The golden age: Tech speeds from racetrack to road faster than ever

Racing tests engineers as well as their designs.

Read the whole story

 

[Deleted member 192806]

I'm waiting for when a road car can handle like a Formula One.

The results have been showing up in road cars generally as more power, greater efficiency, and improved reliability, leading to what is arguably a current golden age for road-relevant technology transferring from track to street.

That reminds me. How many racing cars use something other than an internal combustion engine?

 

[Deleted member 14629]

That reminds me. How many racing cars use something other than an internal combustion engine?

http://www.fiaformulae.com/

 

[sr105]

Unfortunately, such systems are currently not street-legal thanks to regulations which ban showing a driver an active video display if the car is in forward motion.

The Tesla Model S does this today.

 

[Cumulonimbus Maximus]

Another technology from motor racing/Le Mans? Audi's laser headlight system, coming to a (non-American) car near you!

 

[erendorn]

Digger[/url]":2f9p99as]And yet when the thought of beautiful cars are mentioned, no one thinks modern stuff, everyone goes back to the bugattis and Alfas of old.
I wonder why that is? All this pursuit of efficiency and aerodynamics have ruined the look of cars.
Fuel economy be damned, give me a iconic shape any day

There's probably a bit of nostalgia in that feeling. I personally do like the look of many modern cars. (I like the look of some old cars too, style can be quite intemporal).

 

[Krye]

Thanks for the article. Very awesome sauce.

Being an auto enthusiast via driving games, it's totally facinating to see racing tech in 'daily drivers.' The last decade's increase in fuel efficiency while maintain power in our engines (Geo Metro anyone?) is probably the biggest positive I've seen in recent times.

 

[Bongle]

Ostracus[/url]":2mut9rtr]I'm waiting for when a road car can handle like a Formula One.

The results have been showing up in road cars generally as more power, greater efficiency, and improved reliability, leading to what is arguably a current golden age for road-relevant technology transferring from track to street.

That reminds me. How many racing cars use something other than an internal combustion engine?

The WEC cars have an interesting and fairly wide-open hybridization system. The LMP1 regulations are written so that manufacturers can choose to include small to large hybrid components, which affects how much fuel they're allowed per lap. If you want to deploy 8MJ/lap (about 60hp average over the course of the lap), then you get less fuel, but gain more flexibility in your electrical components. Obviously battery tech isn't quite there yet, but the 3 main manufacturers in LMP1 last year all picked different hybridization levels and were all competitive with each other. I expect we'll gradually see bigger and bigger electrical systems.

Formula E, as another poster mentioned, is interesting too: This is their first year and all the chassis/powertrain units are spec, but next year teams will be able to include pretty much whatever they want, as long as it costs less than some large number and fits in a certain volume and weight restriction. I'm hoping we'll see some neat supercap or barely-out-of-the-lab batteries being deployed.

Even stodgy F1 is now doing races at about the same laptimes at about 2/3rds the fuel usage of a few years ago.

 

[InerringApproximation]

I find it embarrassing how poorly endurance racing is broadcast in the U.S. WEC and to a lesser extent the Tudor series (it was better when it was ALMS) are just fantastic to watch partially because of all of the different classes on the field at once. Positions are always changing, passes (between different classes) occur on every lap, and all of that jostling around opens up opportunities for intra-class passing that don't exist in other series. And if one class gets boring, well, you've got 3 or 4 others to watch at the same time. And any racing series that lets the Deltawing race (even if it doesn't always compete with anything else) is awesome.

Also, WEC is big into hybrid systems at the moment. The fastest prototypes are hybrids, and the front runners even use different technologies (Audi uses flywheels, Toyota uses supercapacitors, Porsche uses li-ion batteries). They're also playing with turbocharger mounted generators and other fun ideas that really might make a difference in road cars. 24 hours of using hybrid systems that peak at over 100 kW output is a hell of a stress test.

I could wax on about how generally awesome the WEC rules are too (they're smart; Store more energy per lap in a hybrid system, and you aren't allowed to use as much fuel). Really though, these two endurance series (Tudor is TRYING to screw it up but hasn't quite ruined it yet) just remind me of how awful so many other racing series are. Spec series have their place (personally I think of F1 as a spec series because of how limiting their rules are), but pretty much everything on TV is a spec series.

Fortunately, endurance racing organizers aren't afraid of streaming their own content.

 

[Dr Gitlin]

InerringApproximation[/url]":1f7lbcc9]I find it embarrassing how poorly endurance racing is broadcast in the U.S.

TUSCC's last two races of 2014 went out on Fox after NFL games and got really quite respectable audience numbers (especially compared with Indycar ).

 

[amp88]

Ostracus[/url]":kgzd1i00]That reminds me. How many racing cars use something other than an internal combustion engine?

As well as Formula E (as previously mentioned by Happysin), the TT Zero series has been around for a few years now, with the all-electric bikes improving significantly in performance each year. From 2010 to 2014 the average speed for the winning ~37.75 mile lap has increased from 96.82mph to 117.37mph. You can see the full 2014 wining lap onboard here.

Nissan's entrance to the top LMP1-H class in WEC this year will also be very interesting to watch. From early reports, it appears as though their hybrid system will be responsible for producing more of the total power output than their ICE (Internal Combustion Engine). The total maximum power output is expected to be at least 1500bhp.

 

[well is it.]

Great article. I think one area that will massively benefit from all this is batteries, and that's something we pretty much all depend on.

 

[sep332]

sr105[/url]":3pt0kqeq]

Unfortunately, such systems are currently not street-legal thanks to regulations which ban showing a driver an active video display if the car is in forward motion.

The Tesla Model S does this today.

Maybe a straight camera view is OK, and the ban is on fancy HUD overlays?

 

[Abhi Beckert]

For me the most impressive area is safety.

Race cars routinely drive head on into concrete walls or get t-boned on the drivers side door at hundreds of miles an hour and drivers walk away with only bruises from the seat belts.

Unfortunately a lot of it doesn't make it into street cars, largely because of over regulation by governments, but everything that does reach street cars is a godsend.

Also it's not just cars, tracks are also getting safer which can teach us a lot about road design.

 

[Bongle]

sep332[/url]":nvwrj3mr]

sr105[/url]":nvwrj3mr]

Unfortunately, such systems are currently not street-legal thanks to regulations which ban showing a driver an active video display if the car is in forward motion.

The Tesla Model S does this today.

Maybe a straight camera view is OK, and the ban is on fancy HUD overlays?

HUDs have existed (overlaid on your windshield, not on a video readout) in luxury cars for decades. In fact, I remember a (cadillac, I think) system that overlaid an infrared readout on your windshield so you could see animals/deer/pedestrians at night.

 

[Deleted member 192806]

Abhi Beckert[/url]":12sjxzjg]For me the most impressive area is safety.

Race cars routinely drive head on into concrete walls or get t-boned on the drivers side door at hundreds of miles an hour and drivers walk away with only bruises from the seat belts.

Unfortunately a lot of it doesn't make it into street cars, largely because of over regulation by governments, but everything that does reach street cars is a godsend.

Also it's not just cars, tracks are also getting safer which can teach us a lot about road design.

The aesthetics of roll bars.

 

[Abhi Beckert]

Unfortunately, such systems are currently not street-legal thanks to regulations which ban showing a driver an active video display if the car is in forward motion.

In my state this was recently rewritten to specifically allow any "driver aid".

Cars need to sell worldwide to be price competitive which often means whatever country has the most restrictive regulations often gets applied worldwide.

 

[Abhi Beckert]

Ostracus[/url]":1m4oa0bd]

Abhi Beckert[/url]":1m4oa0bd]For me the most impressive area is safety.

Race cars routinely drive head on into concrete walls or get t-boned on the drivers side door at hundreds of miles an hour and drivers walk away with only bruises from the seat belts.

Unfortunately a lot of it doesn't make it into street cars, largely because of over regulation by governments, but everything that does reach street cars is a godsend.

Also it's not just cars, tracks are also getting safer which can teach us a lot about road design.

The aesthetics of roll bars.

Most modern cars have a hidden equivalent. Gone are the days when a car flips on it's roof and crushes the driver.

 

[amp88]

Abhi Beckert[/url]":2ciyymmr]

Ostracus[/url]":2ciyymmr]

Abhi Beckert[/url]":2ciyymmr]For me the most impressive area is safety.

Race cars routinely drive head on into concrete walls or get t-boned on the drivers side door at hundreds of miles an hour and drivers walk away with only bruises from the seat belts.

Unfortunately a lot of it doesn't make it into street cars, largely because of over regulation by governments, but everything that does reach street cars is a godsend.

Also it's not just cars, tracks are also getting safer which can teach us a lot about road design.

The aesthetics of roll bars.

Most modern cars have a hidden equivalent. Gone are the days when a car flips on it's roof and crushes the driver.

Indeed, although it's important to note that a part of the trend towards improved pillar strength and safety (for occupants of the vehicle and pedestrians) in the event of a crash has resulted in much wider pillars than were typically seen in the past. This has a knock-on effect in that it decreases visibility/increases blind spots. One interesting development in this area is that of Jaguar/Land Rover, who have shown a simulated 'Virtual Urban Windscreen'.

 

[ip_what]

Abhi Beckert[/url]":29we0wkc]For me the most impressive area is safety.

Race cars routinely drive head on into concrete walls or get t-boned on the drivers side door at hundreds of miles an hour and drivers walk away with only bruises from the seat belts.

Unfortunately a lot of it doesn't make it into street cars, largely because of over regulation by governments, but everything that does reach street cars is a godsend.

Also it's not just cars, tracks are also getting safer which can teach us a lot about road design.

Is there a specific safety improvement that you have in mind that isn't allowed in production cars due to government regulations?

A big chunk of the safety stuff in race cars isn't in consumer cars because really safe cars are customized for the (140-180 lb) driver. You can't make a minivan with a custom molded seat that has the H-point 5" off the ground, strap in a 5 point harness and bolt the steering wheel in after the driver is strapped in. It will take longer to get into the car (without a team) than it takes to get the kids to soccer practice.

A big other reason is that getting $10k (guessing) Kevlar tub in a $25k entry level sedan is slightly problematic from a budget perspective.

And yes, tracks are getting safer, but what do you think the gas tax would have to be to install gravel pits on 47,000 miles of interstate (to say nothing of the millions of miles of more dangerous winding state roads). If you crash at the Nurburgring, they send you a bill for ~ $85/meter of damaged Armco. How much armco do you want us to install on rural route 5?

Something's just don't transfer owing to the nature of the event. Somethings - like stiffer frames, do. I think focusing on government regulation misses the more important reasons for differences in safety.

 

[daxomni]

"Virtuous efficiency?" Surely you jest?

 

[maxwell]

Abhi Beckert[/url]":1ic5036f]For me the most impressive area is safety.

Race cars routinely drive head on into concrete walls or get t-boned on the drivers side door at hundreds of miles an hour and drivers walk away with only bruises from the seat belts.

[bold]Unfortunately a lot of it doesn't make it into street cars, largely because of over regulation by governments, but everything that does reach street cars is a godsend.[/bold]

Also it's not just cars, tracks are also getting safer which can teach us a lot about road design.

You are too funny. At lot of it doesn't make into street cars because street cars buyers complain of over regulation.

Exhibit 1 ) Daytime running lights

 

[Abhi Beckert]

ip_what[/url]":2wlnyzp4]

Abhi Beckert[/url]":2wlnyzp4]For me the most impressive area is safety.

Race cars routinely drive head on into concrete walls or get t-boned on the drivers side door at hundreds of miles an hour and drivers walk away with only bruises from the seat belts.

Unfortunately a lot of it doesn't make it into street cars, largely because of over regulation by governments, but everything that does reach street cars is a godsend.

Also it's not just cars, tracks are also getting safer which can teach us a lot about road design.

Is there a specific safety improvement that you have in mind that isn't allowed in production cars due to government regulations?

Sure - I would like to have a 5 point seat belt and helmet and HANS. Depending where you live, they are usually either difficult or impossible.

The off road tyres I run on my motorcycle are illegal in other countries, even though they are far safer on the dirt - where many people predomanantly ride and are often injured or killed. Fortunately they are legal where I live, so I get to benefit feom that added safety.

II was once following close to another rider, who tried to stop but didn't have enough grip and hit a tree. I stopped easily, my braking distance was less than half hers. The difference? Her tyres were street legal worldwide, mine were racing tyres.

A big chunk of the safety stuff in race cars isn't in consumer cars because really safe cars are customized for the (140-180 lb) driver. You can't make a minivan with a custom molded seat that has the H-point 5" off the ground, strap in a 5 point harness and bolt the steering wheel in after the driver is strapped in.

Sure, but other things like deciding how to attach two bits of metal together without creating a weak point or figuring out how to keep a massive explosion/fire from burning the driver or a door that can be opened when it's been twisted beyond recognition all does apply to a road car.

It will take longer to get into the car (without a team) than it takes to get the kids to soccer practice.

The races I follow have driver changes. It takes seconds to change driver and they have all kinds of extra things to worry about like plugging in the cooling pumps and drinking water for their race suit and helmet (cockpit temperatures can exceed 60C/140F).

A big other reason is that getting $10k (guessing) Kevlar tub in a $25k entry level sedan is slightly problematic from a budget perspective.

Not all race cars are multi million dollar machines. Also they don't have economy of scale, there are only ~25 V8 Supercars in the world for example and they don't share any components with any road car except for things like the headlight bulbs. You can't compare manufacturing costs of a race car to a road car.

And yes, tracks are getting safer, but what do you think the gas tax would have to be to install gravel pits on 47,000 miles of interstate (to say nothing of the millions of miles of more dangerous winding state roads). If you crash at the Nurburgring, they send you a bill for ~ $85/meter of damaged Armco. How much armco do you want us to install on rural route 5?

I've never heard of route 5... but Armco usually isn't safe. Far better to run off the road into the grass/desert/shrubs than hit a steel barrier. Most race tracks use armco where they don't expect a car to touch it - armco protects the spectators and marshals, not the drivers.

There are sand traps on a road near where I live, designed for brake failures going down a steep hill. And any road along a mountain or ocean is likely to have armco barriers.

Making high risk roads safer is cheaper than medical treatment injuries especially if someone is cripled for life. When done wirhin reasonable limits, money spent on safety will improve the national GDP.

Something's just don't transfer owing to the nature of the event. Somethings - like stiffer frames, do. I think focusing on government regulation misses the more important reasons for differences in safety.

I think you don't realise how much regulation there is.

If you want to change how a seatbelt works, it will cost billions of dollars to make it street legal in every country around the world, so they can individually apply their own legislative requirements and do full crash tests in multiple scenarios - those are billions of dollars that could have been spent improving other safety features.

 

[redtomato]

Nice article though I would have liked to go deeper on some of the new tech. I guess that'll have to wait till you get a John Timmer / Laserboy of car tech.

Sixth paragraph:

Since the turn of the century, one rulebook more than any other exists in this Goldilocks zone, and it’s being used to good effect in series like the Tudor United SportsCar Championship (TUSC) and the World Endurance Championship (WEC).

What is the name of this original rulebook? Oddly it isn't given anywhere despite most of the article being about the implications of the rules laid out in this rulebook.

Edit: that came out more sarcastic than I intended. Sarcasm now removed. And thanks to Bongle below for the link to the WEC rulebook. The way the article is worded does suggest there's a progenitor rulebook.

 

[Bongle]

The races I follow have driver changes. It takes seconds to change driver and they have all kinds of extra things to worry about like plugging in the cooling pumps and drinking water for their race suit and helmet (cockpit temperatures can exceed 60C/140F).

Having to jump over the door bars (1.5" steel tubes) doesn't really count, since it's not something you can ship in a production automobile.

Most of the survivability improvements in race cars (having built several amateur-level cars, which safety-wise aren't _that_ different from the GT classes) come from having equipment that isn't entirely practical for road use or from actually removing road-car safety devices:
-Nomex clothing
-Helmets (to avoid bouncing your head off the roll cage)
-5-6 point harnesses
-Fuel cells (to prevent gas from going everywhere)
-Removal of all interior cloth and mechanisms to prevent fire
-HANS devices that prevent your neck from breaking (which also prevent you from looking left/right)
-Removal of all airbags

 

[Bongle]

redtomato[/url]":gbvhryu4]Nice article though I would have liked to go deeper on some of the new tech. I guess that'll have to wait till you get a John Timmer / LASERBOY of car tech.

Sixth paragraph:

Since the turn of the century, one rulebook more than any other exists in this Goldilocks zone, and it’s being used to good effect in series like the Tudor United SportsCar Championship (TUSC) and the World Endurance Championship (WEC).

What is the name of this truly amazing rulebook? Oddly it isn't given anywhere despite most of the article being about the implications of the rules laid out in this legendary rulebook.

http://www.fia.com/sport/regulations?f% ... egory%3A95

I googled "WEC Rulebook". It's actually surprising how accessible many racing rulebooks are.

 

[jbauer5]

sr105[/url]":1zkbhg00]

Unfortunately, such systems are currently not street-legal thanks to regulations which ban showing a driver an active video display if the car is in forward motion.

The Tesla Model S does this today.

Yes, it's true! I am not quite sure why it's been down voted. But you can enable the rear camera at any time, even during forward motion. It's a bit harrowing at first because the angle is a bit different than your typical rear view mirror, but given the Model S's tiny rear window it's very useful.

 

[Ravant]

Ostracus[/url]":1dy9p0ea]I'm waiting for when a road car can handle like a Formula One.

Waiting for a road car that won't be able to handle well at normal road speeds at all, then?

The issue with Formula One cars is that the majority of their handling comes from downforce. They can take that roundabout at 60+ MPH, but if you try to take it below 40, the lack of downforce causes it to understeer and plow on forward. Just watch Top Gear UK's attempt at using a Caparo T1 in what you could consider normal road conditions (35 MPH around town, 60-80 MPH highway.) It doesn't come into its own handling-wise until highway speeds. (A Caparo T1 is essentially a road-legal F1 car, to oversimplify.)

 

[tetrapyloctomy]

Or watch Hammond try to complete a single lap in a Formula 1 car. (After he finally manages to get it moving, of course.)

 

[Unsheept]

daxomni[/url]":129wx7a0]"Virtuous efficiency?" Surely you jest?

He's not kidding, and don't call him Shirley.

 

[amp88]

Ravant[/url]":l003fpny]

Ostracus[/url]":l003fpny]I'm waiting for when a road car can handle like a Formula One.

Waiting for a road car that won't be able to handle well at normal road speeds at all, then?

The issue with Formula One cars is that the majority of their handling comes from downforce. They can take that roundabout at 60+ MPH, but if you try to take it below 40, the lack of downforce causes it to understeer and plow on forward. Just watch Top Gear UK's attempt at using a Caparo T1 in what you could consider normal road conditions (35 MPH around town, 60-80 MPH highway.) It doesn't come into its own handling-wise until highway speeds. (A Caparo T1 is essentially a road-legal F1 car, to oversimplify.)

Two things:

1) F1 cars still generate a very large amount of mechanical grip through their sticky and wide tyres. If you removed the wings and downforce-generating floor from an F1 car it would still be able to lap circuits very quickly, given some time to adjust setup. It's certainly true that downforce plays a very large role in the performance of F1 cars, but I think you're overstating things.
2) Using Top Gear as a source for almost anything (except, perhaps, examples of casual racism in broadcast TV) is a bad idea...

 

[Unsheept]

Abhi Beckert[/url]":2lhepay6]

ip_what[/url]":2lhepay6]

Abhi Beckert[/url]":2lhepay6]For me the most impressive area is safety.

Race cars routinely drive head on into concrete walls or get t-boned on the drivers side door at hundreds of miles an hour and drivers walk away with only bruises from the seat belts.

Unfortunately a lot of it doesn't make it into street cars, largely because of over regulation by governments, but everything that does reach street cars is a godsend.

Also it's not just cars, tracks are also getting safer which can teach us a lot about road design.

Is there a specific safety improvement that you have in mind that isn't allowed in production cars due to government regulations?

Sure - I would like to have a 5 point seat belt and helmet and HANS. Depending where you live, they are usually either difficult or impossible.

The off road tyres I run on my motorcycle are illegal in other countries, even though they are far safer on the dirt - where many people predomanantly ride and are often injured or killed. Fortunately they are legal where I live, so I get to benefit feom that added safety.

II was once following close to another rider, who tried to stop but didn't have enough grip and hit a tree. I stopped easily, my braking distance was less than half hers. The difference? Her tyres were street legal worldwide, mine were racing tyres.

I believe they call those miracle tires, not racing tires. To get them, you bring a sacrifice of facts to the side of a lake, after which a man in white robes walks across the lake and installs them.

When done wirhin reasonable limits, money spent on safety will improve the national GDP.

Now THAT would be a true miracle.

 

[Ravant]

amp88[/url]":6wtowjlb]

Ravant[/url]":6wtowjlb]

Ostracus[/url]":6wtowjlb]I'm waiting for when a road car can handle like a Formula One.

Waiting for a road car that won't be able to handle well at normal road speeds at all, then?

The issue with Formula One cars is that the majority of their handling comes from downforce. They can take that roundabout at 60+ MPH, but if you try to take it below 40, the lack of downforce causes it to understeer and plow on forward. Just watch Top Gear UK's attempt at using a Caparo T1 in what you could consider normal road conditions (35 MPH around town, 60-80 MPH highway.) It doesn't come into its own handling-wise until highway speeds. (A Caparo T1 is essentially a road-legal F1 car, to oversimplify.)

Two things:

1) F1 cars still generate a very large amount of mechanical grip through their sticky and wide tyres. If you removed the wings and downforce-generating floor from an F1 car it would still be able to lap circuits very quickly, given some time to adjust setup. It's certainly true that downforce plays a very large role in the performance of F1 cars, but I think you're overstating things.
2) Using Top Gear as a source for almost anything (except, perhaps, examples of casual racism in broadcast TV) is a bad idea...

Two things:
1) No, I'm not really overstating things at all. Yes, they do have a large amount of grip, but no more than, say, a Koenigsegg CCX, Caparo T1, Ultima GTR or Porsche 918. In fact, regulation limits F1 tire section widths (contact patch) to 355mm front, 380 rear. They often go thinner on the front (McLaren was using 255's in the front last season*) to improve turn-in response. By comparison, Koenigsegg's Agera R uses 265/35-19 in the front and 355/30-20 in the rear. Without that aerodynamic effect of downforce, F1 cars wouldn't be as impressive in the handling department.
2) Not always. Using Top Gear as a source for what most people (read as: Not Michael Shumacher) are capable of in a given vehicle at most isn't that bad of an idea, as most people couldn't get into a CCX/Caparo T1/Porsche 918 and flog it and expect to stay on the road.

Edit to add asterisk: * By going to 255/380 front/rear width split, combined with some interesting suspension changes, McLaren was able to improve its turn-in response considerably under downforce. However, Fernando Alonso noted the car had a strong propensity to understeer at the Grand Hotel hairpin at Monaco last year, which more or less supports my initial statement about lower speeds in an F1 car.

I've also seen 350/390 front/rear installed on road-going C5 Corvettes, a Miata Exocet, a Pontiac Fiero (seriously. It was a Plazma re-body, in a seriously tacky iridescent green. Had the engine to back it up though, a turbocharged LS3), and a Corvette C6 Z06. All of them still handled fine at low speeds, but none of them, compliments of lack of downforce, could match an F1 car at higher speeds. The point is, F1, under about 60 MPH, isn't some massively effective handling machine. Its lateral acceleration capacity is limited to roughly any grand touring car's with similar section widths.

 

[Morbus]

Ostracus[/url]":2ze2vl0f]I'm waiting for when a road car can handle like a Formula One.

Aerial Atom.

 

[lamawithonel]

Abhi Beckert[/url]":2i4u4gxy]For me the most impressive area is safety.

Race cars routinely drive head on into concrete walls or get t-boned on the drivers side door at hundreds of miles an hour and drivers walk away with only bruises from the seat belts.

Unfortunately a lot of it doesn't make it into street cars, largely because of over regulation by governments, but everything that does reach street cars is a godsend.

<snip>

Regulation has nothing to do with it. That stuff costs $$$$$. The F1/Indy survival cell component alone cost around $100,000, and if it cracks it can't be welded like a normal car. It must be replaced. Scale that up to a family-sized car and you're looking at $300,000 or more for a single component.

Economical roll cages are not suited to street cars, either. The bars pose a major head injury risk. In fact, the standards for race car helmets are more stringent than motorcycle helmets for precisely this reason. Not to mention that to be effective the cage must take up the back seat. I'm all for stronger roll structures, though. Thankfully the NHTSA updated roof crush standards in 2009. Previous to that innovation in that area was moving at a snails pace.

But back to race tech: Bladder fuel tanks... those are more expensive, but not by much. They are something I would like to see as standard equipment. They've been used successfully at nearly all levels of racing for several decades now, helping to prevent fuel fires like the one that killed actor Paul Walker. Of course, getting car companies to adopt them across their fleets would would likely require more regulation, not less. (Even the Porsche Carrera GT supercar Paul Walker was in wasn't equipped with this feature.)

 

[normally butters]

Endurance racing is the ideal format for automakers to engage in a big-budget development contest with disparate engineering solutions, because it's relatively easy to even things out over the course of a long race by designing the regulations to create tortoise-and-hare situations. The cars that are faster on the straights are made slower in the corners, cars with the quicker lap times are made to take more pit stops, etc.

But at shorter distances (even Grand Prix distances), it doesn't take a big difference in the way the cars perform before the race becomes a procession. This is where spec series come in, where teams are free to spend a lot money to develop their own cars to control specifications. Since the cars must be so similar to each other, it is incredibly difficult to gain an advantage, but that won't stop the competitors from trying.

In my opinion, the automakers should go racing in WEC with prototypes and all-out silhouettes, and they should go marketing with silhouette bodies on control cars (hopefully more like DTM than NASCAR). There's no reason to invest so much money in racing series which are trying to create a level playing field for the drivers and a thrilling show for the fans.

 

[amp88]

Ravant[/url]":jwbeb5wj]

amp88[/url]":jwbeb5wj]

Ravant[/url]":jwbeb5wj]

Ostracus[/url]":jwbeb5wj]I'm waiting for when a road car can handle like a Formula One.

Waiting for a road car that won't be able to handle well at normal road speeds at all, then?

The issue with Formula One cars is that the majority of their handling comes from downforce. They can take that roundabout at 60+ MPH, but if you try to take it below 40, the lack of downforce causes it to understeer and plow on forward. Just watch Top Gear UK's attempt at using a Caparo T1 in what you could consider normal road conditions (35 MPH around town, 60-80 MPH highway.) It doesn't come into its own handling-wise until highway speeds. (A Caparo T1 is essentially a road-legal F1 car, to oversimplify.)

Two things:

1) F1 cars still generate a very large amount of mechanical grip through their sticky and wide tyres. If you removed the wings and downforce-generating floor from an F1 car it would still be able to lap circuits very quickly, given some time to adjust setup. It's certainly true that downforce plays a very large role in the performance of F1 cars, but I think you're overstating things.
2) Using Top Gear as a source for almost anything (except, perhaps, examples of casual racism in broadcast TV) is a bad idea...

Two things:
1) No, I'm not really overstating things at all. Yes, they do have a large amount of grip, but no more than, say, a Koenigsegg CCX, Caparo T1, Ultima GTR or Porsche 918. In fact, regulation limits F1 tire section widths (contact patch) to 355mm front, 380 rear. They often go thinner on the front (McLaren was using 255's in the front last season) to improve turn-in response. By comparison, Koenigsegg's Agera R uses 265/35-19 in the front and 355/30-20 in the rear. Without that aerodynamic effect of downforce, F1 cars wouldn't be as impressive in the handling department.
2) Not always. Using Top Gear as a source for what most people (read as: Not Michael Shumacher) are capable of in a given vehicle at most isn't that bad of an idea, as most people couldn't get into a CCX/Caparo T1/Porsche 918 and flog it and expect to stay on the road.

1) You said "They can take that roundabout at 60+ MPH, but if you try to take it below 40, the lack of downforce causes it to understeer and plow on forward.". So, you've never seen any Monaco GPs before then? Take a look at this onboard of Rosberg's pole lap from last year's Monaco GP. He takes the Loews hairpin (~0:38) at a lowest speed of about 50km/h (30mph) without the car "plowing on forward". So, yes, I think you're overstating things for dramatic effect (a la Top Gear...). Also, trying to compare F1 tyres and road tyres (even ultra-high performance road tyres which come as standard on hypercars) is just silly.
2) You didn't say "most people in an F1 car would "plow on forward" at 40mph", so I don't see the point in your "most people" comment. Top Gear is entertainment, and the presenters/producers know they're not trying to create a programme which will be used as a serious basis for discussions.

 

[slugabed]

Ostracus[/url]":39nlzxlf]I'm waiting for when a road car can handle like a Formula One.

The results have been showing up in road cars generally as more power, greater efficiency, and improved reliability, leading to what is arguably a current golden age for road-relevant technology transferring from track to street.

That reminds me. How many racing cars use something other than an internal combustion engine?

Since you mentioned Formula 1, many of the cars in that series use a KERS (Kinetic Energy Recovery System), which usually takes the form of a flywheel that spins up during braking. When exiting a turn, the driver engages the KERS and soaks up the 80 or so horsepower the flywheel provides. They get to use this device once per lap, iirc.

It would be cool to see this in use for those commercial vehicles that have frequent stop/start use profiles.