It is currently Mon Jul 13, 2020 10:37 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
 Post subject: FIA Changes for 2017
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 12:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:42 pm
Posts: 2270
Here's the statement:

http://www.fia.com/news/fia-statement-f ... a-one-cars

This is the overview of the bodywork changes:





Overall, I'm cautiously optimistic..

_________________
Top Three Team Champions 2017 (With Jezza13)
Group Pick 'Em Champion: 2016 & 2019


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 1:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2011 6:43 pm
Posts: 192
Location: Greece
It is whatever for me I guess. I'll wait and see before I pass judgement but I am a bit concerned about the added aero.

My main gripe and what I cannot stand atm is the fuel capacity and fuel flow. They might do something about the capacity as I am reading on autosport today but fuel flow has to be removed as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 1:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 5248
Happy they've increased the weight, that'll help the bigger guys. Hate the unnecessary changes to the qualifying format.

I'll reserve judgement on the rest until I see it in action.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 1:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:07 pm
Posts: 7796
Lotus49 wrote:
Happy they've increased the weight, that'll help the bigger guys. Hate the unnecessary changes to the qualifying format.

I'll reserve judgement on the rest until I see it in action.

I don't like that they are constantly increasing minimum weight. They have added 122 kg since 2010. That's 20% increase.

_________________
eeee


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 1:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 10289
Location: Ireland
Most of the '17 regs seem fine. I just wish they would do away with the ridiculous front wings, they're just a hugely expensive drawback. But the teams have invested so much time and money into perfecting them over the years that they can't see any other way.

Give me this wing any day over the current monstrosities
Image
http://www.f1racinggrid.co.uk/mclaren-mp44/

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost


Last edited by mcdo on Wed Feb 24, 2016 1:52 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 1:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:07 pm
Posts: 7796
mcdo wrote:
Most of the '17 regs seem fine. I just wish they would do away with the ridiculous front wings, they're just a hugely expensive drawback. But the teams have invested so much time and money into perfecting them over the years that they can't see any other way.

Give me this wing any day over the current monstrosities
Image
http://www.f1racinggrid.co.uk/mclaren-mp44/

It's not just front wing. It's whole car aero that depends on front wing design.

https://tianyizf1.files.wordpress.com/2 ... us9f6h.gif

You can read more about it here: https://tianyizf1.wordpress.com/tag/y250-vortex/

_________________
eeee


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 1:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 10289
Location: Ireland
dizlexik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Most of the '17 regs seem fine. I just wish they would do away with the ridiculous front wings, they're just a hugely expensive drawback. But the teams have invested so much time and money into perfecting them over the years that they can't see any other way.

Give me this wing any day over the current monstrosities
Image
http://www.f1racinggrid.co.uk/mclaren-mp44/

It's not just front wing. It's whole car aero that depends on front wing design.

https://tianyizf1.files.wordpress.com/2 ... us9f6h.gif

You can read more about it here: https://tianyizf1.wordpress.com/tag/y250-vortex/

I know that, but what should it matter? Do away with the crazy front wings and let a simple wing dictate the aero further downstream.

Less emphasis on aero, more emphasis on mechanical grip is the way to go.

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 2:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 5248
dizlexik wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Happy they've increased the weight, that'll help the bigger guys. Hate the unnecessary changes to the qualifying format.

I'll reserve judgement on the rest until I see it in action.

I don't like that they are constantly increasing minimum weight. They have added 122 kg since 2010. That's 20% increase.


Don't these PU's weigh considerably more than the V8's?.

Doesn't bother me anyway really. I'm just happy the bigger guys won't be penalized as much as they are now(hopefully anyway).

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 2:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:07 pm
Posts: 7796
mcdo wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Most of the '17 regs seem fine. I just wish they would do away with the ridiculous front wings, they're just a hugely expensive drawback. But the teams have invested so much time and money into perfecting them over the years that they can't see any other way.

Give me this wing any day over the current monstrosities
Image
http://www.f1racinggrid.co.uk/mclaren-mp44/

It's not just front wing. It's whole car aero that depends on front wing design.

https://tianyizf1.files.wordpress.com/2 ... us9f6h.gif

You can read more about it here: https://tianyizf1.wordpress.com/tag/y250-vortex/

I know that, but what should it matter? Do away with the crazy front wings and let a simple wing dictate the aero further downstream.

Less emphasis on aero, more emphasis on mechanical grip is the way to go.

How would you increase mechanical grip to maintain the same cornering speeds?

_________________
eeee


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 3:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 10289
Location: Ireland
dizlexik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Most of the '17 regs seem fine. I just wish they would do away with the ridiculous front wings, they're just a hugely expensive drawback. But the teams have invested so much time and money into perfecting them over the years that they can't see any other way.

Give me this wing any day over the current monstrosities
Image
http://www.f1racinggrid.co.uk/mclaren-mp44/

It's not just front wing. It's whole car aero that depends on front wing design.

https://tianyizf1.files.wordpress.com/2 ... us9f6h.gif

You can read more about it here: https://tianyizf1.wordpress.com/tag/y250-vortex/

I know that, but what should it matter? Do away with the crazy front wings and let a simple wing dictate the aero further downstream.

Less emphasis on aero, more emphasis on mechanical grip is the way to go.

How would you increase mechanical grip to maintain the same cornering speeds?

Their bigger tyre plans are a good start. Focusing on underfloor aero while restricting wings would be better.

Anyway... why are cornering speeds important? Making F1 cars faster by no means makes them better to watch or makes the racing any way more entertaining. People are putting focus on the wrong areas. Cornering speeds... I couldn't give a toss about them myself

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 3:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 4594
Bargeboards should be banned as well. It's yet another item that is stuck on the car and can have a huge effect on the car. The teams with all the money run different ones all the time whereas the smaller teams simply can't do this. They don't have any real overlap to road cars, (I personally don't think F1 should to be honest, but F1 teams seem to want this) plus they are something than can easily be broken off causing a the car to perform badly and leaving some nice sharp carbon to spoil someone else's race.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Instagram @simply_italian_car_pics


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 3:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:07 pm
Posts: 7796
mcdo wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Most of the '17 regs seem fine. I just wish they would do away with the ridiculous front wings, they're just a hugely expensive drawback. But the teams have invested so much time and money into perfecting them over the years that they can't see any other way.

Give me this wing any day over the current monstrosities
Image
http://www.f1racinggrid.co.uk/mclaren-mp44/

It's not just front wing. It's whole car aero that depends on front wing design.

https://tianyizf1.files.wordpress.com/2 ... us9f6h.gif

You can read more about it here: https://tianyizf1.wordpress.com/tag/y250-vortex/

I know that, but what should it matter? Do away with the crazy front wings and let a simple wing dictate the aero further downstream.

Less emphasis on aero, more emphasis on mechanical grip is the way to go.

How would you increase mechanical grip to maintain the same cornering speeds?

Their bigger tyre plans are a good start. Focusing on underfloor aero while restricting wings would be better.

Anyway... why are cornering speeds important? Making F1 cars faster by no means makes them better to watch or makes the racing any way more entertaining. People are putting focus on the wrong areas. Cornering speeds... I couldn't give a toss about them myself

But this is why F1 cars are quick on single lap. On straight some road Lambos or Ferraris are faster.

_________________
eeee


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 4:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 1:00 pm
Posts: 4825
Asphalt_World wrote:
Bargeboards should be banned as well. It's yet another item that is stuck on the car and can have a huge effect on the car. The teams with all the money run different ones all the time whereas the smaller teams simply can't do this. They don't have any real overlap to road cars, (I personally don't think F1 should to be honest, but F1 teams seem to want this) plus they are something than can easily be broken off causing a the car to perform badly and leaving some nice sharp carbon to spoil someone else's race.

Are you talking about front wing endplates? I don't recall ever seeing bargeboards being broken that often.

If you do mean bargeboards then you're going to be disappointed because the area where they are is going to be less restricted with the 2017 rules according to the link in the OP so they'll probably get bigger.

Front wing endplates are going to simplified according to the same press release.

_________________
{Insert clever sig line here}


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 4:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 4594
RaggedMan wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:
Bargeboards should be banned as well. It's yet another item that is stuck on the car and can have a huge effect on the car. The teams with all the money run different ones all the time whereas the smaller teams simply can't do this. They don't have any real overlap to road cars, (I personally don't think F1 should to be honest, but F1 teams seem to want this) plus they are something than can easily be broken off causing a the car to perform badly and leaving some nice sharp carbon to spoil someone else's race.

Are you talking about front wing endplates? I don't recall ever seeing bargeboards being broken that often.

If you do mean bargeboards then you're going to be disappointed because the area where they are is going to be less restricted with the 2017 rules according to the link in the OP so they'll probably get bigger.

Front wing endplates are going to simplified according to the same press release.


I do mean bargeboards, I know they are not often knocked off, but they seem a pointless addition. They have no relevance anywhere else which F1 wants things to be, and they are another area the big teams can exploit more than the smaller teams. Just look at the ones Merc are testing!

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Instagram @simply_italian_car_pics


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 4:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 4594
Wider tyres are good, not simply because we need the cars to corner faster, but a move to more mechanical grip over aero grip should help cars follow closer to each other in the corners. This will allow for more passing chances.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Instagram @simply_italian_car_pics


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 4:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 10289
Location: Ireland
dizlexik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
It's not just front wing. It's whole car aero that depends on front wing design.

https://tianyizf1.files.wordpress.com/2 ... us9f6h.gif

You can read more about it here: https://tianyizf1.wordpress.com/tag/y250-vortex/

I know that, but what should it matter? Do away with the crazy front wings and let a simple wing dictate the aero further downstream.

Less emphasis on aero, more emphasis on mechanical grip is the way to go.

How would you increase mechanical grip to maintain the same cornering speeds?

Their bigger tyre plans are a good start. Focusing on underfloor aero while restricting wings would be better.

Anyway... why are cornering speeds important? Making F1 cars faster by no means makes them better to watch or makes the racing any way more entertaining. People are putting focus on the wrong areas. Cornering speeds... I couldn't give a toss about them myself

But this is why F1 cars are quick on single lap. On straight some road Lambos or Ferraris are faster.

The car in the photo above went plenty fast over a single lap and, by comparison to today, that is pretty basic aero. They don't need the current monstrous front wings to pump out the laptimes.

We can always give them something similar to the front wing of the car that still holds a few lap records

Image
http://www.statsf1.com/en/ferrari-f2004.aspx

Obviously more complex than the McLaren above but nothing like what we have today. Took the corners just fine

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 4:17 pm 
Online

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 17032
I loathe regulations designed to produce good aesthetics. I also think the cars at 722kg are getting quite fat. Personally I have no issue with smaller drivers having a slight advantage. Certainly being heavier set or taller is advantage in most other sports and I see no action to equalize there.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 4:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:07 pm
Posts: 7796
mcdo wrote:
The car in the photo above went plenty fast over a single lap and, by comparison to today, that is pretty basic aero. They don't need the current monstrous front wings to pump out the laptimes.

We can always give them something similar to the front wing of the car that still holds a few lap records

Image
http://www.statsf1.com/en/ferrari-f2004.aspx

Obviously more complex than the McLaren above but nothing like what we have today. Took the corners just fine

This isn't exactly the same wing as that McLaren. It's probably closer to how wings looks now than the McLaren.

_________________
eeee


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 4:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 10289
Location: Ireland
dizlexik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
The car in the photo above went plenty fast over a single lap and, by comparison to today, that is pretty basic aero. They don't need the current monstrous front wings to pump out the laptimes.

We can always give them something similar to the front wing of the car that still holds a few lap records

Image
http://www.statsf1.com/en/ferrari-f2004.aspx

Obviously more complex than the McLaren above but nothing like what we have today. Took the corners just fine

This isn't exactly the same wing as that McLaren. It's probably closer to how wings looks now than the McLaren.

Nothing to do with my point but whatever

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 5:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 8072
Text "driver of the day is (driver number)" to Gimmimoremoney. Texts cost £1 plus your normal network rate, and millions of morons will text.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 5:05 pm 
Just make the frontwing narrower, and less plowlike. Generally the rear wing should be made wider and lower, the frontwing should not be the wider wing. The cars should be shorter and wider overall, atleast we get wider with the new tyres.

Pretty much like the F2004 and those aerospeccs looks good.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 5:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:07 pm
Posts: 7796
mcdo wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
The car in the photo above went plenty fast over a single lap and, by comparison to today, that is pretty basic aero. They don't need the current monstrous front wings to pump out the laptimes.

We can always give them something similar to the front wing of the car that still holds a few lap records

Image
http://www.statsf1.com/en/ferrari-f2004.aspx

Obviously more complex than the McLaren above but nothing like what we have today. Took the corners just fine

This isn't exactly the same wing as that McLaren. It's probably closer to how wings looks now than the McLaren.

Nothing to do with my point but whatever

How so? I thought you wanted simple wings?

_________________
eeee


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 5:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 10289
Location: Ireland
dizlexik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
The car in the photo above went plenty fast over a single lap and, by comparison to today, that is pretty basic aero. They don't need the current monstrous front wings to pump out the laptimes.

We can always give them something similar to the front wing of the car that still holds a few lap records

Image
http://www.statsf1.com/en/ferrari-f2004.aspx

Obviously more complex than the McLaren above but nothing like what we have today. Took the corners just fine

This isn't exactly the same wing as that McLaren. It's probably closer to how wings looks now than the McLaren.

Nothing to do with my point but whatever

How so? I thought you wanted simple wings?

Look at that and look at this monstrosity

Image


Ideally I would prefer a single or double element front wing with simple endplates. And the width to be within the front two tyres. But at a push I'd take the F2004-style as a compromise.

The current wings are expensive, silly looking and do the opposite of everything they're always harping on about with regards to overtaking

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 5:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:07 pm
Posts: 7796
mcdo wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
The car in the photo above went plenty fast over a single lap and, by comparison to today, that is pretty basic aero. They don't need the current monstrous front wings to pump out the laptimes.

We can always give them something similar to the front wing of the car that still holds a few lap records

Image
http://www.statsf1.com/en/ferrari-f2004.aspx

Obviously more complex than the McLaren above but nothing like what we have today. Took the corners just fine

This isn't exactly the same wing as that McLaren. It's probably closer to how wings looks now than the McLaren.

Nothing to do with my point but whatever

How so? I thought you wanted simple wings?

Look at that and look at this monstrosity

Image


Ideally I would prefer a single or double element front wing with simple endplates. And the width to be within the front two tyres. But at a push I'd take the F2004-style as a compromise.

The current wings are expensive, silly looking and do the opposite of everything they're always harping on about with regards to overtaking

Silly looking, maybe, but the cars are still much simpler than the 2008 ones. My point is that F1 teams are incredibly good at finding ways to spend a lot of money. Look they simplified aero regulations in 2009 and guess what teams spend even more or aero than before.
Image

Source: wikipedia commons

_________________
eeee


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 6:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 25158
mcdo wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
The car in the photo above went plenty fast over a single lap and, by comparison to today, that is pretty basic aero. They don't need the current monstrous front wings to pump out the laptimes.

We can always give them something similar to the front wing of the car that still holds a few lap records

Image
http://www.statsf1.com/en/ferrari-f2004.aspx

Obviously more complex than the McLaren above but nothing like what we have today. Took the corners just fine

This isn't exactly the same wing as that McLaren. It's probably closer to how wings looks now than the McLaren.

Nothing to do with my point but whatever

How so? I thought you wanted simple wings?

Look at that and look at this monstrosity

Image


Ideally I would prefer a single or double element front wing with simple endplates. And the width to be within the front two tyres. But at a push I'd take the F2004-style as a compromise.

The current wings are expensive, silly looking and do the opposite of everything they're always harping on about with regards to overtaking

I'm with you on this. I think the front wings more than anything give lie to the claim that F1 wants to make things road relevant. I'm sure I read somewhere that they are one of the most expensive parts on the car and are incredibly sensitive to dirty air. They work best with nothing in front of the car, which just gives the car in front an advantage in any overtaking scenario.

I think simpler front wings are desirable, but I know the teams are against it as they form one of the biggest differentiators between the cars


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: FIA Changes for 2017
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2016 2:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 1:22 am
Posts: 1849
Location: Brisbane, Australia
All looks good to me. Wider tyres, wider floor, wider body work. Lots of little simplifications. Smart move I think. I don't really see anything that I don't like. Hairpins in Monaco might be a little tight two cars wide.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
Podiums: 1st Spa '16, 1st Bahrain '15, 1st China '14, 1st Malaysia '14
Championship position 2014: 13th | | 2015: 10th (heading the right way)
PF1 Autosport GP Predictor 2014: Second 2015: Second


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: FIA Changes for 2017
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2016 6:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 10:37 am
Posts: 1622
I'm another one for simple front wings.

Ex-driver pundits who know what they're talking about, as well as current drivers for that matter, have been saying for years that they are probably the biggest reason for the difficulty in following the car in front.

Simplify the front wing and make up for the grip lost with under-body aero and wider tyres, it's not a difficult thing to do.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2016 8:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2003 1:36 pm
Posts: 2412
moby wrote:
Text "driver of the day is (driver number)" to Gimmimoremoney. Texts cost £1 plus your normal network rate, and millions of morons will text.


Pity Maldo's gone, you just know there would be a facebook campaign to make him driver of the day every weekend.

_________________
Shoot999: "And anyone who puts a Y on the end of his name as a nickname should be punched in the face repeatedly."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2016 10:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 11443
mcdo wrote:
Look at that and look at this monstrosity

Image



I don't really understand what's so monstrous about that. It is fantastically detailed and fit for purpose. I like it.

_________________
Go Vandoorne :( - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2016 10:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 10289
Location: Ireland
dizlexik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
This isn't exactly the same wing as that McLaren. It's probably closer to how wings looks now than the McLaren.

Nothing to do with my point but whatever

How so? I thought you wanted simple wings?

Look at that and look at this monstrosity

Image


Ideally I would prefer a single or double element front wing with simple endplates. And the width to be within the front two tyres. But at a push I'd take the F2004-style as a compromise.

The current wings are expensive, silly looking and do the opposite of everything they're always harping on about with regards to overtaking

Silly looking, maybe, but the cars are still much simpler than the 2008 ones. My point is that F1 teams are incredibly good at finding ways to spend a lot of money. Look they simplified aero regulations in 2009 and guess what teams spend even more or aero than before.
Image

Source: wikipedia commons

That maybe be so but it has very little to do with my point. Yes, the teams are very good at finding aero and spending a lot of money in doing so. Give them a simple front wing and let them find all the aero they want behind it

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2016 10:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:07 pm
Posts: 7796
mcdo wrote:
That maybe be so but it has very little to do with my point. Yes, the teams are very good at finding aero and spending a lot of money in doing so. Give them a simple front wing and let them find all the aero they want behind it

In this case it doesn't seem to serve any purpose, other than ascetics. Even with simple wing, other parts of the car as a whole will probably be still very sensitive to any distribution cause by following other cars. Beside that as someone said they wings look well with all the details. The front wing look as such is very minor issue now anyway.

_________________
eeee


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: FIA Changes for 2017
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2016 10:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 8072
Just a thought on front wings, but why should a car go round a corner like its on rails? That is where driver skill comes into its own. You want entertainment..


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2016 10:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 10289
Location: Ireland
dizlexik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
That maybe be so but it has very little to do with my point. Yes, the teams are very good at finding aero and spending a lot of money in doing so. Give them a simple front wing and let them find all the aero they want behind it

In this case it doesn't seem to serve any purpose, other than ascetics. Even with simple wing, other parts of the car as a whole will probably be still very sensitive to any distribution cause by following other cars. Beside that as someone said they wings look well with all the details. The front wing look as such is very minor issue now anyway.

As stated by Zoue and JohnnyGuitar above, they're too sensitive to dirty air. They're detrimental to following in the wake of a car in front. And God forbid a driver taps off another car - 4/5 elements lost in an instant. They're overdeveloped, big and clunky and do nothing for actual racing

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: FIA Changes for 2017
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2003 1:36 pm
Posts: 2412
Make them out of aluminium. Problem solved.

_________________
Shoot999: "And anyone who puts a Y on the end of his name as a nickname should be punched in the face repeatedly."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 11443
mcdo wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
That maybe be so but it has very little to do with my point. Yes, the teams are very good at finding aero and spending a lot of money in doing so. Give them a simple front wing and let them find all the aero they want behind it

In this case it doesn't seem to serve any purpose, other than ascetics. Even with simple wing, other parts of the car as a whole will probably be still very sensitive to any distribution cause by following other cars. Beside that as someone said they wings look well with all the details. The front wing look as such is very minor issue now anyway.

As stated by Zoue and JohnnyGuitar above, they're too sensitive to dirty air. They're detrimental to following in the wake of a car in front. And God forbid a driver taps off another car - 4/5 elements lost in an instant. They're overdeveloped, big and clunky and do nothing for actual racing


They're beautifully detailed, fit for purpose and help make the car go as fast as possible within the regulations.

_________________
Go Vandoorne :( - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 1:22 am
Posts: 1849
Location: Brisbane, Australia
mds wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Look at that and look at this monstrosity

Image



I don't really understand what's so monstrous about that. It is fantastically detailed and fit for purpose. I like it.

I agree with you 100% they are beautiful and an incredible peice of engineering. Infinitely more impressive than a flat angled plank.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
Podiums: 1st Spa '16, 1st Bahrain '15, 1st China '14, 1st Malaysia '14
Championship position 2014: 13th | | 2015: 10th (heading the right way)
PF1 Autosport GP Predictor 2014: Second 2015: Second


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: FIA Changes for 2017
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 10289
Location: Ireland
That wing is one of the main reasons we have abominations like DRS

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: FIA Changes for 2017
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2016 12:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 11443
mcdo wrote:
That wing is one of the main reasons we have abominations like DRS


No, the regulations are. That wing is the best solution to the current regulations.

_________________
Go Vandoorne :( - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2016 12:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 25158
mds wrote:
mcdo wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
That maybe be so but it has very little to do with my point. Yes, the teams are very good at finding aero and spending a lot of money in doing so. Give them a simple front wing and let them find all the aero they want behind it

In this case it doesn't seem to serve any purpose, other than ascetics. Even with simple wing, other parts of the car as a whole will probably be still very sensitive to any distribution cause by following other cars. Beside that as someone said they wings look well with all the details. The front wing look as such is very minor issue now anyway.

As stated by Zoue and JohnnyGuitar above, they're too sensitive to dirty air. They're detrimental to following in the wake of a car in front. And God forbid a driver taps off another car - 4/5 elements lost in an instant. They're overdeveloped, big and clunky and do nothing for actual racing


They're beautifully detailed, fit for purpose and help make the car go as fast as possible within the regulations.

No-one's arguing they're not detailed - quite the contrary. They are impressive pieces of engineering. The question is how much they add to or detract from the actual racing. They may well make the cars go faster but the more complicated they are the more sensitive to airflow they become and the more difficult they make overtaking.

As far as regulations go, that's the point, surely. Of course they will be made if the regulations allow it, but when everyone in F1 is bemoaning costs as well as the difficulties encountered in overtaking, it seems a no-brainer that things like this, which are both ridiculously expensive and contribute quite heavily to overtaking difficulties, are put under the spotlight and questions asked as to whether they are actually fit for purpose


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: FIA Changes for 2017
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2016 1:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 10289
Location: Ireland
mds wrote:
mcdo wrote:
That wing is one of the main reasons we have abominations like DRS


No, the regulations are. That wing is the best solution to the current regulations.

What thread do you think this is?

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Battle Far, Bing [Bot], Junglist, yodasarmpit and 52 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group