new proposred 07 F1 chassis

[racer2c]

:cry: A non functioning rear wing for advertising purposes? what is this the IRL? This is an F1 throughbreed, not Pontiac Grand Am with fake hoodscoops !

I just got sick to my stomach. :)

[oddlycalm]

:cry: A non functioning rear wing for advertising purposes? what is this the IRL? This is an F1 throughbreed, not Pontiac Grand Am with fake hoodscoops ! Agreed, but is your position that they can ignore the commercial aspects at a time when tobacco money is on the wane? Given that functional wings are a problem what do you suggest?

oc

[racer2c]

Agreed, but is your position that they can ignore the commercial aspects at a time when tobacco money is on the wane? Given that functional wings are a problem what do you suggest?

oc

Put fenders on them and call them stock cars? :gomer:


I maintain that F1 has gone through formulae that allows for functional single wings and didn't inhibit slip stream passing. the dual wing approach just seems to be an excuse so that they don't get labeled as reverting back to 1989. I'd rather see old aero tech that would allow for a single functional wing with large advertising space than 2006's version of Tyrrell's P34 or a Brabham BT46B. Although I do applaud change and adventures in engineering and the dual wing is growing on me. :eek:

[Ankf00]

Well not a completely non-functional wing, still use them to balance the car out as you wish, but weak enough to generate far less turbulence than at present. The ground-effects should be generating the vast majority of downforce.

If the car is more dependent upon mechanical grip and groundeffects DF then the cars will be much more stable in the corners than they are now.

Also to balance out the lack of drag from the aerofoils, you can widen the track again to create more frontal surface area, and in addition it would increase mechanical grip...

[Methanolandbrats]

Did'nt they try really fast ground effects cars? Problem was they were too dangerous because when they got sideways they turned into frisbees.

[oddlycalm]

Did'nt they try really fast ground effects cars? Problem was they were too dangerous because when they got sideways they turned into frisbees. Pretty much true of any aero-based formula, including the current specs. Get it sideways and it's all bets off.

oc

[TrueBrit]

Did'nt they try really fast ground effects cars? Problem was they were too dangerous because when they got sideways they turned into frisbees.


Tell that to Ronnie Peterson in his Lotus 79 or Gilles Villeneuve in his 312-T4...

[Methanolandbrats]

Tell that to Ronnie Peterson in his Lotus 79 or Gilles Villeneuve in his 312-T4... What era was it when they threw a few over the fences....one I remember in France....late 70s, early 80s?

[TrueBrit]

What era was it when they threw a few over the fences....one I remember in France....late 70s, early 80s?

It might have been early/mid 80's after the FIA banned sliding skirts so all the teams put hydraulics on the cars that dropped them down onto the fixed skirts that were still allowed...I remember reading an article at the time talking about how ridiculous it all was that the FIA had mandated a minimum ride-height that was only measured at rest, after all, how does one go about measuring ride-height at 180 mph down the Hangar Straight?...After every session all the cars would come into the pits really slowly to allow the cars to pump themselves back up to the minimum height that was checked at the pit entrance...Gilles Villeneuve, of all people, complained that this turned these otherwise highly sophisticated pieces of machinery into nothing more than 700hp go-karts, where the only suspension travel was from the flex in the tyre walls....

[oddlycalm]

The only way to totally get rid of the "frisbee" effect is to ditch the aero designs completely. Any car with aero downforce that gets sideways to the airflow more than 15%-20% will lose a great deal of downforce and if you come around farther than that you lose it all. It's the same with all airfoils and it's used as a tool by pilots everyday when they crab (turn the plane sideways a certain amount) to lose altitude quickly as the airfoil loses lift or conversely crab into a crosswind to retain stability.

Mansell came out and said he believes that driver aids that prevent driver mistakes are a bigger issue.
Nigel Mansell "They are all looking at it from the wrong point of view," explained Mansell. "They are blaming the cars for the aero problem. With the computer age, when was the last time a computer missed a gear? When was the last time a computer spun the wheel at the wrong time without traction control? Drivers now don't make mistakes unless they make a complete balls up."

[coolhand]

This discussion reminds me of what i have always thought.

How close is F1 racing towards cars that are driven by a computer? I honestly think that by next season they can have cars that are preprogrammed to go around the track faster then they can with drivers. I dont know how they would overtake but they are at that point.