F1 Pitstops will be slower this season

[Jericoke]

That doesn't matter - the same number of cars can get past you in 2 seconds in either NASCAR or F1.

lol

a 2 second gap is far more positions in NASCAR than it is in F1

I agree that a NASCAR pitstop means more pressure than an F1 pitstop.  Slowing down F1 pitstops will take the pressure off, and close the gap between a good stop and a bad stop.  More passing will be done on track, and less in the pits.

All so my kids can have free balloons when we go out to eat 

[lkjohnson1950]

I'm with Scott F1 pit stops don't make as much difference in the outcome as NASCAR.

[Scott]

Sorry Jeri, but considering NASCAR pit speed limits are a lot higher than F1 (NASCAR is between 70-110kph depending on the track, while F1 is 60kph at all tracks), a 2 second pit lane gap can mean a lot more on track difference in NASCAR than it does in F1.

Sorry, I'm not trying to be anal arguing about this, but to me it is straightforward - a screwed up pit stop in NASCAR is just as devastating to a team as if the same delay happened in F1.  I'm not a NASCAR fan (I was when I was a teenager), but like Lonny, I think they've thought out the pit stop a lot better than the FIA has in F1 - proof is how often F1 is constantly tinkering with it because they haven't got the right formula.  NASCAR's barely touched their pit stop reg's over the years.  I'm not suggesting they fuel the car with a linebacker holding a gas can, but otherwise...

[cosworth151]

Maybe that's because most everything in NASCAR is at least a half century behind the times. If F1 followed NASCAR standards, the pit crews would still be using mallets on winged knock-offs.

When NASCAR fans sees an F1 pit stop for the first time, they're left speechless with their jaws on the floor. I like that.

[lkjohnson1950]

That's because they can't believe it takes so many people to do what most race series accomplish with 5 or 6. F1 is the only series I know of who allow crew in the lane before the car stops moving, and the only one that requires 3 people per wheel to change a tire. Overkill.

[John S]

That's because they can't believe it takes so many people to do what most race series accomplish with 5 or 6. F1 is the only series I know of who allow crew in the lane before the car stops moving, and the only one that requires 3 people per wheel to change a tire. Overkill.

A lot of things in F1 can be considered overkill Lonny, but that's what sets it above all the others and why we love it so.  F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of motorsport not a stock car series 
 
Having said that however it now seems that the FIA under Todt are determined to castrate F1 by stopping any technological development, ride height adjustment being a case in point. All we may be left with is the over the top pitstops, -oh and those crazy standing starts,   if they impose even more restrictions on car development. 

[Jericoke]

Sorry Jeri, but considering NASCAR pit speed limits are a lot higher than F1 (NASCAR is between 70-110kph depending on the track, while F1 is 60kph at all tracks), a 2 second pit lane gap can mean a lot more on track difference in NASCAR than it does in F1.

Sorry, I'm not trying to be anal arguing about this, but to me it is straightforward - a screwed up pit stop in NASCAR is just as devastating to a team as if the same delay happened in F1.  I'm not a NASCAR fan (I was when I was a teenager), but like Lonny, I think they've thought out the pit stop a lot better than the FIA has in F1 - proof is how often F1 is constantly tinkering with it because they haven't got the right formula.  NASCAR's barely touched their pit stop reg's over the years.  I'm not suggesting they fuel the car with a linebacker holding a gas can, but otherwise...

The sports are fundamentally different.  The gap between 1st and 10th in NASCAR can be 2 seconds.

That's not common in F1.

Rarely will a 2 second difference even matter in F1 pitstops.  (I suppose when it does matter, they'll be glad for those 2 seconds).

[lkjohnson1950]

So you're saying that the current pit stops are meaningless since they rarely vary more than a couple of tenths?

[Scott]

The only reason there can be 2 second gaps to 10th place in NASCAR is because the aerodynamics work so well that they pass each other like MotoGP races.  The guy in front (or in front of a pack) actually has a disadvantage.  Gap changes in NASCAR can be as much as a few seconds per lap, while in F1 unless someone made a huge error, is in 10ths of a second, if at all.

All that work and tech they put into the F1 stops is for nothing?  Then there should really be no resistance to changing the pit regs to have only 5 guys doing what 20 do now.  Boy, talk about a no brainer on saving money, especially if spoiled pit stops mean nothing in F1. 

But back to the original thread - don't you agree Jeri that F1 pit stops could be handled by half the number of people out there now, even if it slowed the stops down by 6-7 seconds?  Don't you think it would make it more interesting for the fans who can hardly see the blur that the pit stops are now, and also for the strategists who would have more to work with when they make the decision to bring a driver in or not at certain points in the race? 

[cosworth151]

The reason that there is only 2 seconds between 1st and 10th in many NASCAR races is that NASCAR rigs it that way. They start with a spec racer car. Then, if any car shows any significant advantage, NASCAR takes action to slow that car down. The rules change car by car, week by week.

As far as F1 pit stops go, I don't think that slower is more interesting. If they want longer pit stops, bring back refueling.

[Jericoke]

The only reason there can be 2 second gaps to 10th place in NASCAR is because the aerodynamics work so well that they pass each other like MotoGP races.  The guy in front (or in front of a pack) actually has a disadvantage.  Gap changes in NASCAR can be as much as a few seconds per lap, while in F1 unless someone made a huge error, is in 10ths of a second, if at all.

All that work and tech they put into the F1 stops is for nothing?  Then there should really be no resistance to changing the pit regs to have only 5 guys doing what 20 do now.  Boy, talk about a no brainer on saving money, especially if spoiled pit stops mean nothing in F1. 

But back to the original thread - don't you agree Jeri that F1 pit stops could be handled by half the number of people out there now, even if it slowed the stops down by 6-7 seconds?  Don't you think it would make it more interesting for the fans who can hardly see the blur that the pit stops are now, and also for the strategists who would have more to work with when they make the decision to bring a driver in or not at certain points in the race? 

I'm not debating the merits of the sports, just that NASCAR and F1 provide a fundamentally different spectacle.

I'm also saying that if pit stops are a more or less identical time for all cars/teams, that means pit stops become a lesser factor in the race, making on track passing more important.

I also believe that F1 stops should be as fast as possible.  If I'm paying $1000 for tickets, hotel, travel and a fancy t-shirt, I'm not all that interested in seeing the cars sitting still... or for a million dollars of engineering falling back a position because someone lost his grip on an air gun.

I wouldn't stop watching F1 if they changed to NASCAR style pitstops where the driver has time to get a drink and a window wash (gotta love the drink on a 10 foot pole!), but I don't see how it makes the race more interesting.

As for saving money... aren't the F1 pit crew already at the track to take control of the cars in other capacities?  Wouldn't it cost MORE to bring in specialists like NASCAR does?


One final thought:   Imagine Massa's whining if he's waiting 30 seconds for Alonso to clear the pitbox when they come in for wets!

[Scott]

I also believe that F1 stops should be as fast as possible.  If I'm paying $1000 for tickets, hotel, travel and a fancy t-shirt, I'm not all that interested in seeing the cars sitting still... or for a million dollars of engineering falling back a position because someone lost his grip on an air gun.

If you're paying that for grandstand seats across from the pit, you might want to see a bit more action than the cars tearing down the straight in front of you.  The T-shirt has its own value.  Races in and out of pit lane are races in themselves.  

I wouldn't stop watching F1 if they changed to NASCAR style pitstops where the driver has time to get a drink and a window wash (gotta love the drink on a 10 foot pole!), but I don't see how it makes the race more interesting.

 

At least a longer stop that the teams pay more gap time for can create a bit more strategy, which I miss since the refuelling ban.

As for saving money... aren't the F1 pit crew already at the track to take control of the cars in other capacities?  Wouldn't it cost MORE to bring in specialists like NASCAR does?

I'm not sure about that one.  You could be right.

One final thought:   Imagine Massa's whining if he's waiting 30 seconds for Alonso to clear the pitbox when they come in for wets!

They should just retire Massa when it rains anyhow - they'll save on carbon fibre.  

[lkjohnson1950]

The reason that there is only 2 seconds between 1st and 10th in many NASCAR races is that NASCAR rigs it that way. They start with a spec racer car. Then, if any car shows any significant advantage, NASCAR takes action to slow that car down. The rules change car by car, week by week.

As far as F1 pit stops go, I don't think that slower is more interesting. If they want longer pit stops, bring back refueling.

Kind of like the way the FIA eliminates things like blown diffusers. ride height controllers and drooping front wings? Not to mention V10s V12s etc.

[John S]

Kind of like the way the FIA eliminates things like blown diffusers. ride height controllers and drooping front wings? Not to mention V10s V12s etc.

I have no problem with eliminating ingenuity when every one has caught up, but I do have issues with them clamping down on fresh ideas, that may give one or two teams an edge, before they even get raced. Traditionally novel solutions have mixed things up with younger teams able to get wins and even titles. Hell we might not even have the monocoque if Todt had been in charge in Colin's time! 

F1 has always been in the forefront of advancing technology, now it seems the FIA is trying to take it into a one chassis series. I just wonder if they are trying to boost the LMP endurance cars at the expense of F1? After all with their new WEC series the FIA have much to gain with this approach.

[cosworth151]

I don't think so. Since the FIA got its hooks into Sports Endurance racing, they've been screwing up it as badly as they do everything else.