Tracks you would like to see again or appear in F1 Thread

go_Rubens · Post by **go_Rubens** » 06 Apr 2013, 02:28

nome66 wrote:its increased radius appears to be better for "last-ditch" passing before the front stretch.
also the runoff is a bit better than just gravel

There may be a better overtaking opportunity at the Casio Triangle, and I want more overtakes. However, I like to see better quality of overtakes too. I like quality more than quantity. Passing at the old chicane may have been hard, but it was possible. Senna proved it. Barrichello proved it. Others have proved it.

As for runoff, F1 would have made the runoff area asphalt sooner or later anyhow.

AxelP800 · Post by **AxelP800** » 08 Apr 2013, 07:33

I don't understand why FIA wouldn't let some circuits in terms of safety such as runoff. Then why F1 allowed to race at Monaco? That should be grade 4 track, altough it's great circuit. Bathurst just need some catch-fence to put on those mountain sections.
And also the runoff at Tilkedrome is just way too wide. I would reduce it to half of the current size.
FIA should realize why Monaco allowed but place like Laguna Seca is not (other than the location problem). Just let F1 race through old Hockenheim without chicane, Enna-Pergusa without chicane. Remove Singapore Sling into 1 corner, Le Mans Full no chicane (6 km Mulsanne). Let's see how long those engines would survive

go_Rubens · Post by **go_Rubens** » 08 Apr 2013, 22:27

AxelP800 wrote:I don't understand why FIA wouldn't let some circuits in terms of safety such as runoff. Then why F1 allowed to race at Monaco? That should be grade 4 track, altough it's great circuit. Bathurst just need some catch-fence to put on those mountain sections.
And also the runoff at Tilkedrome is just way too wide. I would reduce it to half of the current size.
FIA should realize why Monaco allowed but place like Laguna Seca is not (other than the location problem). Just let F1 race through old Hockenheim without chicane, Enna-Pergusa without chicane. Remove Singapore Sling into 1 corner, Le Mans Full no chicane (6 km Mulsanne). Let's see how long those engines would survive

Here is what I think:

Monaco stays because of prestige, and is (although I hate to say it) a classic.
Maybe F1 could add safer walls along with catch-fencing at Bathurst.
About runoff at Tilkedromes, agreed.
Hockenheim was an engine killer with the chicanes. Just keep the chicanes.
I would keep one chicane section at Pergusa.
I don't like the Singapore Sling, but it adds to the challenge for the drivers. Keep it.
The old Mulsanne at Le Mans would be crazy, and today's engines wouldn't last :lol:

Nessafox · Post by **Nessafox** » 09 Apr 2013, 01:50

AxelP800 wrote:I don't understand why FIA wouldn't let some circuits in terms of safety such as runoff. Then why F1 allowed to race at Monaco? That should be grade 4 track, altough it's great circuit. Bathurst just need some catch-fence to put on those mountain sections.
And also the runoff at Tilkedrome is just way too wide. I would reduce it to half of the current size.
FIA should realize why Monaco allowed but place like Laguna Seca is not (other than the location problem). Just let F1 race through old Hockenheim without chicane, Enna-Pergusa without chicane. Remove Singapore Sling into 1 corner, Le Mans Full no chicane (6 km Mulsanne). Let's see how long those engines would survive

To Monaco's credit, their amount of safety vehicles and marshalls is a lot bigger than on other street circuits and the marshalls and safety crew are some of the best trained in the world. You very rarely see Monaco Marshalls do stupid things, unlike some other tracks.

Gerudo Dragon · Post by **Gerudo Dragon** » 09 Apr 2013, 01:58

Donington Park.

go_Rubens · Post by **go_Rubens** » 11 Apr 2013, 01:57

darkapprentice77 wrote:Donington Park.

It is better than Silverstone!

roblo97 · Post by **roblo97** » 11 Apr 2013, 13:18

could we post a couple of our own designs here ?

pi314159 · Post by **pi314159** » 11 Apr 2013, 17:11

roblomas52 wrote:could we post a couple of our own designs here ?

Why? We already have two threads for our own designs. ("Beat Tilke at his own game" and "Reject (or not) track design")

takagi_for_the_win · Post by **takagi_for_the_win** » 11 Apr 2013, 17:14

go_Rubens wrote:
darkapprentice77 wrote:Donington Park.

It is better than Silverstone!

Jesus, this is beginning to look like the 'Bash every track used by F1 recently' thread

UncreativeUsername37 · Post by **UncreativeUsername37** » 11 Apr 2013, 18:05

takagi_for_the_win wrote:
go_Rubens wrote:
darkapprentice77 wrote:Donington Park.

It is better than Silverstone!

Jesus, this is beginning to look like the 'Bash every track used by F1 recently' thread

Albert Park is a bunch of tight 90-degree corners with no character; compare to Adelaide, a bunch of tight corners with character.
Sepang has 5-6 and 7-8 which are kind of cool, the rest of the corners are just your typical tight and/or overcomplicated Tilkedrome things.
Shanghai is basically the same track as Sepang. Double hairpin, medium-short right-turning straight, tight right-hander, short straight, left-right sweeping turn combo, double-apex turn, short straight, complicated turn(s), long straight, hairpin... ugh.
Bahrain is boring tight corners with a double sweeping combo and decreasing-radius turn thrown in there, just like all the other Tilke tracks.
Catalunya doesn't have any good overtaking opportunities.
Monaco has nowhere to pass and it's way too unsafe to be in F1 today.
CGV is just a bunch of indistinguishable chicanes.
Silverstone actually has too many high-speed corners, such that it neglects overtaking.
The new Nürburgring is a bunch of overly tight corners and chicanes. It definitely doesn't have the variety or challenge of the Nordschleife.
The Hungaroring has nowhere to overtake, and doesn't even have anything else to make it interesting, like the unique, inspiring high-speed corners of Silverstone or the unforgiving challenge of Monaco.
The new Spa, when you think about it, is a bunch of 90-degree corners, a hairpin, and a couple chicanes.
Monza is a power circuit interrupted by the occasional slow chicane.
Singapore is just a bunch of angular 90-degree turns and chicanes.
Korea has two long, boring straights and a long, twisty section with a bunch of medium-speed corners that all feel the same where it's impossible to overtake.
Suzuka has been on the calendar for a long time without being significantly changed, automatically making it a good track.
India is a mass of tight corners with a token high-speed changing-radius turn, same as all the other Tilkedromes.
Abu Dhabi has the same problem as Singapore.
CotA is a bunch of hairpins with the good corners plagiarised from Istanbul and Silverstone.
Interlagos has been on the calendar for a long time without being significantly changed, automatically making it a good track.

Salamander · Post by **Salamander** » 11 Apr 2013, 18:30

UgncreativeUsergname wrote:Albert Park is a bunch of tight 90-degree corners with no character; compare to Adelaide, a bunch of tight corners with character.

Doesn't stop Albert Park from putting on more interesting F1 races than Adelaide ever did.

CGV is just a bunch of indistinguishable chicanes.

It's also THE GREATEST TRACK KNOWN TO MAN. Seriously. It's not the most imaginative circuit design, but actually driving it, it's one of the best experiences.

The new Spa, when you think about it, is a bunch of 90-degree corners, a hairpin, and a couple chicanes.

Last time I checked, Pouhon and Blanchimont weren't 90 degrees. And Eau Rouge isn't really much of a chicane, given that it's taken flat-out today.

Suzuka has been on the calendar for a long time without being significantly changed, automatically making it a good track.

Interlagos has been on the calendar for a long time without being significantly changed, automatically making it a good track.

Neither has Montreal, Melbourne, Monaco, Monza, or the Hungaroring. Why aren't they automatically good tracks?

UncreativeUsername37 · Post by **UncreativeUsername37** » 11 Apr 2013, 19:10

BlindCaveSalamander wrote:
UgncreativeUsergname wrote:Albert Park is a bunch of tight 90-degree corners with no character; compare to Adelaide, a bunch of tight corners with character.

Doesn't stop Albert Park from putting on more interesting F1 races than Adelaide ever did.

CGV is just a bunch of indistinguishable chicanes.

It's also THE GREATEST TRACK KNOWN TO MAN. Seriously. It's not the most imaginative circuit design, but actually driving it, it's one of the best experiences.

The new Spa, when you think about it, is a bunch of 90-degree corners, a hairpin, and a couple chicanes.

Last time I checked, Pouhon and Blanchimont weren't 90 degrees. And Eau Rouge isn't really much of a chicane, given that it's taken flat-out today.

Suzuka has been on the calendar for a long time without being significantly changed, automatically making it a good track.
Interlagos has been on the calendar for a long time without being significantly changed, automatically making it a good track.
Neither has Montreal, Melbourne, Monaco, Monza, or the Hungaroring. Why aren't they automatically good tracks?

I was being sarcastic/trollish. In retrospect I should've plonked down a </sarcasm> or something at the end.

Salamander · Post by **Salamander** » 11 Apr 2013, 19:13

UgncreativeUsergname wrote: I was being sarcastic/trollish. In retrospect I should've plonked down a </sarcasm> or something at the end.

I probably should've picked up on that in fairness.

dr-baker · Post by **dr-baker** » 11 Apr 2013, 19:36

I'm surprised I haven't mentioned Martinsville yet...

Salamander · Post by **Salamander** » 11 Apr 2013, 19:40

dr-baker wrote:I'm surprised I haven't mentioned Martinsville yet...

F1 at Martinsville would be a complete and utter disaster, on the scale of Spa 98.

dr-baker · Post by **dr-baker** » 11 Apr 2013, 19:47

BlindCaveSalamander wrote:
dr-baker wrote:I'm surprised I haven't mentioned Martinsville yet...

F1 at Martinsville would be a complete and utter disaster, on the scale of Spa 98.

But without the safety net of third cars! Reliability nowadays is too good - accidents are the way forward! (in a safe environment, of course...)

Wallio · Post by **Wallio** » 11 Apr 2013, 19:58

Not gonna lie, I'd love to see some team take there Monaco car and hot lap Martinsville. I wonder if they could go flat out?

johnnyCarwash · Post by **johnnyCarwash** » 11 Apr 2013, 19:59

dr-baker wrote:I'm surprised I haven't mentioned Martinsville yet...

How does Martinsville compare to the Milwaukee mile?
I would love to see F1 at the mile

UncreativeUsername37 · Post by **UncreativeUsername37** » 11 Apr 2013, 20:03

If we want F1 to go on an oval, then why don't we choose one where the turns aren't exactly the same, like Pocono or Indy?

Wallio · Post by **Wallio** » 11 Apr 2013, 20:06

UgncreativeUsergname wrote:If we want F1 to go on an oval, then why don't we choose one where the turns aren't exactly the same, like Pocono or Indy?

Daytona. Even with Monza-spec aero 235mph average laps are possible.

pasta_maldonado · Post by **pasta_maldonado** » 11 Apr 2013, 20:20

dr-baker wrote:I'm surprised I haven't mentioned Martinsville yet...

No. Because Martinsville is one of the worst tracks known to man.

roblo97 · Post by **roblo97** » 11 Apr 2013, 20:27

dr-baker wrote:I'm surprised I haven't mentioned Martinsville yet...

Bristol motor speedway would be epic on the half mile oval for 382 laps

dr-baker · Post by **dr-baker** » 11 Apr 2013, 20:29

UgncreativeUsergname wrote:If we want F1 to go on an oval, then why don't we choose one where the turns aren't exactly the same, like Pocono or Indy?

In which case, ROCKINGHAM MOTOR SPEEDWAY!!!

Salamander · Post by **Salamander** » 11 Apr 2013, 20:30

Wallio wrote:
UgncreativeUsergname wrote:If we want F1 to go on an oval, then why don't we choose one where the turns aren't exactly the same, like Pocono or Indy?

Daytona. Even with Monza-spec aero 235mph average laps are possible.

No. Just no.

Wallio · Post by **Wallio** » 11 Apr 2013, 20:34

BlindCaveSalamander wrote:
Wallio wrote:
UgncreativeUsergname wrote:If we want F1 to go on an oval, then why don't we choose one where the turns aren't exactly the same, like Pocono or Indy?

Daytona. Even with Monza-spec aero 235mph average laps are possible.

No. Just no.

Obviously, its dangerous as hell (CART at Texas anyone?) and will never happen, but as a pure numbers game. It'd be epic.

pasta_maldonado · Post by **pasta_maldonado** » 11 Apr 2013, 20:51

dr-baker wrote:
UgncreativeUsergname wrote:If we want F1 to go on an oval, then why don't we choose one where the turns aren't exactly the same, like Pocono or Indy?

In which case, ROCKINGHAM MOTOR SPEEDWAY!!!

I'd be all for F1 visiting the road course, but not the oval. That would contradict the whole purpose of F1 and let the NASCAR fanboys win, which is something I'd hate to see.

go_Rubens · Post by **go_Rubens** » 12 Apr 2013, 00:11

pasta_maldonado wrote:
dr-baker wrote:
UgncreativeUsergname wrote:If we want F1 to go on an oval, then why don't we choose one where the turns aren't exactly the same, like Pocono or Indy?

In which case, ROCKINGHAM MOTOR SPEEDWAY!!!

I'd be all for F1 visiting the road course, but not the oval. That would contradict the whole purpose of F1 and let the NASCAR fanboys win, which is something I'd hate to see.

NASCAR doesn't deserve to win over F1, and that is all I have to say.

Salamander · Post by **Salamander** » 12 Apr 2013, 00:16

... how would F1 racing at an oval mean NASCAR wins? Wins what?

To be honest, it'd be interesting to see F1 race on an oval - oval racing requires a much different skillset, and I'm all for challenging the drivers as much as possible.

Gerudo Dragon · Post by **Gerudo Dragon** » 12 Apr 2013, 00:28

go_Rubens · Post by **go_Rubens** » 12 Apr 2013, 00:34

darkapprentice77 wrote:

Is this supposed to be your own redesign of Silverstone or some airfield track?

Gerudo Dragon · Post by **Gerudo Dragon** » 12 Apr 2013, 00:35

go_Rubens wrote:Is this supposed to be your own redesign of Silverstone or some airfield track?

It's Thruxton, former airfield

nome66 · Post by **nome66** » 12 Apr 2013, 00:43

totally real btw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6WuSQkKdfI

roblo97 · Post by **roblo97** » 12 Apr 2013, 06:53

darkapprentice77 wrote:

Ah good to see my local track here

roblo97 · Post by **roblo97** » 12 Apr 2013, 21:24

A list of tracks I think are worthy of f1

Argentina
Portero De Los Funes
Autodromo Oscar Galvez #15
Rafaela with 2 chicanes

Australia
Adelaide
Albert Park
Bathurst
Phillip Island
Surfers Paradise

Austria
Salzburgring
Ostereichring

Belgium
Geddine
Spa

Brazil
Cruitibra
Interlagos

Canada
Montreal
Mont Tremblant
Mostport

Czech Republic
Brno

France
Charade
Rouen
Dijon Prenois
Paul Ricard

Germany
2001 hockenheim
Kassel Wilhemshöe
Norisring 1971
Sachsenring

Ireland
Mondello park

Italy
Cagliari
Imola
Monza
Mugello
Valelunga

Japan
Autopolis
Suzuka

Macau
Guia

Malaysia
Sepang

Mexico
Mexico city

Monaco
Monte Carlo

Morroco
Marrakech WTCC track

Netherlands
Assen
Zandvoort

Portugal
Portimao
Oporto WTCC 2007

Singapore
Thompson Road

Slovakia
Slovakiaring

South Africa
Kyalami

Spain
Jerez
Montjuic Park

Turkey
Istanbul Park

U.A.E
Dubai Autodrome

U.K
Brands Hatch
Cadwell
Donnington 2010
Goodwood
Oulton Park 1972
Silverstone 1991
Snetterton 300
Thruxton

U.S.A
Detroit 1990
Fair Park
Fontana Road Course
Indy Oval
Laguna Seca
Las Vegas Motorspeedway Road Course
Lime Rock Park Mountain Proposal
Long Beach
Mid Ohio
Road America
Road Atlanta
Sebring
Sonoma
Talladega Road Course
Virginia International Raceway Grand East Course
Watkins Glen

That is my list based on you tube videos and psp and Xbox games

go_Rubens · Post by **go_Rubens** » 13 Apr 2013, 15:29

Roblomas52, you left out a good bit of the Tilkedromes. Some of them are good, and you have Istanbil and Sepang, but what about COTA? I liked the track.

AxelP800 · Post by **AxelP800** » 13 Apr 2013, 15:55

I wonder why no one racing at Pikes Peak using F1 chassis or at least GP2 or even CART in 2000

Salamander · Post by **Salamander** » 13 Apr 2013, 16:41

AxelP800 wrote:I wonder why no one racing at Pikes Peak using F1 chassis or at least GP2 or even CART in 2000

IRL raced there up until 2005.

FullMetalJack · Post by **FullMetalJack** » 13 Apr 2013, 17:13

go_Rubens wrote:
darkapprentice77 wrote:

Is this supposed to be your own redesign of Silverstone or some airfield track?

That's exactly what I thought, the similarities to the old Silverstone, and even the runways are uncanny.

roblo97 · Post by **roblo97** » 13 Apr 2013, 20:30

go_Rubens wrote:Roblomas52, you left out a good bit of the Tilkedromes. Some of them are good, and you have Istanbil and Sepang, but what about COTA? I liked the track.

It's a good track IMO ruined by that crappy stadium section

Nessafox · Post by **Nessafox** » 13 Apr 2013, 22:07

redbulljack14 wrote:
go_Rubens wrote:
darkapprentice77 wrote:

Is this supposed to be your own redesign of Silverstone or some airfield track?

That's exactly what I thought, the similarities to the old Silverstone, and even the runways are uncanny.

That's of course what happens when you built circuits round miltary airfields. Military airfields don't tend to have lot of variation. The varation depends on the amount and length of runways. In this 3-runway type of aifields, they usually tend to be A-shaped or Z-shaped.