What’s all this about Visor tear-offs?

I haven’t read every possible view of the visor tea-off issue but I initially found it a little strange given the proximity to safety that this device has.

Presumably the tear-offs were getting frequent in their use and these would flip and fly around in the vortices and lodge themselves in the brake ducts and air intakes of other cars. This would, obviously, cause issues with overheating and other concerns.

On the flip side of that argument, the proposed ban on visor tear-offs prompted a discussion of securing the discarded sheets inside the car which, then became a potential flammable device or fuel for a fire.

It was then proposed that the driver could only use two tear-offs per race but this all seemed incredibly near-sighted to me as vision is paramount and a driver should be able to use as many as they need in order to see clearly.

The FIA have reversed their stance on the issue as one of the mighty trump cards in the trinity of F1 trump cards (safety, cost, sustainability) was used to stop the FIA in their tracks…that being the safety trump card. The FIA’s Charlie Whiting said:

“I have decided, based on discussions with the drivers, they are likely to be put in more danger trying to dispose of tear-offs in the cockpit than they are from a tear-off on the track.

“With this in mind I felt the best thing to do was exercise common sense and ask the drivers to simply keep the amount of visors they use to an absolute minimum, bearing in mind of course that this will vary due to a number of factors.

“Based on this rationale we do not intend to make a report about any driver disposing of a tear-off on the track or in the pitlane.”

It seems logical to me as you wouldn’t want to impair a driver’s vision in any way. Perhaps this all plays into the canopy and other topics to increase safety and reduce the tear-off issue. At this point, are we simply going to create LMP1 cars with canopies and fenders? If so, let’s just watch Le Mans.


0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of

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

Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Paul KieferJr

Let’s also remember how long it takes to tear-off a visor and throw it away. Compare that to finding some pocket in the car and putting it in there. Remember that every second with your eyes off the road is that one second that could lead to an accident. I think you’ll see that throwing it away is more preferable to hunting down a pocket.


F1 merging with Le Mans and WEC? Possibly Indycars as well? I’d love that. Bring some capitalist consolidation and synergy to motor racing. Let it be bigger. I’m all for it. I don’t want mainstreaming or loss of diversity per se, but to me it’s a pity looking at what has become of the great races.


I remember in Supercross some of riders used to have on their goggles a motorized system in which it had a roll of clear film which they pressed a button to activate. I think the same system is used for the car cameras. I’m sure they can do something similar for the drivers.

the Late Idi Armin

there another reason for having movable wings, ducting that actually cools drivetrains instead of having to strike a balance between airflow, downforce and cooling and keeping trash out.


or…let’s just add another another button on the steering wheel that controls a rolling lens ala Indycar cams that rotates a circular lens into the drivers helmet, presses against a foam activated squeegee, uses re-cycled water from the eventual sprinkler systems, uses recycled electricity from the KERS to heat and re-laminate the visor shield, each driver gets 10 total ‘push-to-clean’ events during a race within the VRS (visor recycle system) designated area on track. All in the spirit of safety, cost savings and spicing up the show. There…simple and easy FIA potential solution.


You don’t need a button to turn the visor:
comment image

Paul Riseborough

Let the teams design brake and engine air intakes with debris guards if they think it’s a genuine issue. Of course it would make the cars slightly less aerodynamic efficient, but that’s an engineering decision each team can make for themselves.

Ian Finlay

So, tear-off pose a hazard to the cars? Okee-Dokee. But tons of klag? Nope no hazard there!