>>F1 design rules limit
>>severely ground effects design; hopefully they'll decide to move
>>toward it soon.
>Highly unlikely since they moved away from it for safety reasons.
What is the full deal on that. To me, it seemed they were simply
after, as in Indycar, a reduction of downforce. But FIA chose to go
mostly for reducing ground effects, while Indycar (while reducing some
of that too), mostly went for reducing upper body features that
provide downforce.
Turns out ground effects downforce is less affected by turbulence, if
I am hearing right. That is, a car racing right at another's tail
isn't affected nearly as much as a car relying mostly on wings for
downforce. makes for more close-quarter racing, something F1 seems to
need if we ever expect to see passing on narrow, twisty courses. Like
in the Hungary race- we all basically knew Jacques had the race in the
last 5 laps, and so did Damon, so did the announcers, because the only
way he could lose was to make a very bad mistake or break something.
In indycar, two lead runners that close are never so certain. I know,
I know, particularly in the last few road races,, where everyone goes
kamikazee at the end! Or an unfortunate yellow turns it in to a drag
race.
Hey, both forms of racing have their problems, I think any way you
look at it, all forms of racing have to make compromises that seem
like flaws in some situations... that is racing.
