What F1 car is this? and

well but i mean, cigar shops sell bongs for tabacco only, and we know the many uses for those things. I'm just saying that if ferrari sold those car wiht an engine and a program for racing, but they say that the car its not for racing. Then it is not their fault. because i dont think they would want to risk selling old race cars that need a ton of maintainance for them to be in prime shape. even if they are in prime shape something can fail.

but yeah, it's true what you say, but i guess that's the fine print. I think it's up to the owners risk to drive those cars. I dont think ferrari would sell those cars with some kind of a warranty.

 

So Nigel, have you contacted the people in Italy yet?

 

I am sure Ferrari makes buckets on money on this program. If they charge 32k for brake service on an Enzo, imagine the profits they can make by fixing up these F1 cars.

Like someone said earlier, they race these in Europe 5 times/year. And I highly doubt that anyone would EVER even consider racing a display only car. That would be the epitome of absurdity.

BTW, does anyone on this board have any connections whatsoever to someone involved in Ferrari's program? Ill bet that they could shed some insight.

 

Ferrari originally designed the car to race a single season ... the next owner decided to keep on running the car.

Thus IMO the next owner takes the risk. BUT I have since learnt that a division of Ferrari actually maintain the car for these guys ... thus it is this divisions responsibility to provide a safe car ... NOT the guys that built the car, their job is finished and completed and all their design goals made.

For example look at #0846 (Jim G's P3/4). If that car fails now it is no way Ferraris fault. They designed the car to run in the late 60's ... it was again only designed to last a few years NOT 30+.

That is what I meant.

The comparison to the Firestone tyre/Ford Explorer debarkle is not relevant because Firestone designed the tyres for Ford and for normal, current use. Completely different ball game to designing a F1 car for a single season.

Pete

 

A short story about "display only" racing:

Just before I started working for Pete Lovely in 1981, they were running a converted Williams FW07 Formula One car in the Can-Am series. In the third event of the season, at Watkins Glen, a motor mount on the Cosworth engine snapped in half, jamming the throttle wide open and steering the car into the wall at something well above 100 MPH. Driver Gary Gove suffered two badly broken legs in the accident.

When the car was examined after the accident, the broken motor mount was inspected. On the underside was stamped the words, "FOR DISPLAY PURPOSES ONLY". Of course, no one had told them that this critical part was known to be defective, and the marking was in a spot that could not be seen. Real helpful. Gary was lucky not to be killed. It was end of Pete's involvement in professional racing. The car was later restored (with proper motor mounts) and was quite successful in vintage racing.

 

Pete

Thanks for the clarification

 

I've called a good friend who is close with the Corse Clienti staff. He'll try to find out what the situation is. Give him time though, because I think the staff isn't back in Europe yet and I'm sure you'll understand it's a delicate situation.

 

I've received a PM from someone who has spoken with the technical director of Corse Clienti F1, Andrea Galetti, and can update Fchat to some degree on what is happening. Basically I can't disclose everything that was said but what I can tell you is that the car has been sent back to Maranello in Italy for Ferrari engineers to examine it. Ferrari happen to be as perplexed as we are about what caused the failure of Kroymans' car, and we can't really speculate any further on what happened without some facts provided by the accident investigation.

 

Oops. That doesn't sound good neither for Ferrari nor for the Corse Clienti program unless they find some tampering.

 

Maybe they will learn something about the aging of carbon fibre when used in a racing cars chassis??

This could be extremely useful information for the motor racing world ... and who knows may permanently retire these cars (?).

These cars are frighteningly fast (when driven by an experienced driver) in an amatures hands they become dangerous and if they are questionable structurally wise ... this is one time I really think that they should be for display purposes only, and curse the invention of carbon fibre

Pete
ps: For example if I owned a Porsche 917 there is NO way I would drive or race it without replacing the chassis ... they were weak when new, they would be dangerous now!

 

That is precisely my biggest concern: I want to see these cars out there on the track. Doesn't have to be at speed, just doing parade laps is fine. But at least they turn a wheel and don't just sit behind a fence.


So I'm still hoping actually for some "tampering" that explains it away and doesn't mean the end of all carbon fibre based racecars as part of a corse clienti program. There aren't that many Lauda/Rega cars left...

 

Ferrari F1 cars have been privately driven for 10 years. Corse clienti F1 exists due to increasing demand of private F1 owners and Ferraris increasing interest in their own racing history for two yrs. Even if there would be any impact on the Corse Clienti F1 program due to the outcome of the causes of this failure, I doubt that there will be any change of mind with the "parading" owners...

Some facts should not to be forgotten:
1. These are racing cars and racing is dangerous
2. Even if you parade, roll around, whatever... these cars are extremely fast and constructed to the absolute limit in their time (that´s why it´s called F1), so there is always the possibility of driver error or mechanical failure, whether you´re a pro or not
3. Nobody wants or likes to get hurt, that´s why
4. maintenance on these car´s is extremely thorough (e.g. X-ray scans on vital suspension parts, complete check after each meet, etc...)
5. The privilege of driving these cars is fun. Fun as well for the spectators as for the owners. But the owners also know about the resposibility to take care and maintain these important pieces of Ferrari F1 history

DB

 

I dont think that the blame should be put on carbon fiber alone.
like NIGEL_645 said there are many things that are done to a Formula one car.

Any road car that is not maintained fails. Talk to any Formula one mechanic thats has spent countless hours working on a F1 car, and there still a possibility of it failing.

plus the SLR Mclaren's car body is all made out of carbon fiber.

If Carbon fiber fatigued, then what about all those things made out of kevlar.


anybody here a composite engineer?

 

ok, apparently the pictures of carbon fiber that i posted earlier dont work anymore, so here they are again, hope they work.


http://www.imagestation.com/mypictures/inbox/view.html?id=4149186059&url=http%3A//www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid136/p571c98f1328a758e4d403cbda1de344d/f74f8e0b.jpg&caption=image0001&album_id=4276985093&from_album=1

http://www.imagestation.com/mypictures/inbox/view.html?id=4149186052&url=http%3A//www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid136/p8bb1bbec7ce43a6ff2410b4af280a8e0/f74f8e04.jpg&caption=image0004&album_id=4276985093&from_album=1

 

I have lots of pieces from the burned Enzo....it tears and delams pretty easy, but I found a ball joint of some type that was embedded in the CF and it was still hanging on..........the rest of the car had left it, however.

The foreman said it was pretty hard to extuinguish, once ignited .....

 

yeah i heard, or more like i was told b4 i started to mess with CF, that its flamable, considering all the use of epoxy and stuff use.

so yeah it doesnt make a good firewall, but still the car didnt burn to the grown. and pretty much anything that gets burns loses its structure.

how did you get a burned Enzo??? a new product from ferrari ;-)

george

 

here is a drawing that i came across in Peter Wrights book on the F2000 F1 Car. It does appear that there is a joint in this area of the car.

 

Holy smokes, Rob. That's exactly the info we needed. Great find!

Well, I think that puts to rest the single piece construction myth of the safety tub...

It's seems fairly clear now that F1 cars in general, if they all use this type of construction, have a potentially serious weakness.

What still surprises me though is that this join hasn't failed during actual race weekends within the last 5 years. So does this prove the cars are safe enough, or does the Kroymans accident prove they're not?

I guess the final judgement will be left to the FIA.

 

Not at all.

Kroymans car is 5 years old ... totally irrelevant to current F1 and FIA regulations.

The only relevance is people trying to run these as 'historic' vehicles.

Pete

 

Well, actually, the construction technique hasn't changed since then. All the Ferrari F1 cars built since including the 2004 cars are constructed in the same way - this is why Ferrari are worried. It's most definately relevant.

I will have an update on findings from the investigation around September 6, so stay tuned.

 

Yes but is it caused by say the ageing of the glue or whatever ... and thus a less than 1 year old (ie. current race car) chassis would be fine.

I guess they need to work that out ...

Pete

 

Do you remenber during Ralph's accident that they said that the driver can be removed out of the car moving him. Like a part of the car can be removed. Do you think that it was made this way to be able to access to the driver better? if it is, i think it just put the driver in more danger.

George

 

well, at least the driver can be removed together with the raceseat. When removed the raceseat can then be disassembled via removeabel cords. in this way the body of the driver can be stabilized in a controlled manner.

The drawing of the monocoque is very clear, thanks for that!

Ciao, Peter

 

No, that refers to the fact that they can detach the seat from the chassis and remove it upwards without taking the driver out of the seat, to prevent further injury to the neck and spine.

 

I've heard that the first impression by the Corse Cliente of the cause when they examined the car at the circuit was a combination of heat, the nature of the impact and...aging. The heat would have caused the bonding to weaken. So this means (like the picture of the monocoque shows) that the monocoque indeed is made up of two parts who are bonded together.