Williams-BMW launch FW27

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by iGav, Jan 31, 2005.

  1. iGav macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #1
    Have you seen the size of those 'chimneys' :eek: :eek: :p

    Judging by all the swoops and bumps and stuff they're trying to get some serious downforce on this puppy!! enormous front wing aswell!! :eek:

    Behind the cockpit looks like they've done alot of complex aero in that general region, the compact rear end trend also seems to be continuing too. Single keel aswell.

    I think it lacks the simplicity, sophistication and detail of the MP4-20 IMHO though, which from some angles I swear is a spawn of an F-14 Tomcat! :eek:

    Thoughts??

    Actually do we have any Williams fans on the boards??

    So far we've got Ferrari, McLaren, Renault and Minardi...
     
  2. iGav thread starter macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #2
    here's a couple more images of the aero-complex rear, and retro nose.
     
  3. anonymous161 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    Location:
    Where the wind comes sweeping down the plains
    #3
    well, if the car doesn't run well, they could always use the chimneys as a sanctuary for endangered bald eagles. Maybe now that Montoya is no longer at Williams, I might be able to cheer for them a bit. Webber should be a good driver, I just hope he is more go than show.

    With these ever-shrinking rear ends and two race engines, we should be primed to see some spectacular failures this year. Maybe the stewards will remember to bring their black flags to the races (and use them for things other than spare car infringements)
     
  4. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #4
    I liked the Williams/Juan Pablo/Ralf setup, and I was disappointed in my expectations. Initially they had big power and then they were unremarkable in that department.

    I've always been a BMW fans so I'm hoping to see something this season.

    Those chimneys ARE HUGE, cripes it looks like the Queen Mary. :D
     
  5. iGav thread starter macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #5
    I'm looking forward to seeing what Webber can do in a top car as well, I'm thinking he'll go really well, he's an incredibly smooth driver (much like Button) and his work ethic is well suited to Williams.

    I don't doubt his credentials... he's dominated EVERY teammate he's had which is all that you can ask of a driver in a team, he's in good company though in that respect. Schumacher has never been beaten over a full season by his teammate either. ;)

    The one thing I am impressed with is that Williams continue their subtle remembrance of Ayrton Senna on their cars.

    Look closely in the verticals on the nose and you'll see the discreet Senna 'S' logo.

    Magnificent, and nothing less than the great man deserves.
     
  6. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #6
    I don't understand this push for one tire supplier; If they really want to limit speed they're better off changing the engine/aero rules.
     
  7. anonymous161 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    Location:
    Where the wind comes sweeping down the plains
    #7
    I am also puzzeled by the tire issue. I guess with the FIA feel that they can create large hard blocks of rubber that will negate mechanical grip. I don't really see where it could lower the cost substantially, but I could be wrong. I think the less mechanical grip, the more aero grip, which means more cost in wind tunnels and computer systems, since that is the situation we are in now.

    The 27's nose seems to be pretty high compared to the rest of this year's cars. The FW27 really feels like a progression of the FW25, leaving the walrus out of the family photo album. But the 25 was a good car so this could be good news. The return to single keel is interesting as it leaves only McLaren in twin territory. I really thought that other teams would adopt the twin design instead of moving away from it, but truly the suspension and chassis rigidity issues are hard to overcome. The 20's success this year could determine the future of that design I guess.
     
  8. MOFS macrumors 65816

    MOFS

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    Durham, UK
    #8
    Got this quote from an old F(1) magazine interview with Max Mosely. Here's his response to why only one tyre manufacturer...

    He's right, I think. Bridgestone have a miles superior wet weather tyre, and spend all their time with Ferrari. Whereas Michelin spread their time between the rest of them. Slight disadvantage... :rolleyes:
     
  9. iGav thread starter macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #9
    Well they are changing the aero and engine rules. ;)

    I think I'd prefer a one tyre race series, it equals everything out. At the moment such is the difference in performance characteristics between the Bridgestone and the Michelin that I find that the races are too dependent on the tyres. For example in the rain, the Bridgestone are, in the hands of Schumacher 1-2 seconds a lap faster than the Michelins, yet in transistional conditions the Michelins seem to hold a similar advantage. In dry conditions, after a safety car it takes the Bridgestones 2-3 laps to come up to temp by which time and Michelin cars in front of them have gone.

    I don't think the goal with a one tyre series is to reduce speeds as such, I think it's more to do with stopping the escalating speeds that the current tyre war is producing. The cars were gaining 1-3 seconds a lap per year, and that was mainly tyres and tyres alone, FIA control this and they can control the rate of speed increase.

    The other issue is that it would arguably reduce testing costs (rather than the current nonsense spouted by the 9 'other' teams) If a tyre company were to make say 3 dry compounds available and 2 wet, and these stayed the same throughout a season, then they'd be no need for each team to spend the number of days they do now going through christ know's how many compounds and specials over the duration of the season.

    The only issue for me though is who that tyre company should be. If it's Bridgestone and Ferrari continue to win then that could cause issues with some people, and I have no doubt that Ferrari would argue against having Michelin when they've been developing and perfecting their chassis for Bridgestones over 5+ years....

    Maybe Goodyear should come back with the legendary 'Eagle' brand. :D
     
  10. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #10
    Yeah, it makes sense. But like you said, which brand gets cut? It will be a rather political decision because of the Ferrari/Bridgestone relationship.And why not adopt a third brand rather than the two current manufacturers? That would definitely p*** some people off, but it would be the most "fair" solution, eh? I doubt it will happen, though.

    Now that you mention it, it seems that changing tires would be the best way to hobble Ferrari over the short term. The change to V8s will slow everybody down but the teams with the best V10s will likely still have the best V8s - it's not like there's a big difference between a V10 or V8 except in power output. Although the decreased size and weight will probably make for some significant aero changes.
     
  11. anonymous161 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    Location:
    Where the wind comes sweeping down the plains
    #11
    I think the control tire would negate most of the development work done in recent years by either company, especially if the FIA changed the groove pattern/quantity and/or the composition of the tires.

    At first I was opposed to the small V8 engines, but now I am excited about the change and think that it will provide some interesting new designs as the weight of engine/weight of car ratio will change.

    A little off topic, I believe the regulations allow for 5 valves per cylinder in the current engines, yet all of the spec sheets I have seen list the engines as 4 valves per cylinder. Is there a reason why the teams don't use the maximum number of valves allowed? My only guess would be packaging efficiency with the pneumatic valve systems but otherwise I don't know.
     
  12. russed macrumors 68000

    russed

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2004
    Location:
    London, England
    #12
    wow that car really does look pretty complicated! the maclaren from first appearences looks so much more simple (but i know it wont be).

    all i can hope is that this season is going to be more exciting. i think Webber will do well, he has always shown potential but was let down by his car (the jaguar) lets hope he can prove himself.

    i think the one tyre supplier would greatly even things out. also it would hinder things for ferarri, isnt it hte case that bridgestone basically spend all of their time with them and develop the tyres for them. (which is slightly unfair).
     
  13. DJY macrumors 6502a

    DJY

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Location:
    Canberra AUST
    #13
    Of course he is... he's an Aussie!
     
  14. iGav thread starter macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #14
    It would if they did the right thing and went back to slicks! :)

    It would give the FIA instant control over rising speeds that have resulted because of the tyre war, and with the rule changes regarding the aero packages, it'd certainly slow the cars down considerably, and maybe tip the balance in favour of mechanical grip, which is EXACTLY what we need to encourage more overtaking.

    It'd also save money as well if only one type of tyre (in 1 or 2 compounds) was developed for the duration of the season, because it'd negate the need to test every available compound and the new compounds and designs that come on stream over the duration of a season.



    As far as I understand, 5 valves per cylinder are inefficient at higher engine speeds, this is due to the amount of dead air and disturbance that adding an extra inlet valve introduces into the combustion chamber of an engine and which is then exacerbated at higher speeds, so they can in certain applications make less power than a 4 valve engine at the same speed. Include the extra weight of the engine and the packaging issues and the result is less desirable.

    Ferrari did run a 60 valve V12 (5 valves per cylinder) back in early 1993, only to switch to 48 valves (4 valves per cylinder) later on that season, I'm not sure whether this was to do with fuel consumption, or because engine speeds were increasing etc but they obviously saw some benefit in droping 12 valves.

    I assume that the 5 valve limit is there to allow a degree of 'Technical' innovation in the rules. :rolleyes: :p



    In fairness they don't have much choice when the only other teams they have is Jordan and Minardi both of whom hardly test at all. The same goes for when they had Sauber last season, those teams just don't have the budgets to test, and because of this of course they'll spend more time testing with Ferrari and thus the tyres will be more geared towards them because that's where Bridgestone will have received a significant amount of their data from.

    It's difficult for Bridgestone to approach anywhere near the levels of mileage and data that McLaren, Williams, Renault, BAR-Honda and Toyota generate for Michelin, and that is why Ferrari have refused to sign up to the testing agreement, because they'll be in a position where they'll be significantly disadvantaged because Michelin will have 5 top teams generating their data, one of which test more than Ferrari already and the other 4 only fractionally behind.

    The only way to rid F1 of this is to go with a spec tyre or atleast a spec company. I think Goodyear would be a good compromise because they've got extensive F1 experience, they've served all the old guns on the grid so the arguments of favoritism go out of the window, and we get those funky tyres with massive white lettering on the side that not only bare the 'Eagle' legend, but looked ace at speed! :D

    Now, not that this suggestion will really make any difference to the competitiveness, but remember back in the '80's and early '90's the cars were so low, and with Titanium strips under the cars, they used to produce sparks... lots and lots of sparks, they should bring that back. Sparks are cool. :D
     
  15. anonymous161 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    Location:
    Where the wind comes sweeping down the plains
    #15
    You know what I miss, cars that start themselves. I know that starter motors are heavy and hard to package, but it would be nice if a driver could start his own car if it stalled on the grid or during the race. Then we could be rid of electronic anti stall devices and such. No matter how much technology cars have, I just think they should be able to start themselves and roll down the track, not have to be maintained like a fighter jet with tire warmers, radiator coolers, laptop weilding technicians and giant starter guns. Maybe the drivers could run to their cars like in the old road racing days, that would be fun.
     
  16. Counterfit macrumors G3

    Counterfit

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2003
    Location:
    sitting on your shoulder
    #16
    That front wing is MASSIVE!

    And I'm all for Goodyear being the only tire again. :D
     
  17. JFreak macrumors 68040

    JFreak

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Location:
    Tampere, Finland
    #17
    if they really want to limit (average) speed, they would just have to set new BRAKE regulations in such a way that it takes about 150 meters to brake from full speed to zero. that way it would not matter how much power you had or how great was the top speed - drivers WILL brake early enough to be able to turn into a corner.
     
  18. VincentVega macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2004
    Location:
    UK
    #18
    They just need to slash downforce drastically. Mandate standard front and rear wings that aren't particularly effective. Re-introduce the flat bottom so there's a semblance of ground effect and force them to have low noses again like in the late 1980s/early 1990s. Go for huge slick tyres at the back and give the drivers plenty of mechanical grip, thereby negating the need for fancy aerodynamcs. Ban all the silly winglets, barge boards and so on. And have a standard ECU so that traction control can be banned once and for all.

    Oh, and while we're at it, revert to pre-2003 qualifying again and force Max Mosley to retire. Driver age limits and salary caps? Please. This is a real sport, not tiddlywinks (no offence meant to any tiddlywinkers).
     
  19. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #19
    I dunno, I was against the age limits in tiddlywinks myself. :p :D ;)

    It's really a p*sser of a decision because F1 is THE premier motorsport and should be the fastest and at least somewhat technology driven. At the same time, we want a sport where victory ultimately requires good teamwork and good driving.
     
  20. Counterfit macrumors G3

    Counterfit

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2003
    Location:
    sitting on your shoulder
    #20
    The bottom of the cars have to be flat from 330mm behind the center of the front wheels to 330mm in front of the center of the rear wheels, this is to prevent the use of tunnels for ground effects.
    So you want 1994 all over again (well, it would be safer this time around... :()

    AMEN!
     

Share This Page