New cost cutting plan: In particular the rules of 2017. 18'' wheels won't look right IMO (But hey, we have dildo front ends anyhow...), and I think they'll reduce grip levels significantly. Less and less things can be done to the cars over the years. I just hope it won't get ruined.
Source? Beyond that, please explain how and why, in your view, 18" wheels would "reduce grip levels significantly"?
Source is autosport. F1 cars get most of their suspension out of the tires. With bigger rims tire flex is greatly reduced. The much smaller sidewall will also be stiffer. Should F1 switch to larger wheel rims? - F1 Fanatic Some pictures in there. Doesn't actually look half bad...
As I recall, the 13" limit was imposed way back in the 70s purely as a way of restricting brake size. If larger wheels allow bigger brakes (though of course this could still be restricted by technical regs), that would be a performance net gain. As far as less tire flex reducing grip, I do not think that's an issue at all. Suspensions, if necessary, could be tuned for more compliance to compensate. Grip is ultimately governed by the contact patch area (among other variables, of course), and this presumably would remain about the same. After all, Le Mans Prototypes don't seem to suffer from a lack of grip with their much larger wheels and smaller sidewalls. And they would look a lot better!
Bigger brakes won't make much difference...they're already at over 5G and they're on the limit of what the tire can handle, not the brakes. If they want to stop better they need a wider tire. Good point about the LMP's. IIRC for F1 they tried to go bigger a few years back to reduce grip levels, hence my statement.
I'm sure most won't agree with this, but if restricting brakes were an issue, then why not consider a move away from carbon brakes? Champ Cars used steel and that was one of the big differences between them and their contemporaries in F1. Truth be told, I can't imagine too many fans upset with the idea of dropping carbon brakes, and if restricting speed were really the issue, it's a hell of a lot more subtle than changing engine specs.
It looks like their master plan is to eventually compete with Indycar!!! Might as well call the series GP 1.
Looks like F1 wants to be more like IndyCar. And that's a bad thing. The move to 18" wheels and active suspension is a good move though.
Going to steel brake discs would stretch braking zones, increasing passing opportunities while lowering overall speeds and cutting costs. Carbon has little to no application on production cars and therefore the rationale to use them for research is also unfounded. Absolute no brainer.
+1 I propose they dust off their 2004 cars, slap on some steel brakes and mechanical diffs (no electronic interference, which is just alternative traction control) and let them at it! If only...
The bigger wheels would certainly help the visual appeal. I think the rather than limiting teams so much, the revenue sharing arrangements probably need to be revisited. I think F1 has the same issues as MotoGP. One team always just figures out something that no one else does and dominates. You put a great driver/rider with the machine on top of that... then it's a whole other level of domination. Look at Repsol Honda over the years. They just kill it every year. This year Marquez could literally win every race... I wouldn't be surprised. It sort of takes the fun out of it.
Good point. I do like the idea of doing away with CF rotors. The resulting increase in unsprung weight would add an additional factor. I think that there are diminishing returns on braking performance with wider tires. I seem to remember reading somewhere that braking adhesion, unlike lateral cornering, favors a longer contact patch rather than a wider one. All things being equal, a narrower tire will have a longer-shaped contact patch than a wider tire. Going a step further (I'm getting theoretical here), an overall larger diameter tire might have the potential for a better compromise between the two requirements (i.e. increasing the area of the contact patch in both dimensions).
I read something about Martin Brundle complaining about active suspension possibly coming back, man I hope so. I'd very much like to see some suspension innovation in the passenger auto sector and I believe modern F1s take on active suspension would do just that.
Assuming that phenomenon occurs, I imagine the longer contact patch would only theoretically outperform a wider context patch of similar surface area. A wider tire is probably going to have a larger contact patch than a thinner tire at the same pressure. Also, the proposed regulations seem to change wheel size, not the rolling circumference of the tire. Interesting topic though. All the best, Andrew.
Hey the cars were slower at Bahrain, but that has got to be the most exciting race I have watched in a very, very, very long time!
What current teams have relationships with a Formula E team? That is where F1 needs to get a head start on the 18" wheels.
Why don't they stop di_ _ ing around and just shut down F1 and abdicate to Formula E already, this drip, drip of rules changes to dumb down F1 is just painful.
The good people of F1 are currently making a lot of noise about being more relevant to modern road cars - Hence the V6 turbo engines and hybrid electric motors. The argument being made (mainly by Pirelli), is that 13" high profile tyres are simply not relevant to modern cars in any way, shape or form . Even the most basic hatchback (compact), now comes with a minimum of 14" tyres and are more often than not on a low profile. Talk of how an F1 car gets most of it's suspension travel via the high profile sidewalls as an argument for not going to 18" low profile tyres is pretty much pointless! If F1 does go to 18" wheels/tyres then the entire suspension concept/principal will be changed to suit the new wheel/tyre combination (Which is a big part of the argument not to go to an 18" combination - The cost of having to research and develop a whole new suspension concept and make it work as well as the old system for 13" wheels/tyres). Lets face facts here: Every now and again F1 needs reigning in a bit for it's own good! Don't believe Me? - Just take a look at how mental the old turbo cars went back in the 80's - 1500bhp from a 1.5 litre engine in qualifying trim? Ground effects that resulted in drivers needing to strap their helmets to the cockpit sides to prevent their necks from collapsing? If you gave the designers free reign to do whatever they wanted to do in F1 then the cars would end up being almost undriveable! F1 designers can't help themselves! - They will always want to push the envelope of what's allowed within the rules. Sometimes, the only way to contain them is to restrict the rules that govern them!
Stretching braking zones would make it a duller deal than it is and I believe decrease overtaking, but probably increase sliding off. The hairpin in Montreal for example would lose some of its appeal if they came in real slow and gradual vs aircraft carrier landings. If they have ABS the tire is out of the picture even more than it is now and the brakes can achieve maximum performance. Stopping is all about heat dissipation, mechanical energy transformed into heat energy. That is done by the brakes and carbon are immensely superior to steel. Steel just absorb the heat and don't dissipate nearly as well as Carbon. It would really change F1 negatively. It is where F1 stands above other racing.(used to) You are right that a longer narrower patch gives better traction for accel and decel, but the total patch will remain the same if the vehicle weight and tire pressure do. but it doesn't really matter for stopping. [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnMbtWop8Qo]Brembo Brake System on the new IZOD INDYCAR.mov - YouTube[/ame]
Braking in a nutshell -- what he said @:15-:30 [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaGP1y4aUj4]On the track with Brembo - Part three - YouTube[/ame]
Let's face it, enforced standardization is the only way to bring cost down, which is the topic in F1 at the moment. Sad, but maybe inevitable.
