It's the sort of thing that was attempted with the F-Duct, though, without having illegal movable aero (accepting they allowed movable front wings, this season). Stall the aero for the rear wing for long fast straights, yet still have the downforce for corners.FairfaxPat":w708zr2g said:I'm with Dr. S--LeMans type racing is my favorite, always plenty of excitement and much passing-unlike F1 which tends to be a single file procession from start to finish. The moving wing is not new, Jim Hall first used one on his Chapparral CanAm car in the '60s. I remember watching it fly down the straight at Riverside Raceway and then pop the wing down at the end of the straight and drive around the outside of the competition through turn 9!
The movable rear wing (under conditions) will likely be the reason for banning F-Duct type aero stalling of the rear wing - I just think it's all getting a bit too contrived, just to try and get some overtaking.
Sure, aero of modern F1 cars makes things difficult - but in recent years, they've had working groups trying to alleviate it. Some of the problem is some tracks.
Making it too contrived is going to make it more like a video game to watch.
Well with enough blocks to blow (so to speak) and no real limit on how many you use, and with turbos, then high outputs are likely - but having some reliablity (regulated by engine change rules) or limits on boost (as was used in CART) provides some middle ground between almost drag racing type screamers, and engines that can do one or more race distances.FairfaxPat":w708zr2g said:And Neil-the BMW F1 did make 1000 BHP in racing trim!
Personally, part of the majesty of the F1 engines, was the whole high-revving thing. Forcing them down to around 12k revs and using turbos, may be more indicative of what's happening for petrol road cars. Evidence and display of relevance - I'll buy - but really, that's just lip-service.
I honestly think too much compromise will end up pleasing a diminshing proportion of the fans.