 1 doesn't even hold the fastest lap ever recorded by a sanctioned
racing series... as far as I know, that would be CART / Indycar, who achieved
a 241mph (387kph) qualifying lap at Fontana
([http://www.prnmag.com/columns/44-columns/66-who-holds-the-
wo...](http://www.prnmag.com/columns/44-columns/66-who-holds-the-worlds-
closed-course-record-aj-foyt.html)).

But Formula 1 doesn't run on banked ovals like Indycar does.

Circuit Gilles Villeneuve has hosted a lot of series, including both Formula 1
and the NASCAR Nationwide series. There's a comparison of record lap times at
the end of the Wiki article
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circuit_Gilles_Villeneuve](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circuit_Gilles_Villeneuve)).
At least here, it seems that Formula 1 is a fair bit quicker than Indycar and
loads quicker than the saloon / sport type cars. For this particular type of
course, they probably _are_ the fastest racing class.

~~~
rurban
F1 is about 10x better than other racing series or car tech. The top speed and
power obviously not. But look at the max. rpm. Capped now at about 20k, but
they can easily go to 26k. F1 is all about high freq and acceleration.
Internal systems are running at 10khz cycles, normally a NASCAR or normal car
Max is 500-1k. F1 dynos are small monsters compared to NASCAR. Dragsters have
strong power, 3x more than F1 with stronger dynos but this is like a ship
dyno. You could use cheap hydraulic dynos to test them.

Transmitted data rates and sensors are insane, team budgets ditto. NASCAR and
Indy could never use that much sensor tech as F1. They are highly motivated,
but it's a different league. The F1 dyno tech would blow away any Tesla
e-motor.

~~~
PhantomGremlin
No, 20k rpm was "the good old days". Now they are limited to 15k.[1]

I think the engine manufacturers were the ones pushing for all these rule
changes. The reason is the manufacturers want to be able to utilize this
technology in their road cars. Just look at turbos, not too long ago F1 went
turbo (again). Not coincidentally many recent road cars are turbo. E.g. Honda
has turbos in their econoboxes.

[1] [https://www.formula1.com/en/championship/inside-f1/rules-
reg...](https://www.formula1.com/en/championship/inside-f1/rules-
regs/Power_Unit_and_ERS.html)

