Used to be a big Formula 1 fan as a kid, growing up in Niki Lauda's home town (of 2000 people). Formula 1 lost it when they moved away from the V10. And when they started putting kids in the cockpit instead of real men.

I think they lost it when they started dictating what kind of engines teams can use. Just limit the max fuel flow, and then let the teams go wild. Want to use a gas turbine? Go for it!

This! I have said this for years now. It would open up the sport to some real innovation.

The "kids" are on average a lot better at driving than most of the "adults" of 30 years ago. Pay drivers barely exist anymore, and even e.g. Stroll is not bad compared to the pay drivers of decades past, who were genuinely terrible.

V10s are overrated. They sound nice, yes, but ask the drivers who have actually driven them and they actually prefer the V6T hybrids in a lot of ways. It turns out that actually sitting inches away from the V10 with the associated noise and vibrations kinda sucks.

The best comparison I can think of is that in a Indycar race, it's every driver against each other, meanwhile in Formula 1 you can feel it's the whole team that's actually taking part in the race, and the car on track is just the tip of the iceberg of the process.

They're also both real time competitions whereas a bunch of other racing is turn based.

Honestly after going down to the local circle track to watch the Legend cars, modified , Whelen and actual honest to God GM B-bodies from the 80s, along with other open wheel and general cool shit, it's not hard IMO to find (and be directly involved in) actual racing than watch "NASCAR" Cup series or F1. Legend cars on a road track in particular kind of takes me back to watching the super bike races (which were about as real and hardcore actual racing as you'll get) at Mid Ohio.

They put a few full NASCAR races recorded solely from a drivers perspective up on youtube every once in a while. I never appreciated that sport until I started watching those. It's far more brutal and compact than I ever had expected with the shift in perspective making all the difference. It's "dudes racing for their lives."

In general the driver's perspective has always seemed underused to me. In F1 at least (where the cars are insanely stiff), unless there are overtakes in progress, watching from the trackside cameras just looks like cars driving round a track. Whereas from the driver's view you can see the car reacting to the track and the driver reacting to the car.

People complain a lot that the TV coverage spends too long on the driver's girlfriends. For me I think it spends too long looking at the cars (from the outside)!

I guess part of this is just that the image quality from onboards is not so sleek. But if it was up to me I think like 60-70% of the airtime would be from onboard.

Sounds like a killer app for VR- observing from the driver's perspective, being able to switch to whoever you want. How many cameras are in those cars I wonder?

If you have an Apple Vision Pro, you can. See https://www.lapz.io/, https://www.forbes.com/sites/barrycollins/2024/10/02/this-in..., https://youtube.com/watch?v=Z9OlYcfLmTY

They have a lot of cameras and they offer a paid service where you can stream from any driver's onboard. Unfortunately this is out of sync with the main broadcast which kinda kills its value for me...

I think VR would make most people sick as it's a very bumpy view.

I once got free tickets to a race (DTM, German touring cars), and to be honest I don't know why people go to them. You saw a small section of the track, and occasionally cars whizzed by. No idea who was in the lead, who was behind, or what was happening in the race in general. Much better to watch on TV.

Yeah I've never had any urge to go in person at all! Also, F1 is EXTREMELY expensive to watch in person at most of the venues. (I assume most other motorsports are at least cheap to spectate).

> unless there are overtakes in progress

I don't think F1 cars have overtaken each other since the 1990's.

If you want to see overtaking, stick to watching the Superbikes instead.

The poor advertisers don't get great exposure from the helmet cam shots, so we mostly get the boring, wide-angled shots instead on the broadcast.

They get fantastic exposure from the other onboard cameras though! The one by the air intake is the best view for spectating and probably one of the best for advertisers too.

Some of the most racing fun I've had in video games was actually NASCAR games.

The whole race was constant jostling for position. There was almost always someone within a car length/width, and zero room for error. From what I've seen on TV and YT, it seemed pretty spot on.

Unfortunately I was also bad at driving with a PS2 controller so I was the danger on the track.

Interesting.. I agree on the description but my experience was opposite. I enjoyed F1 much more, though I really enjoy all the technical stats and talks with the teams/engineers that develop the cars and find it to be an equal part of the whole thing as the actual racing itself.

And MX-5 Cup is better than both!

the corporate hi-tech "extravaganza" has only come recently with its rise in US popularity. While you are not wrong I think thats just one part of the sport. Indycar is just racing and strategy. F1 is technical development, racing, strategy, and team performance. I like both but while I find the racing better in Indy, I follow F1 much more closely because I really enjoy the technical side of the sport. I also think 10 teams (soon to be 11) and 20 drivers (soon to be 22) that race in every race makes it easier to stay invested throughout the season.

Your take is disingenuous.

At the 2025 Indy 500 they had Tom Brady driving laps in an Indy car engaged in banter witb the broadcast team up before the race started. Then a US military propaganda moment flying Blackhawk helos over the track to titillate their target audience.

I think the GP poster was referring to the actual race, and not the peripheral parts of the event -- I don't know much about racing in general, but even with the extra "propaganda" you mention, they didn't seem disingenuous

I watch both here and there, not every race. Both Indy and F1 have very similar format with the "peripheral" parts.

OP had to have been referring to the "peripheral" parts of the race, as it's the only time celebs are trotted out.

They don't have Ja Rule calling the action during F1 races; they aren't getting Ja Rules input when there is a crash.

The celebrities are nowhere to be found during the actual F1 race.

I followed Indycar this past season, watched nearly every race and had planned on attending a race but then didn't make the trip. I'm not sure what Indycar is trying to be, tbh. The Indy 500 is a spectacle, the rest of the season is not nearly as interesting. There's some good racing, but F1 is more technically interesting and maybe better overall. NASCAR is boring as hell, just stage-managed bullshit like pro wrestling and I have not followed it in over 20 years.