Discussion
In the run-up to this year's Spanish GP last week, we were treated several times to that incredible footage of Mansell and Senna running inches apart the first time the race was held at Catalunya, in 1991.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSD-VllWlYg
I used to think the cars of that era were plug-ugly and indeed still do, but just look how clean they look up against the current crop. Putting them side by side would be like parking Scarlett Johansson next to Ann Widdecombe.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSD-VllWlYg
I used to think the cars of that era were plug-ugly and indeed still do, but just look how clean they look up against the current crop. Putting them side by side would be like parking Scarlett Johansson next to Ann Widdecombe.
At least now the numbers are reasonably legible, which they haven't been for at least 30 years, but they couldn't even get that right. Instead of letting the teams all do their own thing, they should have specified black on a white background.
What's wrong with having all the 'sharkfins' white, and reading (for example) "HAMILTON 44" on the left side, and ""44 HAMILTON" on the right, in black?
What's wrong with having all the 'sharkfins' white, and reading (for example) "HAMILTON 44" on the left side, and ""44 HAMILTON" on the right, in black?
Eric Mc said:
Funny, the cars that existed when I was 9 are also the way F1 cars should look.
Maybe it's an age thing.
Its definitely an age thing. Maybe it's an age thing.
I think and F1 car should look like a Ferrari 412/t2 - on an FW16, and that a Group A Impreza is the best thing there is - and super tourers are the dogs wotsits.
That is all open for debate.
But the one thing that isn't a coincidence...is that I was about ten when the idea of what things 'should' be solidified in my head.
I bet you were too.
I bet most of us were.
The Lotus 49 is a beautiful thing and the display at Autosport this year was the best thing in the show by a country mile. It is a wonderful machine, enormously evocative and if I was a gazillionaire I would be handing the owner of one a blank cheque.
But is it what a modern racing car should be? Absolutely not.
Skii said:
m444ttb said:
Despite having only been 9 at the time. The cars during the few years either side of '91 (89-93 ish) are, in my mind, how an F1 car looks.
absolutely.Example, the 1990 Ferrari 641.
I am kidding, but really only half kidding!
paulguitar said:
Skii said:
m444ttb said:
Despite having only been 9 at the time. The cars during the few years either side of '91 (89-93 ish) are, in my mind, how an F1 car looks.
absolutely.Example, the 1990 Ferrari 641.
I am kidding, but really only half kidding!
I am aware I am in a minority on this one....
...and it is those huge aero arrays at the ends which mean that the current cars cannot follow.
A simple wing at the front means the guy in front does not have a huge advantage over the guy following.
If teams cannot agree on a cost cap then the regs need to be biased towards "clean" wings and fuselage, in order to minimise the amount of effort wasted on fiddly bits that tend to make the cars look ugly.
I like the look of the front wing in FE and that Indy cars look more purposeful than F1.
A simple wing at the front means the guy in front does not have a huge advantage over the guy following.
If teams cannot agree on a cost cap then the regs need to be biased towards "clean" wings and fuselage, in order to minimise the amount of effort wasted on fiddly bits that tend to make the cars look ugly.
I like the look of the front wing in FE and that Indy cars look more purposeful than F1.
Eric Mc said:
I like the 1990/91 cars too. The looks began to fade with the arrival of the high noses and full span front wings.
The Ferrari F10 was a good looking thing...As was the F60...
Renault/Lotus R31...
Sauber C30
Loved those wheels.
2009-2011 high rear wing/high nose cars looked good to my eye. It went downhill afterwards, IMO with the exception of the 2012 McLaren MP4/27 and the 2013 McLaren MP4/28.
rdjohn said:
...and it is those huge aero arrays at the ends which mean that the current cars cannot follow.
A simple wing at the front means the guy in front does not have a huge advantage over the guy following.
If teams cannot agree on a cost cap then the regs need to be biased towards "clean" wings and fuselage, in order to minimise the amount of effort wasted on fiddly bits that tend to make the cars look ugly.
I like the look of the front wing in FE and that Indy cars look more purposeful than F1.
From the looks of things this year it seems that the cars CAN follow behind. Seb has been able to sit and pressure the Mercs at every race this season. Lewis was able to do it to Seb at the last race (yes there was a compound difference in the mix on that one too). A simple wing at the front means the guy in front does not have a huge advantage over the guy following.
If teams cannot agree on a cost cap then the regs need to be biased towards "clean" wings and fuselage, in order to minimise the amount of effort wasted on fiddly bits that tend to make the cars look ugly.
I like the look of the front wing in FE and that Indy cars look more purposeful than F1.
But a lot of the midfield seemed to be in pretty close contact with each other as well.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff