F1 is often referred to as the pinnacle of technology, a statement I often contest. In my mind it is amongst the pinnacle of motor sports but is far from the pinnacle of technology. Many road cars are far more advanced than their F1 cousins, even the more exotic construction materials are finding their way onto our roads. In the 50's, 60's and 70's F1 took huge leaps forwards in car design. John Cooper moving the engine from the front to the middle, Colin Chapmans numerous contributions such as aluminium space frame monocoque chassis, aerofoils and ground effect. Mercedes fuel injection engines. In contrast the mid to late 90's and 2000's seem to be a period of stagnation and dumbing down from a technology point of view with many advancements banned rather than embraced. I appreciate that there comes a point with technology where it can be argued that the drivers ability becomes a secondary element to the success of the car but have we really reached the point where we can go no further in car design because of this? I for one can't see the current regulations allowing anything like the past innovations of Chapman and Cooper, to mention a few, making it to the grid. With a fixation on cutting costs while operating within tight technological boundaries I think the next golden age of innovation will not be purely or largely driven by the sport but more by the seemingly fanatical view that the world must become greener, which for me means we won't be seeing anything new on our F1 cars and filtering into mainstream consumer use until all electric drive trains are allowed, and I think that is a fair way off.
I'd argue the most advanced F1 car ever made were the 2008 models... all that sexy aerodynamics - I have no idea why people didn't like them!
From an aero point of view though they were just a continuation in development from previous seasons, the double and even triple diffusers of 2009 were possibly a slightly new aero direction, but it was nipped in the bud pretty quickly.
Because they looked disgusting. I agree Bob that the regulations are too tight with real innovation, the things they're still allowed to push are aerodynamics and packaging, even those are constrained and never going to find their way onto a road car. I think an example of how restrictive the regulations are now is with powertrains. The whole world is moving away from gasoline engines, but the rules would never allow electric, hydrogen powered vehicles or even diesel engines. It's a fine balancing act between ensuring competition, allowing innovation and keeping costs down. There was a piece in Autosport really comparing the RB7 to previously dominant cars, the MP4-4 and the FW14 were on average over a second faster than everyone else in qualifying, compared to the 0.25 seconds advantage the RB7 has. So in that respect the regs are doing their job. There was often huge gulfs in performance when there was a split between NA cars and turbocharged ones, which they obviously want to avoid a repeat of. At the same time the restrictive regulations prevent the midfield teams challenging the top teams in the way the once were able to. Shaking up the regulations, such as 2009 and 2013 provide teams lower down the order with a brief opportunity to challenge higher up, but spiralling costs mean the FIA are limited with how often they can do this. At least we have brief spells at the start of a set of regulations where it's shaken up a bit, and at the end the top teams should be closely matched, it's just a shame there's no real innovation.
2009 saw a huge gulf in performance between the Brawns and the rest of the grid. One regulation which allowed a team with little or no development money to win both championships that year was the ban on in season testing. Brawn left the traps with over a second in the bag and were only caught up mid-season. Had they had money to develop the car then Button may well have set a new record for dominating a season. A 0.25 second advantage is quite likely as bigger gulf now with a lack of testing and tight regulations as a 1 or 2 second gap back in the hay day of F1 design and development. The numbers may be smaller but the result is the same.
I totally agree, Bando a dark day in F1 rule making. They may as well have made them tow caravans it was such an archaic way of slowing down the cars.
The age of innovation has to be the 60's. Every F1 car can trace its roots back to rear engines, monocoque chassis, sponsorship and aerodynamics. All of these were pioneered during this time. The fundamentals for an F1 car have not changed since. Some would say its the early-mid nineties when electronic wizardry was at its height. Even after is was all banned, some were still being innovative with it........
i'd say 1992-93. The time when the cars barely needed any driver input, due to active suspension, traction control, ground effects etc.
