Mosley's latest radical plot (F1)

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by iGav, Oct 24, 2005.

  1. iGav macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #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?
     
  2. JFreak macrumors 68040

    JFreak

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Location:
    Tampere, Finland
    #2
    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...
     
  3. mad jew Moderator emeritus

    mad jew

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Location:
    Adelaide, Australia
    #3
    It needs ribbons to more effectively cut back on drag.


    [​IMG]


    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.
     
  4. mpw Guest

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2004
    #4
    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.
     
  5. MOFS macrumors 65816

    MOFS

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    Durham, UK
    #5
    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.
     
  6. JFreak macrumors 68040

    JFreak

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Location:
    Tampere, Finland
    #6
    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...
     
  7. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #7
    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.
     
  8. Don't panic macrumors 603

    Don't panic

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Location:
    having a drink at Milliways
    #8
    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.
     
  9. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #9
    Hmm, but does that mean we won't see damaged cars coming back out after a crash/problem to run a few laps just to improve their quali position? I thought that was a bit dumb.
     
  10. dmw007 macrumors G4

    dmw007

    Joined:
    May 26, 2005
    Location:
    Working for MI-6
    #10
    Definitely! :) ;)
     
  11. dmw007 macrumors G4

    dmw007

    Joined:
    May 26, 2005
    Location:
    Working for MI-6
    #11
    [​IMG]

    Was this your first bike mad jew???? ;) :)

    just kidding. :)
     
  12. Subliving macrumors member

    Subliving

    Joined:
    May 31, 2005
    Location:
    Leeds, UK
    #12
    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...
     
  13. mad jew Moderator emeritus

    mad jew

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Location:
    Adelaide, Australia
    #13

    Almost. Mine had a purple stripe. :D



    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. ;)
     
  14. Don't panic macrumors 603

    Don't panic

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Location:
    having a drink at Milliways
    #14
    I thought they did that already
    [​IMG]
     
  15. Counterfit macrumors G3

    Counterfit

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2003
    Location:
    sitting on your shoulder
    #15
    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?
     
  16. anonymous161 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    Location:
    Where the wind comes sweeping down the plains
    #16
    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.
     
  17. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #17
    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.
     
  18. link92 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2004
    #18
    We need a good set of rules in 2008, which allow overtaking and the like, then keep them until 2013 at the earliest...
     
  19. iGav thread starter macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #19
    Because then you end up with Formula Ford. :p

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

    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. :(
     
  20. displaced macrumors 65816

    displaced

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Location:
    Gravesend, United Kingdom
    #20
    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.
     

Share This Page