2017 F1 car- first impressions
Discussion
Saw this link via Leo Parente
http://www.ams-mag.com/news/2017-f1-car-details-an...
Looks similar to F1 cars of mid 2000's
http://www.ams-mag.com/news/2017-f1-car-details-an...
Looks similar to F1 cars of mid 2000's
stew-S160 said:
Saw this link via Leo Parente
http://www.ams-mag.com/news/2017-f1-car-details-an...
Looks similar to F1 cars of mid 2000's
From the story: "The result is simply spectacular."http://www.ams-mag.com/news/2017-f1-car-details-an...
Looks similar to F1 cars of mid 2000's
Something of an overstatement...
IforB said:
Errrrr. Is that it?
What a collossal waste of time.
+1 seems a lot of media commentators are starting to lose their minds with the hyperbole due to nothing of interest to actually comment on.What a collossal waste of time.
The evolution of F1 into 2017 for me is heading towards a vague interest annually of the results of WDC and WCC.
What did you lot want, machine guns and smokescreens?
I'm not sure this source is credible, but taking it at face value I must voice my disappointment that the regulators haven't done more to reduce 'dirty air' effects.
Otherwise, game on- 200mm increase in width and 300/400mm tyres will look impressive.
Presumably this'll bring the cars towards lap record pace once again.
I'm not sure this source is credible, but taking it at face value I must voice my disappointment that the regulators haven't done more to reduce 'dirty air' effects.
Otherwise, game on- 200mm increase in width and 300/400mm tyres will look impressive.
Presumably this'll bring the cars towards lap record pace once again.
so, they are going to increase the cars dependants on Aero?
total fail is that is going to be the case.
mag said:
The new cars are expected to generate an additional 100 points of downforce - that's 30 percent more than the current cars.
and the front wing will be even more complex.total fail is that is going to be the case.
Edited by Scuffers on Thursday 10th December 14:03
Having a car that is 5s per lap quicker in Q3 is worth nothing if they are then pottering around 10s per lap off that pace in order to conserve fuel.
The wider rear wing will reduce turbulence for a following car, but the multi-element front wing will still result in a following car will being somewhat slower than a team mate in clean air going through corners.
However the wider rear wing will give an even bigger DRS boost, so perhaps there could be increased overtaking, albeit only down the pit straight.
The wider rear wing will reduce turbulence for a following car, but the multi-element front wing will still result in a following car will being somewhat slower than a team mate in clean air going through corners.
However the wider rear wing will give an even bigger DRS boost, so perhaps there could be increased overtaking, albeit only down the pit straight.
Eric Mc said:
You could build a 70s PERFORMANCE spec car without reverting to 70s SAFETY spec.
Not that I'm saying you should, of course.
Even if you wanted to do that, the problem is how you get there. If you change the rules back to what they were in the 70s, you'd end up with cars nothing like those of the 70s. I suspect with 70s regs and current understanding of aerodynamics and engine technology you could produce a car whose limits were defined by the ability of the driver to remain conscious. Not that I'm saying you should, of course.
I think there's probably something to be said for simplifying the aerodynamics in an attempt to make them less susceptible to dirty air - limit the number of wing elements whist increasing the size of the wings, that sort of thing. Maybe even severely limit the effectiveness of wings and allow more ground-effects if it can be done safety but that's a significant "if" unless you bring back full active suspension to maintain the ride height which isn't exactly going to help on the "cost" front.
Edited by kambites on Monday 14th December 19:26
Smollet said:
Go back to 70s spec. At least that allowed a certain freedom. Ok I know it won't happen but at least they looked different. Too much emphasis on aero has killed F1
Aero was at its infancy in the 70's and teams were still regarded as garagistas; they didn't have their own wind tunnels, no CFD, an army of aerodynamicts and designers as is now taken for granted today.How do you take away that wealth of knowledge and yet still be innovative and retain performance that many crave?
entropy said:
Aero was at its infancy in the 70's and teams were still regarded as garagistas; they didn't have their own wind tunnels, no CFD, an army of aerodynamicts and designers as is now taken for granted today.
How do you take away that wealth of knowledge and yet still be innovative and retain performance that many crave?
easy, mandate a std front wing, job done.How do you take away that wealth of knowledge and yet still be innovative and retain performance that many crave?
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff