How Modern Circuit Layouts Affect Racing

Brought to you by TheJudge13 contributor Anil Parmar (editor in chief  – Formula E Diary)

Formula 1 cars may have been slower in past eras but they looked quicker, and the work that the drivers did behind the wheel was clearly beyond mere mortals like you and I. Much of the blame towards the lack of ‘spectacle’ has been levelled at the engines power units, however what everyone within the sport seems to ignore is that much of the fault lies with the circuits. The circuits are not just pieces of tarmac, but instead characters that bring Formula 1 to life. They are just as important as the drivers and the cars.  A great circuit can turn a procession into something worth watching because the circuit itself leaves an impression.

And modern F1 circuits are terrible!

Flow

One of the key aspects of great F1 circuits is the ‘flow’ of the circuit. The ‘flow’ is when one corner or straight feeds into another, when each corner is partly defined by what proceeds and precedes it. There is perhaps no better example of this than the almighty Suzuka circuit, built to test racing cars to their limit.

Every corner here feeds into the next. The esses link beautifully to the Degnar corners, whilst spoon curve puts tremendous pressure on the drivers as they seek to get a perfect exit onto the back straight. The key to Suzuka’s success is that there is no wasted space; every single corner is designed to push a racing car to its limit, including the chicane and the hairpin.

Even when the races there don’t produce overtaking, the visual spectacle is something that any motorsport fan can appreciate. A perfect lap of Suzuka is something beautiful to watch.

But what about the more recent F1 tracks?

Recognise the above two circuits? Good, because China and Bahrain have been on the F1 calendar for sometime and it’s probably going to stay that way. Despite both of them having produced some great races, neither makes a Formula 1 car look spectacular. Why is that?

One of the biggest problems with modern F1 circuits is the sheer abundance of slow, technical corners, which ruin the flow of a circuit. Much of this is apparently to make overtaking easier however the verdict is still out on whether this has actually worked without ruining the visual impact of watching racing cars.

Not only do slow corners ruin the flow of a circuit, they also make Formula 1 cars look completely ordinary through them. Circuit layouts were much faster in past eras and whilst the racing was often processional (particularly in the early 00’s), the visual appeal of watching a car on the limit on such quick circuits was second to none. The cars looked alive back then. They don’t when racing around a hotel in Abu Dhabi (although I’m sure the hospitality is awesome), and they certainly don’t look exciting when going around turn 1 in China.

For all the criticism that the 2014 cars received, the looked great at tracks like Spa, Monza and Circuit de Catalunya. The latter doesn’t always produce great racing but watching the cars attack sectors 1 and 2 is very special.

DRS, Field Spread and Ctrl+C

Slow corners also created another problem, one familiar to anyone who has watched a race at Valencia, Singapore or Abu Dhabi. That problem is field spread, and it’s the single biggest problem I have with modern tracks.

When a fast corner precedes a long straight, the following driver loses some aerodynamic performance, however this is somewhat negated by the fact he reaches top speed relatively quickly and can use the slipstream effect, as well as DRS to try and make a pass. When a slow corner is used however, we have a problem, because the chasing driver is limited by when he can put his foot down. Before you know, he’s lost 20m to the driver in front. Martin Brundle refers to this as the ‘concertina effect’.

Of course, the real solution here is to cut down on aerodynamics and increase mechanical grip but that’s a topic for another time…

Because of these design choices, circuit design has become less and less exciting, with fast corners often forced together (see Korea) whilst hairpins and slow corners are placed at every opportunity. F1 has resorted to a not-so-inspirational combination of hairpins and straights to ‘facilitate overtaking’, although the success of this has been minimum at best.

In fact, looking back at the recent additions on the F1 calendar, the amount of ‘hairpin-straight-hairpin’ complexes is shocking. China, Malaysia, Valencia, India, Korea (which has two of these zones immediately after each other), Abu Dhabi, Bahrain and COTA all feature this combination of corners which, combined with DRS, has now created a designated part of each circuit where overtaking should be completed.

The only modern circuit that does not feature this mickey-mouse combination is Istanbul Park in Turkey, which features the mighty turn 8 and the ‘faux-rouge’ turn 9, both quick and challenging corners. Ironically, this is considered to be best modern Tilke circuit, although it’s not even on the calendar anymore. Go figure!

The field spread at some modern circuits is so significant that after the 2010 Abu Dhabi circuit, Jean Todt said:

‘It (overtaking) was impossible. I’m speaking as the President of the FIA. From now on, before a new circuit is approved, we will evaluate the potential for the spectacle as well as the safety’.

Instead of taking action on circuit design and cutting down on aero, we were left with DRS as a ‘fix’. By ignoring the problem and coming with an artificial solution, Formula 1 has traded visual appeal for convenience. It’s not right.

Buddh International Circuit

The Buddh International Circuit, which featured 5 consecutive heavy braking zones preceded or followed by straights. It also suffered from severe field spread, leading to a lack of overtaking.

The downfall of Formula 1 circuits is made clear when we take a look at the Austrian GP, now held at the Red Bull Ring. It’s unique track layout, which features just 7 corners and a lap time of around 70 seconds, received universal acclaim from drivers and fans upon its F1 return. Jenson Button expressed his delight that ‘there are more fast corners (4) than slow corners (3) when speaking to Martin Brundle on Sky Sports.

The irony was not to be lost on this writer, who recalls how the circuit, in its guise as the A-1 Ring, was considered to be a butchered version of the incredible Osterreichring Grand Prix circuit. It’s telling that such a circuit is now loved for its fast corners when it is a much slower version of the old racetrack. The same fate awaits Mexico; the stunning original layout has been tinkered with, giving us tighter corners and a forced stadium section. When will it stop?

I firmly believe that track layout, from the tarmac itself to the run off around it, is as important to the spectacle as the cars and drivers. Tracks need to be varied, visually appealing and present a high degree of challenge; get this right and the visual appeal of watching great drivers in extraordinary machines can’t be topped. The FIA need to realise this and ease off the restrictions place on Tilke and other F1 circuit designers; the sport deserves more than forced layouts, endless run off areas and ‘overtake here’ DRS zones. Circuits are the characters of F1 and it’s time we brought them back to life.

Advertisements

61 responses to “How Modern Circuit Layouts Affect Racing

  1. Bravo Anil! Great article. I’ve studied old racetracks a lot, and I am appalled at how generic and boring the new Tilke tracks are compared to the historic ones. Bahrain in particular is such a disappointment as they had huge amounts of money and the whole freaking desert in which to build a track. They could have built anything, and yet we ended up with another stop-go Tilkedrome.

    • I think the biggest problem is that all of the circuits are designed by the same guy, so they all feel/look the same.

      At least when you watch the older circuits, they all look totally different.

      For me, watching a boring race at somewhere like Monaco or suzuka is still more exciting than watching a good race at Bahrain

    • Anil – Let me just echo the good Judge’s comments, and say thank for you this thoughtful article!

      I just want to also note that I particularly appreciate you how you’ve tied modern circuit design back to the problem of the current aerodynamic rules… the inability of the cars to run together in fast curves due to dirty air has created boring new circuits.

      For me, my favorite two sentences were, “Instead of taking action on circuit design and cutting down on aero…”, and also, “…the real solution here is to cut down on aerodynamics…”

      Three things have happened in the last few weeks which cause me to be concerned about this very same matter:
      1) Monza, the last F1 circuit where the teams all lay their wings down doesn’t have a deal with FOM to continue hosting F1 races. Once per year downforce is reduced, and F1 cars can follow each other relatively closely through Curva Parabolica to draft each other down the main straight; this may be gone.

      2) Marlboro Man, (Mr. Arrivebene) published his team’s design proposal for the future of F1 and it was a haphazard series of red wings covering what should’ve been an F1 car. Since Marlboro Man is a marketing guy (and a nicotine marketeer besides), we could forgive him for his lack of intelligence. But unfortunately the public response was positive, which means… more dirty air behind cars, which means will be… more crap circuits!

      3) IndyCar came out with new wing kits that consisted of atrocious layers of wings upon wings, and some people nearly stood up and cheered. Which means for IndyCar… more dirty air behind cars. But why would F1 fans care, (IndyCar has been crap for a long time now). The problem is that some F1 fans were saying that F1 needs even more dirty air like what IndyCar is now developing from their rolling kinetic sculptural odes to the art of viral winglets.

      If Jean Todt (or anyone in F1) was serious about reducing the problem of susceptibility to aero wash in fast corners, it would not be too hard to solve.

      • Thanks for the comment!

        I can only hope that future F1 regulations increase the amount of downforce produced by the underside of the F1 car as opposed to downforce generated the front wing.

        I went to the WEC at Silverstone last week expecting to be underwhelmed but I left in complete awe of the racing that I saw, and sad at what state is in.

        As far as I’m concerned, the 2017 regulations need to look like this:
        -Much more horsepower and fuel.
        -Much wider, grippier tyres.
        -Less dependence on front wing aero with a bit of Ground Effect to keep cornering speeds impressive.

    • Let me also join in the applause for an excellent articles.
      This excess of slow corners really does destroy the spectacle and racing.
      Brands Hatch provides some good examples of where cars can look good and racing occurs – or used to in early F1 days. Clearways (now Clark Curve) has to be taken right in order to pass into Paddock Hill Bend, and the combination of Westfield Bend following the straight from Hawthorn Bend was awesome – even when no overtaking happened.

  2. OK, it’s time to build a track with a figure 8. THAT would add some excitement !!! Long sweeping corners and short straights. Plenty of fan space inside. I’d buy a ticket.

  3. Blanchimont turn 17 and 18 in Spa looked amazing back around 2006 era. I’m not sure if it’s the camera angles but it used to look soo much faster. It seemed like the camera was farther back and created wider shot.

    To go on long with the article the sense of speed is diminished with asphalt run offs and painted run offs.

    I was in Austin last year and on tv gives it no justice in the elevation or where they were on track. I think certain tracks have a sense of where your at based on the background. Monza is so simple but I can tell where they are at most of the time because of the back drop.

    • One thing the new tracks try to accomplish is greater sight lines for those attending. This I think leads the TV viewer with less of a sense of speed compared to, say the tree lined Monza.

      • Yes, great piece Anil!

        McKidd, you’re onto something. Slow corners do equal better spectator sight lines… they also equal more grandstands. And it seems more grandstands – butts in seats at a “lower” price – is part of the goal with these obnoxious tracks.

    • Watching an F1 car fly out of Parabolica, tuck into the slipsteam and overtake into T1…10x better than a DRS overtake in a hairpin-straight-hairpin section.

      Interestingly, cars can overtake quite easily at Monza because they all run low downforce configurations….Hint hint FIA?

    • Many of them retain some kind of harmony with the surrounding landscape which many of the new circuits don’t – or the camera angles don’t represent this. So you get the feel of racing in a stadium the whole lap.

      BTW – I urge anyone who has not been to Monza – go this year, it may be your last chance to see F1 there. If Ferrari snaffle this GP up and we head off to Mugello, Monza will struggle to get it back.

      The weather in central Europe is pretty much always fantastic. Last year GA was under 100 euro’s for 3 days. Accommodation isn’t difficult.

      The Monza setting is spectacular and unique – and you can feel the history invading your senses – oh and yes – get up on the old banking – stuff the security. They tend to all bugger off as soon as the race is over anyway.

      • I always got the impression the drivers loved Mugello, they raved about it when testing there.

        Shame we can’t have both, Monza is the last high speed track left, i even miss the old hockenheim circuit with it long straights, seeing car shimmy under braking, balanced on the perfectly on the limit of adhesion.

  4. Watched the Schumacher lap. God how I miss the sound of those engines and gear changes. I think the points made in this article are quite valid too. New tracks are more boring. Perhaps slower corners and tighter chicanes are designed to stop cars going ‘too fast’ these days as well.

    • I believe the idea Tilke works under is to design the track to run through a series of slower corners in front of grandstands, in order to provide more viewing value to the paying customers.

  5. Let me concur, Anil! Getting a lap right in Suzuka is a supremely satisfying experience. To pile on the “flow” argument, in Suzuka you never have the time to think of anything else in between two corners. Even on the main straight, the entry to T1 is so awkward that you can’t stop planning how you will attack that corner. On the back straight, 130R comes to bite you sooner than you’d like. And there is absolutely no space to spare, anywhere. All in all, an incredible driving experience.

    I think you can better appreciate the Suzuka layout from onboard footage:

  6. “Jean Todt said:

    ‘It (overtaking) was impossible. I’m speaking as the President of the FIA. From now on, before a new circuit is approved, we will evaluate the potential for the spectacle as well as the safety’.”

    Oh, Little Jean clearly hasn’t paid attention to a word he was saying. Doesn’t sound like Baku has been vetted for anything other than how much money it was transferring to CVC’s coffers…

  7. “The only modern circuit that does not feature this mickey-mouse combination is Istanbul Park in Turkey, which features the mighty turn 8 and the ‘faux-rouge’ turn 9, both quick and challenging corners. Ironically, this is considered to be best modern Tilke circuit”

    Even Istanbul is relatively bland, when compared to nail-biters like Suzuka, Monza or even Catalunya; even if it has some flow and certain corners with more personality. For me perhaps Malaysia is also vying for the “best” Tilkedrome, as Section 3 is very peculiar but also very short. And it’s Mickey Mouse all the way. So yeah, no, Malaysia doesn’t cut it overall, either…

    • Every time the cars come up to that tilke chicane in catalunya I cry a little remembering how great that last turn used to be when the cars were at full noise on entry

      I find it sad that now we put down catalunya as one of the “classic” tracks, when 15 years ago it was considered one of the worst track

      • I feel the same way about Hungary. I think Istanbul can be considered Tilke’s “least-worst” effort.

        • I totally agree. I started following F1 in 94 and remember thinking Hungary was like some backyard goat track the v8supercars race on, now I get a little excited about Hungary as it has “character”

      • Exactly – another travesty – but the chicane was supposed to do two things solve dirty air problems AND improve safety. Run off areas around the final corner are deemed tight by modern standards – in terms of the depth of run off from the edge of the circuit.

  8. “The Buddh International Circuit, which featured 5 consecutive heavy braking zones preceded or followed by straights.”

    Five? I only counted to 3, maybe 4… Anyways, Buddh is a layout that I actually enjoy. Only if the damned Tilkerer put some gravel traps in the 2nd sector! What drivers did of the track limits in 2013 was a mockery, and the FIA and Charlie were exposed as a bunch of incompetent idiots…

    http://cdn.images.autosport.com/scaled/d04/d041284ca58107f26b959959c9de3ac4.jpg

    • Wow.

      Charlie and the FIA were very clear in 2013 that if no advantage is gained from off-track excursions, there will be no penalty. Which is as it should be, of course.

      I wonder if you’re also upset to see a child draw outside the lines with crayons?

      • “if *no advantage is gained* from off-track excursions, there will be no penalty. Which is as it should be, of course.”

        Strongly disagree. The lack or presence of advantage is arbitrarily decreed on a whim by a Charlie says… dictate. There have been incidents in the past where Charlie says… “zero-tolerance policy”, yet cars blatantly overtaking and abusing track limits (i.e. Vettel) got away with bupkis. There were other such incidents where the valiant FIA chose to close their eyes when they wished so.

        There are only two workable solutions here:
        – either put electronic sensors on cars/track limits to automatically register ALL track limits violations and penalize the drivers automatically. Exercise exceptions manually when required. This solution won’t work as there would simply be much too many infractions.
        – design track layouts so that drivers are free to use track limits as they wisheth, and crash as they wisheth. For instance track limits is literally a non issue at Suzuka; not even Crashtor will entertain abusing track limits on entry to the Spoon. Only carefully placed grass (natural grass!) and gravel traps can force drivers to respect the track. And where they can find an advantage, so be it: they can all do this.

        But the solution definitely is NOT to put those dangerous sausage kerbs!

        • “…advantage is arbitrarily decreed on a whim…”

          Actually, the advantage is objective, and measured as time gained (or lost). The time data is gathered in part (if not whole) by the GPS data that is available to all the teams.

          That is why there is not an uproar from the teams on this issue. They see the data (that time is lost, or not gained).

          Hope that helps!

          • It certainly helps, yet I’m still not happy.

            Grosjean got penalized for a magnificent pass in T4 during Hungary 2013 for abusing track limits, on the excuse that the stewards “hands were tied”.

            Vettel did not get penalized for a pass in Copse (I think) during Silverstone 2014 where he clearly abused track limits, and on a GP on which Charlie says… “zero tolerance policy”. Alonso wouldn’t stop bitching afterwards, and for good reason.

            Vettel did not get penalized for a pass with all 4 wheels off the track limits on the 2nd straight during Abu Dhabi 2012, which ended in him getting crowned.

            Massa got penalized for a idiotic Charlie says… ruling whereas he crossed with all 4 wheels the white line going into the pits in Brazil 2013.

            All seems rather arbitrary to me. What happened in India 2013 vs Silverstone 2014 is ridiculous. Charlie says… dictates all the way, as far as I go.

      • “I wonder if you’re also upset to see a child draw outside the lines with crayons?”

        If that is acceptable, then surely cutting across Eau Rouge must too be accetable… Heck, the Monaco chicane must be ball, too. Such driving borders on cheating, and it must be dealt with one way or another. As memorably put by one of our podcast panalists (was it AJ?), “the track is the f*cking track!”

        • Lol. I remember that – it was podcast episode 2. He also described the new run off area at Parabolica as somewhere you could park “30,000 fucking trucks” 😉

          He was on holiday in France consuming rather good Bordeaux wine I believe.

          And its a fair point. In Monaco – the track is the track – if you don’t respect it… start picking up the shards of carbon fibre that used to be your car.

    • The final two corners, turn 1, the hairpin and the tight corner at the end of straight..no wonder the field spread is so big there. On top of that it copies Turkey’s turn 8 and has 3 chicanes which just adds to the problem.

      I feel like they tried too hard with India and Korea to have a ‘quick section’ of the track, which ends up feeling completely forced.

      • “The final two corners”

        The final corner, yes, I can see that being heavy braking. But the one before it, T15, is relatively flowing as the angle is wider (than T16) and the distance from the previous chicane is small.

        “I feel like they tried too hard with India and Korea to have a ‘quick section’ of the track”

        The Korean “quick section” is simply ridiculous. That whole circuit is ridiculous, with the obnoxious straights sector 1, sorta kinda almost speedy sector 2, boring Abu Dhabi style sector 3. A Frankenstein of a circuit, obtained by careful averaging on a computer…

  9. The layout isn’t half as important as the fact that driver errors no longer get punished. Runoff areas ruined everything.

  10. “The same fate awaits Mexico; the stunning original layout has been tinkered with”

    Anil, I think the word you were looking for was “tilkered”…

  11. Great piece of writing and some bloody good points. F1 at the moment has had its balls removed, the fast tracks of the past all became shadows of their former selves after the fall out from Senna and Rats tragic accidents. Its not without some irony that the man who loved to drive fast had an impact in the current chicane menace that blights our sport. IMHO theTilke tracks really are dull, they are way too forgiving to the wayward driver who dare to dip a wheel off track,do that in Monaco or even spa and your toast. Its sad when we loose tracks and with the threat of a Monza withdraw I really fear for our sport spirit because what will we be left with?.. Russia? China? Middle east?..with a splattering of Europe races and one in the far southern hemisphere. In the words of the great doctor smith….we’re doomed!!!!!

  12. All circuit designers need to do is take a look at the historical tracks around the world that are not used for F1. Watkins Glen, Road America, Reims, Brands Hatch, Donington Park, Oulton Park, Hockenheim (the original one)…. the list is long. All these circuits are based on the landscape they are set in, they follow the natural contours of elevation changes as quite often they were based on either public roads or park pathways. The flow of these circuits are such because they follow the path of least resistance much like a racing line does. It’s really quite simple.

      • VERY astute comment, Craig! “Technical” corners, though demanding the driver get it right, lest he lose valuable pace for the coming straight, is not at all the same as breathtaking, sweeping curves built IN ACCORDANCE with the layout provided by the natural landscape.

        It is the “Americanization” of F1. For those who avidly watch other sports, we have seen a dramatic shift in golf course design as well as jury-rigging of former masterpieces, like that of Augusta, where The Masters is played. Once upon a time golfers had to THINK their way around a course and constantly make value judgements based on risk versus reward. Now, it’s all about a long tee shot and a short iron to the green. Many people here in the U.S. recognize how mediocre the game has become, to whit: Jordan Speith’s record-tying performance in this past Masters. Sure, he tied Tiger Woods’ 21-under par performance, but look at the number of golfers behind him challenging that record score (and yes, the marshals inexplicably kept the course nice and soft until the final round)! What made Woods’ performance on the “old” course one for the ages was his winning by a whopping 12 shots with the remainder of the players’ scores in accordance with a, for the time, normal Masters.

        In F1, like golf (and impossibly straight American highways) the decision to force courses onto nature rather than build them WITH the landscape is helping to lessen the sport’s visceral impact on fans – and drivers. As advanced as he is for his age it would be tough for young Max V. to complete a successful season on, say, 1989 F1 circuits.

  13. Tilke circuits are shit. He clearly struggles to make them fast, challenging and safe. Which shouldn’t be so hard to achieve when he gets to start with a blank paper in the middle of the desert or unpopulated terraformed swamps. Neither can he make something which actually allows racing and overtaking.

    I wonder if future entrants have already realized that Tilke circuits guarantee nothing but astronomical costs and lavish paddocks which will remain poorly utilized most of the time.

    I could do much better.

  14. Great work Anil. i have enjoyed your contributions to both the site and the podcast.
    Your enthusiasm for Formula E is palpable. I need you to be strong and convince me to start watching. I have been holding off until the teams are allowed to start developing, as spec racing doesn’t really interest me.

    Hey Judge, can’t we get Anil he own Formula E focused podaacst? Im not saying every week, maybe just a 30-60 minute show the week before a race and another as a recap? Not that I don’t enjoy him on the F1 cast, just thought he might be better utilized. Spanners could host both, but I fear his negativity toward FE, and general tie-wearing sarcasm may not help to turn those of us riding the line.
    Nothing personal spanners, those detriments to a FE podcast are what keep the F1 podcast cackling.

    I think your analysis of the tracks is spot on. The narcissist-tin hat side of me has a real problem with every single track being designed and or re-designed by the same guy. Call it a conspiracy if you like, but Tilke seems to answer only to Bernie, and we all know where Bernie’s interest’s lie.
    My view is that the tracks are designed with the priority being perceived passing zones and camera angles, with a heavy focus on advertising space. Good for the money makers, bad for the fans.

  15. For me if you want overtaking you need two straights at each end of said straight you need a chicane. It works at Monza, it worked at Hockenheim (how I miss it!) and it even works in Abu Dhabi. It also works at Suzuka and Spa to some degree. It’s a common theme. On the other parts of the track it needs fast flowing corners, ideally some corners that tighten mid bend as well. What we don’t need is an excess of short straights and 90 degree corners – they create nothing but boredom.

    On that note I’m off to think about how great Hockenheim was recall the time I cycled the old track in ’94 reading all the chalk Senna tributes.

  16. I always ask myself “what makes a corner good for overtakes?”. Though I don’t have an answer to it, I think that formula 1 has evolved to be so perfect that corners’ racelines have to be only one, a very precise and calculated one. Hence the concertina effect. Drivers have no alternatives but to follow the preceding car nose to tail. Tilke’s tracks are suited for overtakes in two situations. When a car is faster in a straight long enough (therefore DRS). And when a car is so aerodinamically advantageous to admit fast cornering using a different line.
    Why races in the rain are so exciting? Even boring tracks gets spiced up with rain. Well, cars lose their aerodynamic advantage or it minimizes, and it’s on drivers. We need less downforce.

  17. not sure if i missed this being mentioned in either the article itself or the comments, but the monopoly held by hermann tillke on circuit designs is ridiculous and needs a stop. i’m pretty sure there are plenty more experts who have the capability of designing circuits altogether. don’t get me wrong, tillke is a great designer of tracks (like Istanbul), but as mentioned in the article, his latest tracks are just to bland with slow corners and long straights. not to mention they get kicked out of the calendar so early, you don’t really remember those races! (eg. korea, india)

  18. I was so excited when they announced the return of the Mexico Track, The fast right hand bend on to the pit straight is something to behold. Then I saw it, and my jaw dropped, they have ruined a classic track, another boring race on the way. I think F1 has become more about maximizing the amount of time you see a car going slow to improve advertising returns. China, Singapore, Russia, Abu Dabhi, Mexico, Bahrain should be put back into the boring hole they came out of. They are all flat, no character. I am Australian and I miss the Adelaide track, the Melbourne track is not bad but it has no real challenge, it feels to perfect. Estoril should be brought back, Imola to have its tamborello returned to it’s original glory and put back on the calendar.

    • @Jimmy

      So true… Having witnessed the fate of the Mexican track (but also Hockenheim, A1 Ring, etc.), I for one pray that Imola, Adelaide, Estoril and the like stay tight where they are and don’t make a peep, or else the Tilkerer may take a scythe at ’em, too.

      • My Favorite track in the current calendar is Brazil. The climb to the pit straight around the blind right hand bend is awesome. Much like how Imola goes up and down several times. I too miss Hockeheim, seeing them race through a Forrest with several chicanes sure beats watching them race around a hotel in a desert.. On a side note, they need to bring back full manual gearbox’s. Nothing better than seeing a driver with one hand on the wheel and the other reaching for the shifter.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.