Couple of dumb questions about F1 cars

I haven’t really followed F1 in many years, but I noticed there is a large bar that surrounds the head of the driver and then would seem to hinder his vision. What brought that whole apparatus on?

Also I’ve been watching some F1 race simulations on YouTube. One was a late model Ferrari f1 versus 2004. The 2004 model beat the late model, and the pitch of the engine was way higher. Is that accurate? If so why ?

 

On the HALO, it was brought on by Jules Bianchis (RIP) crash.

2004 pitch: this is due to the 3.0ltr V-10. Wonderful "eargasmic" sound.

Current F1 cars use a V-6 turbo hybrid with an MGU-K & MGU-H that hook up to batteries.

MGU - motor generating unit.

K- kenetic or by the braking.

H - heat or by the turbo spinning 120k rpms.

 

Halo after Justin Wilson death.

V10 @ 19000RPM

 

So is the older car indeed as fast or faster than the present versions?

 

If you were to take the F2004 vs any current F1 car and compare them both side by side:

Any current F1 car has: 1) wider front wings 2) more front wing elements (2017 & 2018 had 42 wing elements give or take on the team) 3) wider chassis 4) Bardgeboard area is massively aero'ed out with numerous elements 5) wider floor with more elements added for rear tire wash (aero) 6) wider diffuser with more aero elements 7) wider rear wing with more cut-outs and aero bits 8) DRS (drag reduction system) which gives the car a 10 to 12mph advantage in DRS zones on the track(fake overtaking). 9) Wider, stickier, slick tires in various compounds.

So given the above plus the cars V-6 turbo hybrid system, THEY ARE FASTER and more fuel efficient and have a thermal efficiency of 50% or greater.

 

“They” being the newer car I presume?

Great info! Thank you!

 

Correct.....YW.

 

I think everyone agrees that Bianchi wouldn't have been saved by a halo, but there have been a number of accidents over the years where it would have helped.

John Surtees' son was killed by a flying wheel. Felipe Massa was hit by a Brawn spring etc etc

 

I think everybody knew that sooner or later some protection for the head had to be introduced, it was a bit absurd to make an undestructable cockpit around the driver and then leave the head exposed. I just wish it was not so ugly.

About the speed of the current cars, well, there are not so much faster thant the old ones if you take into account that they can´t drive flat out for most of the race. They´re more efficient and those things that nobody likes but that you have to live with in today´s world.

 

Records set by the 2004 cars are only starting to fall in the last year or two...the 2004 cars where *that* fast. Imagine 15 years of aerodynamic knowledge advantage, 30% more tyre etc can gain...and lets not forget, the tracks these days have much more run-off area everywhere, allowing drivers to run wider and get advantages there...asphalt is much better these days.

The 2004 cars where mindblowing.

 

OK so here's my next question...I watched a youtube simulation race at indy between a Ferrari F1 and an Indycar. At the start, the Ferrari blew it way. Ran off and left it. But as the Indycar got to speed, it easily overtook the Ferrari. I assume that this is simply because the F1 car isn't set up for an oval track - the specs for the engines are different for Indycar, and if the Ferrari was set up correctly, it would hold its own just fine. ???

 

Indycars run far lower drag for ovals...I assume if the F1 car with low drag wings and a change of gearing they would keep the indycar honest.

A fairer comparison would be F1 cars vs indycars on a traditional track...where an indycar would get blown away. COTA is one of the tracks both indycar and current F1 race on...lap record F1 is 1.32.0 and for Indycar it's a 1.48.8

 

Yes on a F1 track simulation, the F1 car blew the Indycar away easily.

 

For God’s sake, bring them back!

 

The “halo” was a result of an over-reaction of F1 owners and regulators to the unfortunate death of a driver caused primarily by his over driving for conditions and secondarily by dangerous positioning of track equipment,

 

Absolute rubbish

 

This is the reminder that motorsports is dangerous - no matter how much safety you have. Surtees death was tragic...

 

Historically speaking - Indy Cars are much heavier and have / had about the same or more power HP. F-1 cars are far lighter and have about the same power ... so the power to weight is WAY higher & therefore the performance is much higher. I think on an oval a properly trimmed F-1 car would still be able to be as fast if not faster than an Indy car... just due to overall weight... Indy car aero is a bit "smoother" than F-1 ... but all things being equal regardless of the track an F1 car will out accelerate and handle an Indy car... its not really a fair fight ... but back in the 50;s the Monzaoplis - war of the two worlds - Indy cars killed F-1 cars on the Monza banking....

 

While poor Henry’s death predated Bianchi’s the push for halo-type protection didn't gain real momentum until after Jules’s crash.

 

They want to make sure you don’t feel the urge to start following again...

 

Yes.... and not to get cross-mediums to much, but this clip from YESTERDAY illustrates the same quite effectively.




Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk