Poll DRS - Your opinions on it now

Do you like DRS now?


  • Total voters
    67

HammydiRestarules

Di Resta fan :).
Contributor
Well we're into our 3rd year now of DRS.

Now my feelings about it to start with were great the opportunity to have more overtaking in races. But my tune started to change about halfway through 2011 when it became clear that it wasn't looking like a natural overtake on the car in front. In fact to say the list I thought the racing looked fake.

Now 2 seasons on, I'm still not overly keen on the thing but I don't know I think it might be starting to grow on me cause now I think wow that was a great overtake, then 3 secs later I think you idiot that was done in a DRS zone.

But what's your opinion on the thing now compared to 2 years ago?
 

Andrea_Moda_Rules

Podium Finisher
No

DRS itself isn't the problem, The idea of an overtaking zone is. Don't think anything other a personality transplant will change my view on that.

Other problems that gets on my nerves, the application of DRS zones, the length of them, where they are and how many of there should be. That furthers my view that overtaking zones are stupid. Funnily enough Malaysia highlighted two of those problems.

Edit: Of course overtaking zones includes is the 1 second rule which I also disdain
 

no-FIAt-please

Champion Elect
Premium Contributor
It was a temporary fix to the fundamental problems of aerodynamic racing cars. I would be ok with it if the design was implemented properly, but it just seems to be getting worse. Now there seems to be a standard that all circuits except Monaco need two zones, sometimes only one detection point and that mass overtaking is what people want to see. They shouldn't have banned it in practice and qualifying too, they should have either got rid of it fully or allowed free reign of the device to be used at the drivers discretion.

Not a fan of it currently.
 

Mika's Italian Tears

Points Scorer
Mixed feelings from me.

The first few races, it looked really good, but sine then I have always felt that DRS overtakes are just fake, they are not that much fun anymore when you know its only because of DRS.

I think its good in concept but I just dont like it in its present format. Frankly, I wouldn't mind if rather than DRS zones, they could just let the teams use DRS when they require (like they did in quali + practice last year), because then you are rewarding a team that has a good DRS set-up (and not just the guy who is 1 second behind at a particular point of the track). Also, freeing up DRS usage would just make it that little bit more tricky for drivers (driver errors due to DRS usage over a fast curve when looking to overtake?) and maybe lead to more incidents which are a direct result of the driver's inability to reign in there DRS usage.
 

jez101

Bookies drive nice cars because of people like me
Contributor
Obviously, opinion is really polarised. For me, without DRS and degrading tyres we would be back to the bad old days where 'races' were more like parades but lots if people disagree. Maybe the excitement is artificial, but so what? It's better than no excitement.
 

Il_leone

Champion Elect
Do people prefer processional races then ?

DRS overcomes the problem that today's car have in that designers design them to maximise aerodynamic grip where possible and the age old problem when cars are following behind they lose all the aero grip and does not allow them to get close .

The simple answer is mechanical grip which does not disappear when cars are following close.

This is not helped by circuits like Barcelona which really does not help cars to get close to overtake.

I like the DRS because the only team who look stupid in all this are Red Bulls.. brilliant using it to be fast in clear air but because they carry too much drag they can't even pass slower cars

The only other problem with the DRs zones is where they put them to do the overtakes..some circuits it is way too easy like Spa but others like Barcelona and Hungary it is no real help at all
---------------------------------------

When the turbos come in next season the cars will simply use the boost button to give them the extra speed to overtake


I am glad though they got rid of the unlimited use of DRS in quali and practice
 

FB

Not my cup of cake
Valued Member
Agree with gethinceri, let the drivers use it wherever they want. If they open the wing half second too early as they get onto and the back end spins out then it's the drivers fault.
 

Vortex

Race Winner
Hate it, Hate it, Hate it!

I feel the same as before.. Its Shit!

Tacky flappy wings that have spoilt more races than improved for me. Its either prevented a slower car keeping a well deserved place by allowing the faster car behind to easily breeze pass using DRS or has just took all the excitement out of what could have been a good overtake or battle. And now with two zones it becomes a farce of do not overtake in the first zone or you’ll have it took straight back in the second. Not by skill.. but by temporary car advantages to simulate racing.

I just really don’t like it.
 

Il_leone

Champion Elect
DRs did not really work in Melbourne as I remember no one at the front passed each other unless the Ferraris and Lotus were hanging back

the DRs does not work in Monaco because of the nature of the circuit and everyone is scared about the cars being vaulted coming out of the tunnel which is the only true passing place

the DRs does not work in Hungary because the straight only lasts about 5 seconds anyway


you don't really need the DRS in places like China where the straight is so long

-------------------------------
Like I said do people want to see processional racing

Unless you tell designers they cannot spoil the airflow behind to allow other cars to get close then I don;t see what else is there to aid overtaking unless bigger tyres comeback .

I am sure you're going to see similar scenario with turbos where the boost buttons will be used instead
 

ZakspeedYakspeed

NeverUnderestimateThePredictabilityOfStupidity
Premium Contributor
DRS... it is a necessary evil based upon the design parameters the teams are forced to endure...

If we accept that there will be some form of driver aid... I would prefer an adoption of an IndyCar style system... where you get a set allowance of "boost" or KERS per race... and it is up to the driver to choose how to use it ... no replenishment ...
 

Blog Zbod

Podium Finisher
The very idea is heretical to the bedrock traditions of sport, competition and fair play.

Imagine a football pitch rigged with magical expanding goals, and the goal mouth of whichever team is in the lead automatically expands from 8 yards x 8 feet to 12 yards x 12 feet, making it nigh onto indefensible. It flies in the face of the time-honoured principle that the best man should prevail. I am certain football fans would never stand for such nonsense, and it remains g-d's own mystery why F1 fans do.
 

GeoffP

Thank you and good night
Contributor
DRS has cemented the "overtaking zone" as a fixed geographical position on the track.

Either let it be used everywhere by the best single seater drivers in the world, or stop it hiding the problem and allow more leeway in the aero development with the only restrictions being on the turbulence created when the air leaves the car.
 

Fenderman

Rooters Reporter
Who put the DRS in dross? The most loathesome thing about it is not the device itself but the way it's use is dictated by race-control. As others have inferred above, as a tool for the driver it's just another useful piece of kit that he should be able to use at his own discretion and risk..


The FIA thought it had banned movable aero' devices when it outlawed movable skirts and "double" chassis but found itself caught out by the invention of the so called "F-duct". They freaked out because only McLaren had the F-duct integrated in the car design at inception. Everyone else had to put it on their cars as an "add-on" with their drivers taking one hand off the steering wheel to activate it. Faced with concerns over safety the FIA set out to ban the F-duct but realised they would have to reach a compromise with the constructors. Thus was born the idea of the DRS but with the FIA dictating its use via the race director and prescribing the DRS zones for each circuit.


That was all very well but whilst they were about it the prescription they called for from Pirelli meant that one of their objectives - to increase opportunities for overtaking - was already being met. The result of all that was the "sitting duck syndrome" whereby any car with less traction out of a corner and tyres falling off the dreaded cliff is easy meat.So, yes we see lot's more overtaking in F1 but in three seasons you can count difficult, spectacular overtakes on one hand. We might not be seeing processions anymore (except Monaco as ever) but are we seeing better racing?


Apart from the occasional brief battle, in recent years we have witnessed precious few of the prolonged chases with driver x hunting down driver y with a spectacular overtake (successful or otherwise) that sets apart the greats and thrills the audience. The tyre rules have even deprived us of the more spectacular aspects of the driving styles that Hamilton and Alonso thrilled us with as they have had to calm their techniques to preserve rubber. FFS.

As has always been the case in F1, the team that finds and advantageous tweak, like a superior EBD, flappy front wing or whatever, rises to the top and will dominate. Not a lot of change there then, especially the team with Adrian Newey aboard. So, yes if you like the sitting duck overtake keep DRS as it is. If we want to get to something like balls out racing then take the blooming handcuffs off the drivers and let them use the thing as they wish. Otherwise get rid of it.

Of course, to quote my pal Mephistopheles , all of the above may be a load of old bollocks.

But thems is my bollocks and I'm sticking to 'em LOL
 

teabagyokel

#dejavu
Valued Member
DRS is a mixed blessing, but it there does need to be some "correction" to the overtaking situation we saw in 2010 before the introduction of DRS.

The case against DRS has been well stated, but the main problem in my opinion is the unintelligent application of the zones. There is no need to have a zone up to Les Combes at Spa, or on the back straight at Shanghai or the second straight at Yeongam. They should only be there to give a chance where there was not one before.

However, with aerodynamic dirty air appearing, conveniently, around a second behind the next car, a chance needs to be created to equalise the difference between the dirty air and normal performance. The DRS rather effectively does this.

I don't buy that DRS is artificial; in pure terms motor racing is pretty artificial, and DRS overtaking is no more artificial than turbo boost buttons, "Yellow G4" fuel mixes or tyre wear. We never know exactly what's caused the happenings in front of our eyes.

I do respectfully take issue with the idea Fenderman and others have put forward about DRS ruining the other aspects of racing. Austin would not have gone so well had Hamilton sat on Vettel's gearbox for 50 laps or so without Vettel even needing to defend properly. Without that fear, would Vettel have held it together at Montreal in 2011. Yeah, because no DRS would have meant Button wasn't even close.

Vettel proved in Barcelona in 2011 and at Austin to an eventually unsuccessful degree that DRS is not necessarily a magic bullet, and Shanghai in 2011 showcased DRS' ability to bring a driver (Hamilton) close enough to achieve some remarkable overtakes.

In short, DRS is merely a correction to an issue which had dogged F1 for years, the zones often misplaced but broadly it is a positive, changing the sport from a processional curate's egg to an exciting sport, and yes, it is fairer that cars aren't stuck fast behind another because of aerodynamics rather than the skill of defending. Just look at the 2012 Monaco GP - Webber slowing down because he knew he would stay ahead effort-free, skill-free and Scot-free. Is that what we really want every week.
 

Fenderman

Rooters Reporter
I refer you to my first paragraph teabagyokel . I don't have an issue with any device that can be utilised by the driver to help his cause and I don't think I blamed the device itself for spoiling any racing. I blame the rules. Austin was in fact a good example of the battles I would like to see more of. How often do we hear folk's say "I really want to see x and y fight head to head"? We saw just as little of that last year as we saw in the past. The first two races of this season are holding out the promise of a more tightly fought championship but as always it's reliant on some teams catching up with car development or those that are ahead now will run off and hide in the distance.

With regard to counter-acting the dirty air issue, that would be better achieved by changing some of the emphasis in the regulations. Reduce wing size and aerodynamic downforce and promote increased mechanical grip and ground-effect. DRS is an attempt to mitigate against time lost by a trailing driver in the wake of the car he wants to overtake. However, the speed differential conferred by the DRS means that an overtake is more or less a foregone conclusion. With less wing induced aero' and more grip and traction from mechanical and ground effect they would be able to run closer through the corners and the speed differential conferred by running in a slipstream would be (dare I say it) more "natural" with a shift back onto driver skill to pull off the pass.

As some have commented on this subject on other threads, if one wants overtaking by the bucket load we can find that in NASCAR. I think it's notable that NASCAR does it without DRS. The tyres, weight and overall design characteristics of a NASCAR put much more reliance on mechanical grip and ground effect. It doesn't seem to stop them running at close quarters and slip-streaming. I think F1 should take a good hard look at how NASCAR has managed to do that - maybe a few lessons to be learnt from a humbler series.
 

jez101

Bookies drive nice cars because of people like me
Contributor
The very idea is heretical to the bedrock traditions of sport, competition and fair play.

Imagine a football pitch rigged with magical expanding goals, and the goal mouth of whichever team is in the lead automatically expands from 8 yards x 8 feet to 12 yards x 12 feet, making it nigh onto indefensible. It flies in the face of the time-honoured principle that the best man should prevail. I am certain football fans would never stand for such nonsense, and it remains g-d's own mystery why F1 fans do.
I do love analogies like this Blog Zbod but they can go both ways... Imagine a football match with goals smaller than the ball. That's a bit like f1 in 2010 ;)
 
Top Bottom