Adrian's pissed

"I'm slightly baffled by it because it's been declared legal forever until this race," he added.

"The obvious parallel is when active suspension was banned at the end of '93, where there was no regulation change. Ferrari couldn't get their active to work and suddenly it was illegal for the next year.

"It's easy to fall into the Machiavellian conspiracy theories. Whether that's true or not, I don't know and I can't comment. My read of it would be that, of our main competitors, which are clearly McLaren and Ferrari, then Ferrari probably haven't got their exhaust to work that well so they are quite happy to see the back of it.

 

Here is the complete story:
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/92870

I couldn't agree with AN more. It was legal at the start of the season n it was effective. If hammy, jense or fred now win the wdc I will consider it a tainted championship. Let's penalize success n stifle engineering innovation. That's F1? Spare me. F1 should add some ovals to became even more nascar like. Too bad whiting didn't follow max out the door..

At least they waited tll after the season to ban the active suspension cars.

Ridiculous.

 

The FIA strikes again on behalf of Bernie: the show got too predictable with Vettel victories so let's change the playing field

Vettel is still gonna bag this (not counting an injury).

 

Yep.

All the best,
Andrew.

 

The only problem I see is that the FIA don't react quickly enough when there might be something illegal going on or when a rule has to be clarified. This blown diffuser thing should have been addressed many races ago. Now it reeks of meddling with the championship. This isn't the first time either.

 

I understand Newey's anger but him comparing it to Williams is a bit off as there were no rules in play which stated specifically what Williams were doing was illegal. A decision to ban their active suspension during season meant it would require a unanimous vote during the season. Had some derivative of a rule been available a ban would make sense, but there was none.

This year's change to the off-throttle EBD came at a time when everyone finally understood what was going on, and I believe it was only then when Chuck saw it as a electronically moveable aero device and placed teams on notice of banning. An exhaust was not being used as an exhaust, and engine mapping was electronically being changed for aero purposes. For me, it makes complete sense because something IS moving for the benefit of aerodynamics and as soon as the Fia deduced that was indeed what was going on they subsequently banned it.


This is really strange talk coming from Newey considering Newey and his team are the ones saying it won't really affect them!? His actions speak otherwise. I don't believe Newey is concerned for this year but rather he is more concerned for next year.

 

I need to quote this one line from Newey because everyone called me crazy for saying RB designed their car around their exhaust system:

"We'll be quite heavily affected because our car was designed around the exhaust," said Newey.

 

lol...I don't think that was the reason

 

hahhhaaaa. I suppose I had that coming but I'm a good sport.

 

I think being called "crazy" is both a pre-requisite and occupational hazard of being a Project Master.

All the best,
Andrew.

 

You must be eyeballing my 3.4L 308 project with a 360 crankshaft. Perhaps Rob should change it from 'Project Master' to 'Mad Scientist' or 'Butcher'. Mark, we miss you.



So who here believes as I do that RB7 will not be running as much rake?

 

Admittedly, I have been quietly keeping an eye on that. I mean... you'd have to be a bit eccentric - to say the least - to tear apart an engine that was only just rebuilt and run in. You're definitely providing some excitement to that section.

I miss Mark too... I wonder how his V12 project is going...

Losing the exhaust would make them reduce their rake?

All the best,
Andrew.

 

Their off-throttle exhaust and exhaust system in general creates a huge wall at the back of their car which assists in the entire car acting as one giant diffuser. This is all done in the name of planting the rear end very solidly which of course it has been hugely effective in doing. The moment they lose downforce points at the back end, they have to rebalance the front end. I see they have one of two options here. The first is to do nothing other than change the engine mapping and drive around the imbalance the car will have under braking, and the other is to run less rake so to balance the front end under braking and turn in knowing that once the throttle is depressed that all rear downforce will be back where it needs to be. This will be very reminiscent of the Mclaren a couple years ago which was sort of a Dr Jekyl and Mr Hyde where it was great on-throttle but terrible off-throttle.

 

Thanks John.

Interesting... I think I would want to try to drive around the reduced rear grip under braking rather than reduce front-end downforce. A pointy front end and slightly wayward rear would seem easier to deal with than a car that might have terrific rear grip but might wash out in high-speed corners.

All the best,
Andrew.

 

inching their way to spec racing

JD

 

True, but rear tire wear will be greatly affected. Ought to be interesting.

BTW - I disagree with this change in regs. Redbull found a better way to do things and should enjoy the spoils.

 

Nonsense! (IMHO) - Charlie simply issued a clarification. Nothing to do with "spec racing" whatsoever.

The conspiracy theorists will of course claim that they've already enjoyed the spoils (of something illegal) for too long......

A better parallel would be the banning of Renaults mass damper a few years back - Yet another moveable aerodynamic aid, and Charlie doesn't like 'em.

Cheers,
Ian

 

Typical F1 drama.

 

Its really disapointing... this is what happens when it is a "show" instead of sport of Racing cars.

Like it or not Redbull have done the homework and are on top, its up to everyone else to catch up. Not legislate constant change. I really miss F1 in the 80's!

 

+1 and not bad for a 'drinks company'!! They deserve the success by designing a winning machine. FIA need to let them race!

 

This championship is over. Vettel will take it easily.

The real problem here is the influence Mclaren have on the sport. Obviously they are the ones who are influencing the FIA and Bernie to get rid of this new innovation!

 

You mean when they changed the rules like NASCAR?

I'm sorry, but it was an identical deal back then! If the armchair QB's are to be believed anyway.

JMB is quite possibly the only guy I "hate" more than Mad Max - "Corrupt" doesn't even start to address his regime

[For the newbs, he was President of FISA, 78-91 and the FIA 85-93 btw]

Cheers,
Ian
EDIT; pls don't feed the troll!

 

Wrong. How can it be tainted when neither Alonso, Hamilton, Button, or any of their teams haven't cheated? Jeez the 2008 championship would be more tainted than this one would be if anybody, but Vettel, won it. What are Ferrari and Mclaren supposed do? Give up because in case they win it will be tainted? Right... Be angry at the FIA, but don't bring down any accomplishments by Ferrari or any non-RB team. The other teams have done nothing wrong!

 

If I strip every car and paint them ALL white, with zero lettering, I bet 90% of the F1 'fans' could not attach the correct name to the correct car.

 

So far, you've been pretty spot on with how this should play out, so I'll side with you (I asked that question during the last race and I'm convinced the RB-7's stance will change dramatically).