2nd walrus nose on the grid the nose is also the flattest & straightest I've seen so far...looks almost parallel to the ground. Their exhaust outlet, side vanes, lack of a rear lol & fw look very interesting/unique: http://f1.f-e-n.net/images/f1/2013/20130219/williams_fw35_hires/_89P4178RT.JPG
Maybe Williams has made a good improvement here------- Gary Anderson - BBC F1 technical analyst "The new Williams appears to be a good step forward over last year's car. "There is a lot of good detail work on it. On the front wing, they have eased back on some of the very complex detail of the vortex generators around the endplates, which last year was probably too detailed. And in general it looks like a sound downforce-producing package. "The front wing pillars have been moved forward, so they lean back towards the front wing. That's a good idea - it gives the airflow coming off the pillars more time to settle down before it gets to the turning vanes under the chassis. "The downforce-producing devices on the front brake ducts are very detailed and the sidepods are very well undercut. "Their ultra-low gearbox means there is very little airflow blockage at the rear of the car. There is just a lot of very good basic engineering on it and I would expect that they have made significant progress."
I used to be a huge F1 fan attending the races and never missing the coverage years back but then lost interest for a number of reasons. I like that they have the slicks back and turbo's, but I still can't believe how unattractive these cars are. I just looked at this front wing and have a hard time taking it seriously -- A Look At Williams' FW35 | Planet F1 | Formula One | Photo Gallery and with the rear wing so tiny it looks like a snow plow. Give me the 80's turbo's any day -- http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3134/2312285045_b2dd297705_z.jpg
Its like theres no car behind the engine cover. Someone cut the shark fin away in this photo and it looks so odd lol Image Unavailable, Please Login
I agree, but these cars look better than the groovy grooved-tire troglodytes of a few years ago. From the nose back, the new cars look proper. The nose is quite ungainly, something must be done!
No machine ever said race car/fighter jet/colonial viper better than the BT52 http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b340/rplemma/BT52/BrabhamBT52B9.jpg senna testing - http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploads18/senna50brabham1288208158.jpg Give me those + 1200bhp + tracks like full length Oesterreichring and I'm back.
This car just looks fast. Unfortuantely, I don't think they have the drivers to do it justice. That rear end packaging is incredible.
I can't imagine how they ever even felt it was even vaguely legal! I know "interpretation" is the key, but come on! I guess they're claiming the "slot gap" between the two pieces allows this view. This would seem to be the basis of why Williams claim there's is legal ("it's two pieces!") versus Caterham which is "solid"...... To use an English expression, "they're taking the piss!" Cheers, Ian
Help the Coanda effect. Charlie told 'em the pipes must be angled upwards at least 10degs. They want it to go as low as possible. Here's a pretty good explanation of what they're trying to do; [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gryojy2cHnI]Scalabroni explains Coanda - YouTube[/ame] Cheers, Ian
Did you guys read about the "blown" wheel nuts (similar idea to RB's awhile ago)? This car is bananas!
Just waiting for the ban hammer to come down from the FIA & race stewards Bananas I tell you, bananas!
