Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Mosley's latest radical plot (F1)

I

iGav

macrumors G3
Original poster
Mar 9, 2002
9,025
1
hmmmmmmmmmmmm.

I honestly don't know what to think, it's not as elegant as a single wing, but it does kinda remind me of some of the more crazy thinking back in the '70's, the only thing is, is that back in the '70's it was the teams innovating, not the FIA.

hmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Rinky dink link

Thoughts?
 
JFreak

JFreak

macrumors 68040
Jul 11, 2003
3,151
9
Tampere, Finland
god, that's ugly! why didn't they just radically lower the maximum height of the rear wing? that would effectively make the air flow less distractive for the car behind...
 
mad jew

mad jew

Moderator emeritus
Apr 3, 2004
32,191
9
Adelaide, Australia
It needs ribbons to more effectively cut back on drag.


bikeBicyclesAllRugrats_Chug_a_Bug_12_Girls_Bicycle_220311-resized200.jpg



In all seriousness, I don't mind it. I agree that it should be the teams innovating, not the FIA though. Of course, there's that fine line between restrictions to keep costs in check and the freedom for teams to try new things.
 
MOFS

MOFS

macrumors 65816
Feb 27, 2003
1,241
235
Durham, UK
mpw said:
Why not just get rid of the wing altogether?

More and more I see less and less point to F1, it doesn't seem to innovate anymore in anyway that relates to everyday road cars.
Click to expand...

I'd say that the F1 car has been irrevelant to road cars ever since the introduction of the wing effects ie front and rear wings. Not really relevant to your Vauxhall Astra driver...:rolleyes:

The new wings seem a good idea. The only problem is that the manufacturers seem hell bent on spending masses of money to gain a tenth of a second but don't want to reduce costs or introduce measures to improve the spectacle of the sport. But it does seem like the right way forward.
 
JFreak

JFreak

macrumors 68040
Jul 11, 2003
3,151
9
Tampere, Finland
MOFS said:
I'd say that the F1 car has been irrevelant to road cars ever since the introduction of the wing effects ie front and rear wings.
Click to expand...

so you don't think the innovations in 1990's were relevant? i mean -- active suspension, semi-automatic gearbox, traction control and anti-locking brakes just to mention a few...
 
Lord Blackadder

Lord Blackadder

macrumors P6
May 7, 2004
15,669
5,499
Sod off
F1 tech is still very relevant to road cars. I'll bet that as carbon fiber favbrication costs drop we'll see carbon brakes on supercars, expensive GT cars and eventually more "normal" sportscars. Carbon bodies are getting cheaper and just starting to trickle down as well. Plus, I'm sure that the data F1 teams gain in the wind tunnel and with their ECM/traction control software still has direct benefits to road cars.

But re: this article, like others have said I'd cheer this move if it came from a team or teams. But coming from the FIA this smacks of meddling.

It seems like Max and others have aero on the brain but I've come to be convinced that tires are a far more effective way to control a car's potential performance level.
 
Don't panic

Don't panic

macrumors 603
Jan 30, 2004
5,541
697
having a drink at Milliways
it's kind of off topic, but i didn't want to start another f1 thread for this:

teams just approved the new "knockout" qualis and reverted to changing tyres (although i don't know with what limits if any).
http://f1.racing-live.com/f1/en/index.html

as far as the new proposal, I think they should get rid of the wing entirely, but give the teams some leeway to interpreter the new rules, so we'd see some different cars.

I think they should put limits on outcome, rather than design: for example they should have the cars tested in the wind tunnel and mandate that the downforce should be "such and such" and the air behind under certain distance should be "this clean", and then leave the engineers to design thee best package to get that.
 
Subliving

Subliving

macrumors member
May 31, 2005
48
0
Leeds, UK
Rewind

I've been watching F1 since I was about 4, and have seen it's sad demise. I genuinely believe that the downturn is due to Mosely interfering in almost every aspect of the sport. Aero, engine, chassis, tires, wing construction, wing placement, bargeboard size, air intake size, car width, length and hieght, suspension construction, rear diffuser, and even the fuel rigs. And it's not like they're just little things.

All of the manufacturers would be stupid not to max-out the dimensions and other aspects of the design. This means that all the cars end up being basically the same design with a few minor tweeks. Hardly any innovation.

If you're reading Mr Mosely; stop it, just, stop it!

Subliving

p.s. Why doesn't Apple sponsor an F1 car, maybe they could do the electronics, and then there'd be less electrical gliches...
 
mad jew

mad jew

Moderator emeritus
Apr 3, 2004
32,191
9
Adelaide, Australia
dmw007 said:
Was this your first bike mad jew???? ;) :)
Click to expand...


Almost. Mine had a purple stripe. :D


Subliving said:
p.s. Why doesn't Apple sponsor an F1 car, maybe they could do the electronics, and then there'd be less electrical gliches...
Click to expand...


And cars would go years without changes. Then one day, after countless rumours, they drop the solar panels and announce that they really should have gone with the internal combustion engine all along. ;)
 
Counterfit

Counterfit

macrumors G3
Aug 20, 2003
8,195
0
sitting on your shoulder
Don't panic said:
I thought they did that already
lcl_cinar_busyworldcover.jpg
Click to expand...
Actually, they did sponsor a race car for a season. Clicky.
You have to wonder, what with HP sponsoring Williams, and Panasonic partnering with Toyota, and the upcoming demise of tobacco sponsorship (well, branding anyway), how many more tech companies will get involved in motorsport?
 
A

anonymous161

macrumors 6502
Apr 15, 2003
378
7
Where the wind comes sweeping down the plains
iGav said:
hmmmmmmmmmmmm.

I honestly don't know what to think, it's not as elegant as a single wing, but it does kinda remind me of some of the more crazy thinking back in the '70's, the only thing is, is that back in the '70's it was the teams innovating, not the FIA.

hmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Rinky dink link

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

If they will implement the split wing, bring slicks back, and not change any rules for at least 5 years, then I think its a fine idea.
The level of competition needs to be determined by development, not by who comes up with the best design for a particular season. In the old days, the Lancia D50 raced for what, almost 10 years? This year the car was the previous year wasn't even legal to race.
 
Lord Blackadder

Lord Blackadder

macrumors P6
May 7, 2004
15,669
5,499
Sod off
anonymous161 said:
If they will implement the split wing, bring slicks back, and not change any rules for at least 5 years, then I think its a fine idea.
The level of competition needs to be determined by development, not by who comes up with the best design for a particular season. In the old days, the Lancia D50 raced for what, almost 10 years? This year the car was the previous year wasn't even legal to race.
Click to expand...

I don't know if I'd agree to the new aero, but I totally agree with you that we need a set of rules that will not be radically altered year atfter year. Smaller budget teams have a hard time coping with rule changes that are drastic and often, not to mention that it makes for poor racing - some teams adapt well and crush the competition who are caught out.
 
L

link92

macrumors 6502
Aug 15, 2004
335
0
We need a good set of rules in 2008, which allow overtaking and the like, then keep them until 2013 at the earliest...
 
I

iGav

macrumors G3
Original poster
Mar 9, 2002
9,025
1
mpw said:
Why not just get rid of the wing altogether?
Click to expand...

Because then you end up with Formula Ford. :p

mpw said:
More and more I see less and less point to F1, it doesn't seem to innovate anymore in anyway that relates to everyday road cars.
Click to expand...

Does any race series though? I'd argue that F1 has contributed more to production cars than any other series, rallying included.

subliving said:
I've been watching F1 since I was about 4, and have seen it's sad demise. I genuinely believe that the downturn is due to Mosely interfering in almost every aspect of the sport. Aero, engine, chassis, tires, wing construction, wing placement, bargeboard size, air intake size, car width, length and hieght, suspension construction, rear diffuser, and even the fuel rigs. And it's not like they're just little things.
Click to expand...

I know what you mean, a lot of damage was done when F1 overreacted to the death of Senna in '94, circuits were needlessly changed and regulations were bought in that slowed the cars, but also made them harder to overtake with.

The thing is... the FIA have always meddled with dramatic rules changes, remember the turbo era, ground effects, then active suspension, then natural aspiration, traction control, ABS, CVT, launch control... etc etc, in a way it's nothing new. :(
 
displaced

displaced

macrumors 65816
Jun 23, 2003
1,455
246
Gravesend, United Kingdom
Cool! F1 fans on a Mac board :)

I have this crazy theory... let me know what you think:

The harder the FIA make it to build a 'fast car', the more likely it is that only richest teams will be able to.

From the very first (recent) major change (narrowed cars, grooved tyres), it became a case of who can plough in the most cash to eek out those important few tenths of a sec via snazzy aero and hyper-tweaked engines.

It makes sense that once you remove (or in this case, ban) the 'low hanging fruit' which make a car fast, the cars that dominate will be those whose teams can afford the insane amounts of research required to perfect even the tiniest of detail. Naturally, the cost scales ever upwards -- you end up spending a fortune on getting those extra tenths via legal means, which leads to the situation where only a select few can actually manage it. You get two or at best three teams competing within a few tenths of eachother, and the rest (privateers, etc) simply cannot reach that level.

Personally, I'd say go ahead with the move to V8 engines, but then seriously ease up on the rest of the regulations. Give those on smaller budgets the freedom to go bananas with whatever tech they can afford and see what they come up with!

It's sad to see the Privateer teams disappearing. It hit me the other day that basically the only privateer team left is Williams. I really hope they don't fall into a terminal decline. HP's now left them as a sponsor, BMW's gone and bought Sauber.... it's taken one more element of fluidity ("who'll have whose engine this year?!") out of the sport, which is a shame.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom