GPWizard F1 Forum
F1 News & Discussions => Pit Pass => Topic started by: cosworth151 on February 25, 2016, 12:48:51 PM
-
The FIA has heard the calls from many fans to reduce the effects of aero on racing and responded.....
With more aero!
The 2017 cars will have bigger wings & diffusers. Oh, well......
http://www.racer.com/more/viewpoints/item/126420-analysis-f1-s-2017-tech-changes
-
Without knowing the engine specs, but knowing that customer teams are going to get inferior designs, more aero is the only way a team can differentiate their car to create a competitive advantage.
-
I was thinking just the opposite. Customer engines can be the same by regulation. Small teams will never have access to supercomputers and advanced Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) software needed to maximize aero.
-
I was thinking just the opposite. Customer engines can be the same by regulation. Small teams will never have access to supercomputers and advanced Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) software needed to maximize aero.
Totally agree. Less aero is more ironically...
-
I was thinking just the opposite. Customer engines can be the same by regulation. Small teams will never have access to supercomputers and advanced Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) software needed to maximize aero.
I agree, customer engines should be identical to works engines. I think it's awful that the suppliers are allowed to sell inferior engines. I'd like to see a rule that dictates if there is a shortage of latest spec engines, then the works team gets them LAST, not first.
With engines being 'equal', then I agree with less aero.
But since that won't happen, the only chance a midfield team has is a bright idea on the aero front (Brawn anyone?)
-
Brawn's journey from worst to first was a two step process:
1. Ditch the worthless Honda lump.
2. Replace it with a Mercedes unit.
;)
-
And trick out the diffuser... ;)
-
I agree, customer engines should be identical to works engines. I think it's awful that the suppliers are allowed to sell inferior engines. I'd like to see a rule that dictates if there is a shortage of latest spec engines, then the works team gets them LAST, not first.
Like that's ever going to happen, the manufacturers spend way more than the customer teams can pay in engine development so no benefits they're gone.
With engines being 'equal', then I agree with less aero.
But since that won't happen, the only chance a midfield team has is a bright idea on the aero front (Brawn anyone?)
That's a really bad example Jeri, Honda paid hundreds of millions for that chassis/aero development which simply got the Merc V8 bolted to it. Towards the end of the season Brawn started to lose ground to the others because they had no money to continue development. So much for the chances of even the 2nd tier, let alone the 3rd tier, in F1 with an aero arms race. The only ones likely to benefit among the non works teams, as far as I can see, are Red Bull.
-
Brawn's journey from worst to first was a two step process:
1. Ditch the worthless Honda lump.
2. Replace it with a Mercedes unit.
;)
That's the point though, if the engine is the only thing that matters, then why bother racing if you don't have the best engine? Without aero there's nothing a team can do except hope for bad luck.
-
There are ways to get down force that don't kill overtaking. Bigger wings will only make it worse.
-
Ground effects. If they pave every run-off in F1, they could safely bring back ground effects since the cars wouldn't fly to space every time they went off track like before. They're half way there already. :DntKnw:
-
They started so well with wider tyres, before it all went downhill very quickly. They will never learn. The governing body and the teams have to stop reinventing the wheel and actually cut down on aero dependency if they want this sport to regain some of its lost excitement.
-
NASCAR greatly lowered the downforce on their Cup cars this year. The racing has been much better, much more competitive. The in-car shots show the drivers actually fighting the cars to keep them in line.
-
Go back to the F1 cigar cars and we'd have the best racing in decades (no aero). But the wings are where the stickers are mostly, so.... >:(
-
I did notice that when Ferrari tested the "halo" structure on Kimi's car at Barcelona that they already had sponsor stickers on it.
-
An interesting article to say the least.
I think that customer engines need to be identical to the works team, that is an easy one.
I think the less aero involved is a good idea. What would make the most sense to me in that area would require a bit if research by an outsider in all probability. I think that it would be wise to reduce what ever it is, and it may involve several factors in the aero package, that reduces the ability of a following car to get close to the car ahead in the corners.
We have been listening to drivers voice their problems with this - losing down-force in the corners, preventing them from being close enough in many instances to exit a corner close enough to put a move on the car ahead before, or at the next corner.
Years ago, before the aeros got so high tech, this was seldom, if ever, an issue. I recall racing as recent as the early 2000s, in which cars would even over-take on the exit of a corner, having benefited from following the leading car closely through the corner.
-
I did notice that when Ferrari tested the "halo" structure on Kimi's car at Barcelona that they already had sponsor stickers on it.
Did you also notice that for some strange reason they removed the sponsor stickers after just the first run - must have been some contract no-no.