Aside from the reliability concerns facing teams this year, especially those with Renault power, the big story from Formula 1 pre-season has been the ugliness of the cars. While the variety of designs is welcome, the results are, in the main, just terrible to look at.
The teams say it’s a result of the regulations, which has made us think a few times why on earth would the FIA sign-off on regs that result in such comedy? Either they have no foresight, or the current crop of designers is way too pragmatic, putting performance ahead of aesthetics and the sport in general.
In an article for Autosport+ (subscription required) Peter Stevens, designer of the McLaren F1 and Jaguar XJR-15, shares his thoughts on the matter.
Stevens starts by pointing his finger at the FIA, stating: “well-paid rule-makers seem to have been unable to foresee the consequences of their mandates“.
Yet, it’s the engineers from the teams who have been dealt the most savage criticism. In the past, Stevens explains, an F1 car was drawn on paper and then a trained pattern maker was engaged to transform the drawing into three-dimensional form. There was, of course, a skill in that process which required the maker to interpret and understand body surfacing.
Now that most everything design-related in F1 these days is handled by engineers and CAD systems Stevens sees the weak point, in what he describes as: “the work of under-trained or insensitive engineers”.
More blunty he concludes: “We are expected to endure 2014 shapes defined by an engineering CAD programme with limited surface development capabilities in the hands of pure rationalists. This is simply not good enough.”
Hear, hear.
[Source: Autosport+ (subscription)]
Caterham CT05
Ferrari F14 T
Force India VJM07
Lotus E22
Marussia MR03
McLaren MP4-29
Mercedes AMG F1 W05
Red Bull RB10
Sauber C33
Toro Rosso STR9
Williams FW36
9 replies on “Who is to blame for ugly F1 cars?”
I can hear some engineering-types who might scream ‘form-over-function’, but ultimately F1 is a product and a sales platform. Not only to sell itself, but to sell sponsor’s products and services. Therefore, it needs to include some level of visual appeal.
It could be argued that these design changes could impact viewer numbers therefore advertising leverage etc etc…
Call me crazy but I don’t see people turning off because the cars are ugly. They’ve been ugly since 2009.
While I don’t think they are great, it’s nice to see some variety.
If I was a child I would not be putting posters of these cars up on my wall…
When I was about 7 I used to spend my time at school drawing my favourite F1 cars of the day in the back of my exercise book. It wouldn’t happen now. Not only because the cars are too impossibly shaped to draw, but the kids don’t even have exercise books anymore!
I’m sure these designs are not popular with the sponsors either, less places for good visibility of stickers
The Merc and Ferrari look ok.
Force India… wow.
The Lotus is the best of a bad bunch – it’s at least well concealed by the livery.
The McLaren is particularly disappointing, a team doing the Arrows F1 “sponsor me” lap times through testing should have tried a little harder to make a car someone might actually want to see their brand associated with.
[…] crop of Formula 1 cars, in response to new aero and crash regulations, has certainly encouraged plenty of discussion. The twin-tusk nose of the Lotus E22 (above) is certainly one of the most bizarre design solutions […]
Firstly the FIA should have mandated a few things in the rules. Ban all high noses. Go back to the simple gorgeous designs on the late 80’s early 90’s. Ban all those little end plates, end wings and all those little bits of sharp pieces sticking out everywhere. Those pieces look ugly and also when there is a crash they fly everywhere all over the track becoming like sharp razor blades for cars to run over. They need to simplify the design of the cars and in turn yes making them more appealing to the eye. Also there are rumours by many of the drivers that GP2 cars are faster on some tracks. This is totally unacceptable! They need to allow these turbo charged engines to rev to 22,000rpm and produce 1000+HP. Most fans want to see animals on the track and don’t give a sh@# what it cost teams. If teams can’t afford it (which most can) then they should get out of racing. Go back to the days of specailly qualifying engines and ultimate grip from tyres. Then we will see who is the best driver/car on the track. Not the whimp who knows how to pussy around the track saving his tyres. Shcui left the sport not becauese he wasn’t fast enough but he felt that the tyres dictated who won not who was the best driver. The pussyfication of F1 has been going on for far too long. It’s a f’n dangerous sport, if you don’t want to risk your life, don’t race.
[…] Who’s to blame for ugly F1 cars? [AUSmotive] […]