Has Formula One Ever Originated an Innovation?

Is it better to create something, or to perfect it?

It's a tough call. After all, if someone didn't create something in the first place, there'd be nothing to perfect. Its a sort of a "chicken or the egg" kind of thing.

What am I getting at with this? Well, a look back at racing history has found that F1 did not originate many of its defining innovations. And by "defining" I mean the obvious things: Aerodynamics, safety, etc.

Ah, I can hear the F1 fans going mad with righteous indignation. How DARE I imply F1 has never been innovative!

Well, actually, anyone getting annoyed at this point must've skipped over the opening of this entry.

But let's take a close look at the matter.

Aerodynamics

Did F1 innovate this idea? Of course not. It'd been used for years by airplanes before it ever found its way into F1!

But even if we cast aside airplane wings and focus on CAR wings, F1 STILL didn't originate this brilliant idea, which is often considered its crowning achievement.

The very first wing ever meant to push a car into pavement was not on Colin Chapman's Lotus 49. It was mounted on a Porsche 550 by Michael May in 1956. Although, May's competitors convinced race organizers to block him from entry.

The next car to feature a wing was STILL not the famous Lotus 49, but Jim Hall's Chaparral 2E Can-Am car in 1966!

The next year, he brought the 2F to Le Mans, complete with wing, and not long thereafter is when Colin Chapman decided to add wings to the Lotus 49.

Jim Hall's Chaparrals were also the first cars to investigate ground effect aerodynamics, an innovation often claimed to have been first applied to the Lotus 78.

In truth, the 78 was simply the first car to make SUCCESSFUL application of ground effects.

Safety

Touchy subject, here. There's so many little things that contribute to safety, that it's impossible to say F1 never originated any ideas.

Every major racing series has originated SOME idea in regards to safety, after all. So let's just stick to the obvious thing: breakaway pieces.

It's hard to make a call on this one, as it seems both US IndyCars and Europe's F1 cars were figuring this out around the same time, but close analysis reveals that the US IndyCars just barely won out.

Breakaway crash structures first began appearing on F1 cars in the 70s. But after the Indy Roadster proved to be the OPPOSITE of what was needed, breakaway structure were being looked at in the US as early as the 50s, and began appearing at the beginning of the 60s.

F1 and IndyCar seemed to work out most of the kinks around the same time, but F1 figured out the idea of the protective tub around the driver first, which would ultimately perfect the idea.

However, the high speeds of the Indianapolis Motor Speedway forced US IndyCar teams to think up the base concept almost a decade ahead of Formula One.

On a smaller note, CART IndyCars had used been using raised cockpit edges for well over a decade before F1 applied them in 1996.

Those are the most obvious things, but there's one more thing to think about:

Traction control

That's right, THE ULTIMATE F1 innovation! The one thing F1 is the undisputed creator of! WHY is F1 so strongly credited with this development?!

Because they really did originate it. Its the one OBVIOUS innovation that was first applied IN Formula One. All of my research has turned up no evidence of the idea ever being tried before its arrival in F1.

So give F1 their dues there. Traction control is definitely theirs. But why do they claim to have innovated the other ideas?

Well, quite simply, they subscribe to the aforementioned idea: That perfection is at least as important as originating an idea.

I could go on about this and cite other innovations F1 is credited with creating, but which they actually only perfected: Active suspension (briefly), anti-lock brakes, etc. But there isn't much point in it. The above sums it up.

How do you feel about this? Do you feel that the perfection of an idea is more important than the origin of the idea, and therefore F1 deserves the credit they take? Or do you think the origins are more important, and therefore F1 is being arrogant?

...I think I just opened one helluva can of worms.