Let's face it, F1 has not been the world's fastest track racing for a while, that distinction goes to the 229+mph Indianapolis action in the IndyCar series. I know the cars aren't as advanced as F1, and they do use a 3.0L V8 that makes a "paltry" 650hp, but due to course configuration, it's faster than F1.

I just realized though that with the new 2.4L V8's making less than 700hp, Champ Cars are more powerful, (750hp with Cosworth 2.5L Turbo V8's/800hp with push to pass engaged), They're a little heavier than F1 cars, but with the extra hp, I'm betting lap times would be very similar on the same courses. As the F1 teams struggle to get their chassis' sorted out to accomodate the new V8, I wonder if we're actually going to have a transitional period where champ cars are faster. Hell, I bet a Newmaan/Haas Champ Car could easily beat that 1973 Arrows Super Aguri is going to be running in the beginning of the season...LOL!

well my friend. if u didn't know, CHAMP CARS race in the Montreal track called GILEES VILLENEUVE CIRCUIT that F1 use for the Canadian GP. F1 cars are more than 10sc per lap faster. F1 cars with V8 engines are just 3sc slower per lap from last year V10 runing in Barcelona. u will know that if u see the testing lap times an may be as fast or faster as the year pases. in other words F1 still rules. so for CART cars to beat an F1 car round a track will need 900hp even if the F1 car has less than 700. INDY cars arent fast cause of track configuration. they are that fast due to the car design and aero settings. i ont care if the F1 cars are slower in top speed but round a track is the king and will be forever and believe me those V8 engines are pushing close to 800hp+ and 20,000+rpm's

S7Kid, this is a dumb apples vs oranges thread. Of course cars will go faster on oval tracks. They rarely (if ever) slow down.

I think the fastest qual at Indy was Roberto Guerrero at 233+ (Buick Turbo). Under overcast skies/cold track conditions, the polesitter fanned the gas a bit too much and spun into a wall on the warmup lap. DNS.

Bill Elliott qualified at Talladega in 1985 above 212 mph in a Ford. During the race, NASCAR made up reasons to black-flag him; he wound up 2 (TWO!) laps down. He won anyway.

Mark Martin set the world record for a 500 mile race (no cautions) at Talladega (2.66 mile/33 degree banking) above 183 mph average. Al Unser Jr went a wee bit faster a couple of years later in a CART race at Michigan (2.0 mile/10-15? degree banking). Way more pit stops, too.

Rodriguez/Oliver set the fastest ever race lap on a road course at Spa in '71 in a 917 at over 162 mph. Average.

Is that not honkin' on?

You should also remember that last year during testing in between races, the Mclaren of JPM broke 230 mph.

but.. hiks... sadly.. they put a new regulation on f1s... to lower the capacity... hiks...
LONG LIVE SCUDERIA FERRARI !!!!!!!!

well my friend. if u didn't know, CHAMP CARS race in the Montreal track called GILEES VILLENEUVE CIRCUIT that F1 use for the Canadian GP. F1 cars are more than 10sc per lap faster. F1 cars with V8 engines are just 3sc slower per lap from last year V10 runing in Barcelona. u will know that if u see the testing lap times an may be as fast or faster as the year pases. in other words F1 still rules. so for CART cars to beat an F1 car round a track will need 900hp even if the F1 car has less than 700. INDY cars arent fast cause of track configuration. they are that fast due to the car design and aero settings. i ont care if the F1 cars are slower in top speed but round a track is the king and will be forever and believe me those V8 engines are pushing close to 800hp+ and 20,000+rpm's

20,000+rpm?? too little i shud say...
they tested Ferrari F2003GA in their base until it reach something like about 24,500+rpm... but its not that kinda hihg in race..
and indy, CRAP...

well my friend. if u didn't know, CHAMP CARS race in the Montreal track called GILEES VILLENEUVE CIRCUIT that F1 use for the Canadian GP. F1 cars are more than 10sc per lap faster. F1 cars with V8 engines are just 3sc slower per lap from last year V10 runing in Barcelona. u will know that if u see the testing lap times an may be as fast or faster as the year pases. in other words F1 still rules. so for CART cars to beat an F1 car round a track will need 900hp even if the F1 car has less than 700. INDY cars arent fast cause of track configuration. they are that fast due to the car design and aero settings. I dont care if the F1 cars are slower in top speed but round a track is the king and will be forever and believe me those V8 engines are pushing close to 800hp+ and 20,000+rpm's

Actually, while they do have the 2.4L V8's turning 20K rpm's they are NOT making 800hp. The Bar/Honda V10 was the strongest on the grid the last few years, @ about 920hp. Most teams are claiming more than 200 less hp with the 2.4L V8's. That would put most of the pack at about 700hp. And yes, I know that both F1 and the ChampCar series visit Circuit GV, but I don't remember lap times being 10 seconds off. And yes, the reason Indy Cars can use a 650hp V8 to go so fast, and run the aero configuration they do, is the wide open ovals they race on.

Quite an interesting theory.

Personally, I think F1 is hitting a low spot. History repeats itself. Just look at the early 90's. They were at the height of technology and speed. But, regulations brought them way down. They slowly climbed back up. I think the same thing will happen. In a couple of years, F1 will be back on top.

However, I think F1 isn't trying to be the fastest anymore. The FIA is just trying to make F1 more competitive.

and.....who do you think will hold the dynasty then and be considered the "greatest driver ever" like every other time this has happened in F1

Quite an interesting theory.

Personally, I think F1 is hitting a low spot. History repeats itself. Just look at the early 90's. They were at the height of technology and speed. But, regulations brought them way down. They slowly climbed back up. I think the same thing will happen. In a couple of years, F1 will be back on top.

However, I think F1 isn't trying to be the fastest anymore. The FIA is just trying to make F1 more competitive.

I agree with all of the above. I personally think the V8's will help as far as competitiveness. It kind of starts everyone back at 0 as far as engine development, I think the racing will really get better in '08 if FIA does what it's planned and reintroduce the wider, full slicks, and take a hell of a lot of down-force off the cars with what's allowed aero-wise. I've said it before and I'll complain about it again...F1 cars have become so aero-dependant, and they disrupt so much air that the cars can't even race side by side. Mechanical grip is a good thing, and I await it's return

Don't forget that crazy rear wing thing that they want to put in place in what, '08?

That's to stop the disruption of air coming off the back of the car that makes it so friggin hard to overtake.

Actually, while they do have the 2.4L V8's turning 20K rpm's they are NOT making 800hp. The Bar/Honda V10 was the strongest on the grid the last few years, @ about 920hp. Most teams are claiming more than 200 less hp with the 2.4L V8's. That would put most of the pack at about 700hp. And yes, I know that both F1 and the ChampCar series visit Circuit GV, but I don't remember lap times being 10 seconds off. And yes, the reason Indy Cars can use a 650hp V8 to go so fast, and run the aero configuration they do, is the wide open ovals they race on. well my friend most of the team stated that but I doubt they have that gap now. Those engine increase in HP every day. engineers are constantly looking to increase power. that's why I stated close to 800+hp. and about Indy those car doesn't reach that speed cause Oval configuration of the track. Banking on turns help the car to take a turn at hight speed increasing downforce and inertia. They can reach those speed even in straight lines. top speed has nothing to do with track configuration. that's all in the car aerodinamics and capabilities to do so.

and about Indy those car doesn't reach that speed cause Oval configuration of the track. Banking on turns help the car to take a turn at hight speed increasing downforce and inertia. They can reach those speed even in straight lines. top speed has nothing to do with track configuration. that's all in the car aerodinamics and capabilities to do so.


That's what I'm saying. I'm pointing out that the banking in the turns, long straights, lack of chicanes, etc. allows the cars to run wide open, hence the higher speeds.

yes but u r stating they run that speed cause of the ovals and that's not true. u can make a flat oval track and they wouldn't reach that speed. Banking help them but is not the oval configuration but the banking configuration. Just to clarify.

NO, I'm not stating that they achieve those speeds BECAUSE of the oval configuration. They acheive those speeds by being a 1500lb., 650hp cars with negligable Cd's. I'm pointing out that on a banked oval you can run the car straigthter longer, and turn at higher speeds than you can on a circuit. That's why average lap speeds for an Indy Car at Watkins Glen are about 100+mph slower, (give or take), than at Indy. I'm thinking this misunderstanding we're having her might be due to gramatical differences. Is English your first language?

yes it may because I talk in spanish and I understand something diferent. who know! jijiji.

The cd on any open-wheel car with wings is far from negligible. Try above .375. They are trading drag for downforce.

Well The First F1 V8's May Only Produce 700BHP+ However Thats Gonna Increase Dramitically Over The Next Few Years, 06 Is Really A Trial Year For The New Formula Once They've Got The Settings And Figures For Each Track Right Developments Are Gonna Be Coming Thick And Fast And Soon If The Gonna Be Producing 850BHP And On Top They're Smaller And Lighter F1 Will Always Be The Quickest Car Round A Track.

](*,) :-# :smt076 :smt073 Let's face it, F1 has not been the world's fastest track racing for a while, that distinction goes to the 229+mph Indianapolis action in the IndyCar series. I know the cars aren't as advanced as F1, and they do use a 3.0L V8 that makes a "paltry" 650hp, but due to course configuration, it's faster than F1.

I just realized though that with the new 2.4L V8's making less than 700hp, Champ Cars are more powerful, (750hp with Cosworth 2.5L Turbo V8's/800hp with push to pass engaged), They're a little heavier than F1 cars, but with the extra hp, I'm betting lap times would be very similar on the same courses. As the F1 teams struggle to get their chassis' sorted out to accomodate the new V8, I wonder if we're actually going to have a transitional period where champ cars are faster. Hell, I bet a Newmaan/Haas Champ Car could easily beat that 1973 Arrows Super Aguri is going to be running in the beginning of the season...LOL! i disagree with this totally and think that with takuma sato yuri ide at the wheel, they could be a force to be reckoned with:twisted . also, f1 is greatly superior to champ cars because if you smash up an f1 car, the concrete barrier does not kill you

Well The First F1 V8's May Only Produce 700BHP+ However Thats Gonna Increase Dramitically Over The Next Few Years, 06 Is Really A Trial Year For The New Formula Once They've Got The Settings And Figures For Each Track Right Developments Are Gonna Be Coming Thick And Fast And Soon If The Gonna Be Producing 850BHP And On Top They're Smaller And Lighter F1 Will Always Be The Quickest Car Round A Track. ferrari have the v8 down to the ground and more improvements may give them the edge to beat renault and crush mclaren:p :driving

:cool: :smt021 :smt018 :smt035 :smt075 NO, I'm not stating that they achieve those speeds BECAUSE of the oval configuration. They acheive those speeds by being a 1500lb., 650hp cars with negligable Cd's. I'm pointing out that on a banked oval you can run the car straigthter longer, and turn at higher speeds than you can on a circuit. That's why average lap speeds for an Indy Car at Watkins Glen are about 100+mph slower, (give or take), than at Indy. I'm thinking this misunderstanding we're having her might be due to gramatical differences. Is English your first language? did you know that watkins glen used to be an F1 track

fools! you all forgot about A1 grandprix! and moto gp!

what the hell is wrong with you all?

Sily discussion.
Formula one cars, even I don't like them were faster, are faster and will be faster on a racing track then those CART thingies.

Indies are rockets with wheels intended to take as many corners as some other popular US racing series (NASCAR/dragracing) with the exception of V8 supercars (or were those australian?).

Formula one cars are intended to...



stop double posting!

... drive fast around corners as well as on straights.

Formula one drivers that 'retire' go to the indycar series.

Indies are rockets with wheels intended to take as many corners as some other popular US racing series (NASCAR/dragracing) with the exception of V8 supercars (or were those australian?).


The V8supercars are Australian, they have a lot of turns and different styles of tracks. No oval racing in the V8supercars.

1st thing in My mind is S7kid sure bout this ???
F1 should be one of the fastest in the world......
I know Nascar is fast too but not as fast as the F1......

So for me F1 is always the fastest......

If you take off all countles downforce producing thinks on F1 it can go 400km/h easely.
And Indy is little longer and more adopetd to very high speeds and not so for thight corners. F1 was allways faster and thise new rules about engines did only put power few years back...in 5 years they ll have same power as last seson with V10.
I dont know about money invested in Indy but F1 is like black hole, thats why privat teams are disapering...just to expencive.
All that mybe is good to keep F1 the fastest but it is geting less interesting too.

I think the fastest qual at Indy was Roberto Guerrero at 233+ (Buick Turbo). Under overcast skies/cold track conditions, the polesitter fanned the gas a bit too much and spun into a wall on the warmup lap. DNS.

In 1996 Arie Luyendyck qualified at 235 or 236 mph but not on pole day. This was the last year before the new IRL cars without turbos became the norm. That will stay as the fastest ever I guess ! ;)

The V8supercars are Australian, they have a lot of turns and different styles of tracks. No oval racing in the V8supercars.

yep, I said except because they do have turns where the others have not (2 doesn't count).

Then again, it's an australian series as you have now confirmed (and I'm more then willing to believe) so I'll go look for an american racing series with corners and bends again.

Does anyone here actually get why they changed from V10s to V8s in F1? because it really onfuses me. Further , i think that schumacher deserved to win the Bahrain grand prix because he has come back after a terrible season and carried on and alonso has had it easy!

had something to do wit cutting cost to get more teams in there or at least give somewhat like equal chances to lower budget teams.

At the moment it's like : "hey, we're ferari. We get to spend 80.000.000 on drivers a year and have money left to buy cars. That makes us more equal then you."

Someone got sick and tired of that attitude (someone other then motoring fans that is who were sick of this in the late 90's already) and decided to change the recipy for formula one cars.

The idea is that sticking money and commercials in a blender should not result in a wining team any longer. They try to add engineering now. Shoudl we break teh news and tell them that buying the best engineers will still eb a matter of "may the best....cough.... richest win"

EDIT:: too many errors, too lazy to corect them.

F1 is trying to cut expences year by year but it s hard to do.
Till late 80' most of the car was from aluminium, steel and fiber-glass. But then come carbon fibers and that was first drastic change in expenses...the days when BMW used old stock block was ower and hi-teck materials era come....
Now they are not trying to add more engineering but with making engine last longer and have 8 cyl insted of 10cyl they trie to cut expences just becouse they need only one engine/car/weekend and becouse smaller engine is cheaper becouse of less material used..
They forbide one excotic manufacturing technick or material (read to expencive to imagine) and here comes next one from diffrent team .. bann berilium in engine's block alloy wich was super expencive but then they start to cast gearbox from titanium. It s never ending race.
To demonstrate prices of material....only frame for downhill bike of good aluminium alloy costs 1000euros, of super light aluminium-magnesium alloy with hi-teck steel components costs about 2500 euros, but of carbon fibers with titanium components around 7000 euros....And there isnt much difrenece in strenght becouse of design but carbon is 40% lighter then aluminium and at least carbon's and al-mg have been both made with same amount of engineering.

S7Kid, don't you remeber the times (want so many years) when on Monza the highest speed was around 380km/h(240mph)? On a track! Not oval!

F1 is trying to cut expences year by year but it s hard to do.
Till late 80' most of the car was from aluminium, steel and fiber-glass. But then come carbon fibers and that was first drastic change in expenses...the days when BMW used old stock block was ower and hi-teck materials era come....
Now they are not trying to add more engineering but with making engine last longer and have 8 cyl insted of 10cyl they trie to cut expences just becouse they need only one engine/car/weekend and becouse smaller engine is cheaper becouse of less material used..
They forbide one excotic manufacturing technick or material (read to expencive to imagine) and here comes next one from diffrent team .. bann berilium in engine's block alloy wich was super expencive but then they start to cast gearbox from titanium. It s never ending race.
To demonstrate prices of material....only frame for downhill bike of good aluminium alloy costs 1000euros, of super light aluminium-magnesium alloy with hi-teck steel components costs about 2500 euros, but of carbon fibers with titanium components around 7000 euros....And there isnt much difrenece in strenght becouse of design but carbon is 40% lighter then aluminium and at least carbon's and al-mg have been both made with same amount of engineering.

For downhill I'd choose Nikolai frames over anything.
No lightweight nonsense and fairly priced at 2800 euro's. Best geometry around for the while being.
Either that or Wildsau. They're pretty good as well.

so the FIA want to cut costs, so what do they do? Get everyone to develope new engines from the ground up. That just seems really illogical to me.

It's not like they would not develop a new engine every year anyways. Now they just thought "let's cut the development cost with 2/10th"

I read somewhere though that develoment costs for the new v8 are so much higher than with the v10 but if it reduces the cost in the long run I suppose its got to be a good thing.

The FIA tries so hard to reduce development cost and with every change teh development cost go up instead of down.

Imagine what would happen if the food industry was managed by the FIA.

I belive they are trying as much as they can do couse of big teams especialy Ferrari who are non-stop conplaining. And ofcourse becouse people who are disapointed allways they restrict somethink even more. But actualy they cant limit budget of teams, if someone is willing to invest big bucks, then he will and probably but not nececerry there will be some results. Just imagine how hard are they developing cars that even such restriction of front and rear spoiler and engine didnt slow them down that much this year.

S7Kid, don't you remeber the times (want so many years) when on Monza the highest speed was around 380km/h(240mph)? On a track! Not oval!

Yes, I do remember when F1 cars were approaching 240mph for a couple of seconds down Monza's long straight. What Crossle's talking about w/ Luyendyk at 236mph is AVERAGE SPEED around Indy's 2.5, scarcely banked miles.

I think it was '99 or '00 when Castroneves rocketed his 3.5L Toyota V8 powered Penske Racing Dallara around Indy at an average speed of 231+mph. That was a wakeup call to the IRL that they needed to dial back the power again, so they cut displacement .5L for the Honda/Toyota/Chevy motors used at the time. This cut the polesitter's avearge qualifying speed to about 221 the next year, ('00 or '01 I think). The engineers have gotten the speed back though, as Kenny Braack posted the fastest qualifying speed last year at just a hair under 230mph, (he didn't get the pole though, as he qualified after the day the pole was available, being a last minute replacement for Buddy Rice).

Yes, I do remember when F1 cars were approaching 240mph for a couple of seconds down Monza's long straight. What Crossle's talking about w/ Luyendyk at 236mph is AVERAGE SPEED around Indy's 2.5, scarcely banked miles.
This is because of the oval, not because of the cars. I think we musn't talk about average speed because the tracks are so different, that you cant compare these speeds. If you want u will have to compare it on one track. Unfortunately this track dont exist. Indianapolis is different for Indy and F1 too. F1 was and is faster, despite all restriction that FIA puts. Just the tracks are this what makes the speeds(average) slower. Im sure if u put F1 and Indy on oval or every other racingtrack F1 cars will be faster.
p.s. And Super Aguri's car has 2002's chassis with mods for 2003 and is a little moded for 2006's rules. It can't be faster.

F1 cars are more than 10sc per lap faster. (at Montreal)

WHAT? Since when?
2005 Qualifying:

Jensen Button: 1.15.217
(minardis were down in the 1.19s)
(and Ralf ran a 1.12 in 04)

Sebastien Bourdais 1.20.396
(Da Matta ran a 1.18 in 2002 without the rev-limited 2.65 turbo + the same chassis)

With the new regs in F1 in '06 + '08 the cars will be up around 3+ seconds a lap. Okay, I'l give you 2+ seconds a lap. With the new chassis and more horespower (825hp during p2p) the Champcars are losing around 2+ seconds a lap. So theorectically the F1 cars should still be the fastest however the gap will be far less.

labatt, doesn't a CART car weigh 250 lb. > F1? If the turbo car wants to make a pass/hot qual lap; it can dial up the boost briefly.

http://www.speedtv.com/articles/auto/champcar/19087/

read it Gliies Villneuve Circuit

2005 F1- 1:15.217
2004 CART- 1:19.897

all i know is that when u watch F1 racing u see the cars hauling ass around each and every turn. everybody knows they push the limits with those turns and if u were to try going any faster u would be off the track. the new engines are a little bit slower but if u used one of the older models when they had the v10 like the ones 2-3 years ago then F1 would dominate the times more then they are now. but they are still the fastest track cars. 24hrs of le mans vehicles couldnt hang on the turns with the F1 cars.