DOF_power

F1: Turbo Era Car Versus 2007 V8 Winglets Era Car

23 posts in this topic


The problem is the new car tough faster goes a lot wider thus reducing the racing line and reducing overtaking possibility. Also faster speed = more wake turbulence.

The V-ing of the corners is the result of a poor combination of grooves and downforce.

Unless the aero is cleaned and the cornering isn't smooth-ened overtaking is a lost cause. Only a weirdo combination of active suspensions active differential AWD and active 4 wheel steering will reduce the V-ing as far as I can think of.

That's unless performance is reduced to 1980s levels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AWD? you'll be hankering after gas turbines next.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem is the new car tough faster goes a lot wider thus reducing the racing line and reducing overtaking possibility. Also faster speed = more wake turbulence.

The V-ing of the corners is the result of a poor combination of grooves and downforce.

Unless the aero is cleaned and the cornering isn't smooth-ened overtaking is a lost cause. Only a weirdo combination of active suspensions active differential AWD and active 4 wheel steering will reduce the V-ing as far as I can think of.

That's unless performance is reduced to 1980s levels.

I don't think 4 wheel steering will really help, when Beneton tested it both drivers said it did absolutely nothing to lap times and just felt odd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, but mixed with active AWD maybe could do something. The latest Renault Laguna coupe and BMW 7 series have 4 wheel steering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AWD? you'll be hankering after gas turbines next.

And electro-magnetic valves V10 twin-turbo (25000 rpms) on hydrogen would be my choice.

Edited by DOF_Renault_BMW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And electro-magnetic valves V10 twin-turbo (25000 rpms) on hydrogen would be my choice.

Not forgetting the quad speaker system with a sub-woofer and Dolby Surround Sound :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the better to make the masses hear the engine ... and fear for their lives.

Edited by DOF_Renault_BMW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And electro-magnetic valves V10 twin-turbo (25000 rpms) on hydrogen would be my choice.

Electromagnetic valves/clutches should be given a try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not forgetting the quad speaker system with a sub-woofer and Dolby Surround Sound :D

:rofl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Only a weirdo combination of active suspensions active differential AWD and active 4 wheel steering will reduce the V-ing as far as I can think of.

Or you know like just chopping off some of them winglets.

Where on earth does active suspension and 4 wheel steering come into it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you know what the roles of (advanced) active suspension were ?!

Chopping the winglets would make the cars no faster/much then the GP2s, Formula Renault 3.5, LMP1s.

If you want slow cars go watch something else as there's no (extra) speed/performance without aerodynamics and electronics.

Edited by DOF_Renault_BMW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think giving the cars way more mechanical grip is part of the key, and big fat slicks, (Pre-92 level preferably) seems the best way to go about this along with extending the maximum width to 2m or 2.2m. This offers more space aerodynamically so designers might lean less towards ridiculous winglets and boards and make the cars a whole lot more comfortable off-line. Of course, the aero rules need a serious shakeup, (ban on winglets between, say, the front wheel axle line and the rear, raise the rear wing, drop the front wing, restrict them to 1 or 2 planes front and rear) and more undertray-generated downforce would do wonders too. Essentially as suggested forcing the cars back towards how they looked in the late 80s/early 90s. Also, ban power steering, that truly is a joke for top athletes.

I don't like the idea of active suspension because there's a real risk of the car starting to drive its self more, the same goes for AWD and 4 wheel steering, those are right out of the window IMO. My vision of the car is a reactive tool controlled exclusively by the driver's inputs in terms of throttle, steering, clutch and braking. If it were simply reactive suspension I might not be opposed, especially as it would add to the unpredictability and skill demanded to drive the car.

Edited by Elizabeth Sterling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think giving the cars way more mechanical grip is part of the key, and big fat slicks, (Pre-92 level preferably) seems the best way to go about this along with extending the maximum width to 2m or 2.2m. This offers more space aerodynamically so designers might lean less towards ridiculous winglets and boards and make the cars a whole lot more comfortable off-line. Of course, the aero rules need a serious shakeup, (ban on winglets between, say, the front wheel axle line and the rear, raise the rear wing, drop the front wing, restrict them to 1 or 2 planes front and rear) and more undertray-generated downforce would do wonders too. Essentially as suggested forcing the cars back towards how they looked in the late 80s/early 90s. Also, ban power steering, that truly is a joke for top athletes.

I don't like the idea of active suspension because there's a real risk of the car starting to drive its self more, the same goes for AWD and 4 wheel steering, those are right out of the window IMO. My vision of the car is a reactive tool controlled exclusively by the driver's inputs in terms of throttle, steering, clutch and braking. If it were simply reactive suspension I might not be opposed, especially as it would add to the unpredictability and skill demanded to drive the car.

Advanced active suspensions are a must. The electronic nervous system must detect the loss of downforce of the wings and compensate by lowering the car (enhancing the ground-effect/underwing downforce thus equalizing for the loss wings downforce).

That's part of the 2011 proposals, but the 50% loss of downforce isn't to my taste as GP2 cars where just 7-5 sec. slower in France and if Mosley's proposed 5 slower cars becomes a reality it will be embarassing.

The technology and strategy must make the difference as always in F1.

The highest formula of GP racing was always like this.

Those who wanted to see the top drivers (Clark, Hill, Brabham, Rindt) to battle it out in more equal machinery would watch voiturette/F2 racing and/or the Tasman series; the races for some thus more interesting. But the top formula was about "innovate to win" as if technology could not defeat the driver then there was no need for progress.

And all the great big step forwards like the slipery light alloy direct-injected Mercedeses, the mid engined Coopers, the monocoque 25, the ground effects cars, the active suspens would leave the HAVE NOTs drivers depressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW I agree with most of your ideas but instead of the flat bottoms there should be sculped bottoms and instead of the 18 inch rear tires the 70s early 80s 21 inch ones should be used.

08061202vp5.jpg

Most (recorded) overtakings and lead changes were in 1982 BTW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DOF you should try mailing your ideas to Mr Mosley instead of just writing the same thing on a forum for 346th time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What would Mosely care, other than keeping an eye out on how much money he gives to prostitutes??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes I can tell who started a thread just by reading the topic. This was one of those times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just drop all these bloody winglet thingies and go back to " SLIDING SKIRTS" ground effects like it used to be and for God sake why not use the telemetry that modern day production cars use????????

I always thought F1 was the development R&D part of motor racing? to be passed onto everyday car production?

Seems today the every day shopping cart, sorry the SUV that mum transports the kids around in, has more technology then F1 ?????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, so true.

But there's no need for sliding (rubber) skirts (witch would easily be damaged), rigid ones can work just fine (1981, 1982).

The ground height can be controled via active suspensions (witch would use sensors and lasers to check things).

And add some 21 inch slicks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now