That winglet at the sidepods of the Mclaren and Brawns are bothering me... :o
Perfectly legal under the scope of the rules Another area where working within the grey areas of the rulebook results in items that were thought to be against the rules.
I've also noticed that since Mclaren got their new front wing that to has more little wings and flicks etc. The Ferrari wing has a couple but far fewer. I'm sure it's all within the rules but i thought the idea was for the cars to look more........ basic. The cars seem to be growing more and more (as martin Brundle put it) warts.
Another Grey area interpretation of the rules here The way I am reading this is that you can only have 2 airfoil elements between 75-200mm above the ground. Between 201-275mm anything goes and there is nothing in the rules exempting the extra airfoils.
the effect of the rotating mass on braking is insignificant. true, but as i said, in an open wheel car (or any car where you can direct sufficient cooling at the brakes, which all race cars can) this doesn't matter because standard iron brakes won't fade. true, but all modern brakes can stop any race car's tire to the point of lockup. no doubt. the quote you are referring to actually mentions aluminium brakes, and is a misprint. the car will come standard with 2-piece rotors (aluminium hat / iron disc) or optional carbon brakes. carbon brakes are a complete waste on a street car though.
Racing is not just about reducing drag, infact cornering speed is everything and this is why F1 cars are about as aerodynamic as a Kenworth truck. I believe it takes something like 500hp just to push the downforce component of the aero on these cars, thus when they lift off the throttle the cars slow dramatically. If tracks did not have corners then lying the driver completely down would make sense ... and they also did not race on the same track at the same time. Because of this drivers do infact need to be able to see and judge the corners and their car position to others, etc. Again, reducing drag is not what F1 is about. Making more cornering speed is what they are about. Pete
Mate mousecatcher is right. The only reason they run with carbon brakes is the unsprung weight. No braking advantage at all. A few years ago one of the Williams ran with steel/iron brakes and there was no difference in lap time. Steel/iron brakes won't fade, but may require more cooling ducks and thus might not help the aero side, but carbon brakes do NOT brake better than steel/iron, they are just lighter ... which is very important when hoping curbs, etc. Carbon brakes on a road car is just plain embarrassing ... and a really good way of pissing off greenies too (as it takes a lot of energy to make them and they don't last)! Pete
Oh and for all of you that still think F1 involves radical engineering and is the top of it's field, please be reminded that you are watching a TV show that like all shows has been fiddled with. Take Max and Bernie away and F1 would/could be lapping in half the time. Pete
One thing tho, i really hope the FIA really bans those nonsense wheel fairings. Look how many teams were struggling with it during pitstops. Williams was the latest at Monza. Plus, they take away the beautiful sight of the glowing discs...
They are banned for next year, and NoDoubt really needs to actually work for an F1 team before he speaks any more
