Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 39
  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,991
    Like
    0
    Liked 14 Times in 14 Posts
    One idea which these days may or may nor be contrary to the rules, could overcome the dratted problems that the horrible idea of control tyres has allowed.

    Especially for drivers such as Schumi who requires a car to be essentially oversteer at its maximum and therefore the rear considered undriveable by other drivers - most of them incompetent when compared to the Kerpen man.

    I refer to the concept designed and used by Barnard on the McLarens of the 1980's at some point - use the front brakes to force more oversteer when the point is reached where the control tyres just flat line.
    Jense - Mclaren MP4-25 :D
    MonzaOne :D

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Quakertown, Pennsylvania
    Posts
    3,406
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior
    Hoop98 or one of the engineers could speak to this better than I can, but at 1.6 liters and 650 hp, this isn't going to be a highly pressurized turbo engine, is it? I mean, it won't be anything like the crazy turbo engines we saw in the 80's. Would these things have any sort of meaningful torque? I know a fellow who has a 2.0 liter turbo in a street car and he's making well over 400 hp... and has over 30K miles on the engine. I don't know, but I guess I've just come to expect F1 engines to be from another planet. This one sounds like the guy next door (so far).
    It depends a lot on if the FIA wants to change the maximum bore diameter.
    racing-reference.info/showblog?id=1785
    9 Simple Rules as Suggested by a Nerd

  3. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    45
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    650bhp ?
    That's pretty less power than the f1 car had today . Oh well , at least they'll have turbo and ground effect but just don't move the side pod forward .
    The only thing i look forward to...

    The KERS + Turbo + Ground effect .
    " You need to put your life on the line to become a race car driver. " , ZEROX said . :vader:

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    193
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Well known Ferrari F-40 has 2.9 L (2936 cc) turbocharged V8 giving 478 PS (352 kW; 471 hp) under 110 kPa (16 psi) of boost at 7000 rpm. If we "shrink" the engine to 1,6 L we will have about 250 HP, if "accelerate" to about 19000 rpm we get about 650 HP. These calculations are very primitive, but they give some figures at least.

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    6,476
    Like
    21
    Liked 20 Times in 20 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by ioan
    Why not simply impose a fuel tank volume?! To easy for the F1 managers to think about it?!
    Yeah, how they managed to not think of that is simply retarded.

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,231
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by theugsquirrel
    Yeah, how they managed to not think of that is simply retarded.
    There is too much opportunity for abuse with scavangers, additional pipework, swirls etc adding a few extra litres

    With a flow meter, you can guarentee that as long as nothing is between the injectors and meter, then that's the maximum they can use.

    If we have a maximum fuel tank size, we will get more of this fuel saving mode instead of racing and it's more costly to change the flow rate in the future.

  7. #27
    Admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Chester-le-Street, United Kingdom
    Posts
    38,577
    Like
    78
    Liked 125 Times in 92 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by skc
    If we have a maximum fuel tank size, we will get more of this fuel saving mode instead of racing and it's more costly to change the flow rate in the future.
    Exactly, we don't want situations like we've already seen where cars have too little fuel to complete the race and have to go into 'fuel saving'. Let them have as much as they need but only use so much at once.

    I still think that isn't the answer however. And that's drastically slashing aerodynamic grip to almost zero!
    Please 'like' our facebook page http://www.facebook.com/motorsportforums

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,231
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark
    Exactly, we don't want situations like we've already seen where cars have too little fuel to complete the race and have to go into 'fuel saving'. Let them have as much as they need but only use so much at once.

    I still think that isn't the answer however. And that's drastically slashing aerodynamic grip to almost zero!
    This is where we have some problems.

    If you cut down aero grip and rely on Mechanical, you have slow corners and lap times.

    If you compensate by introducing ground effect downforce then you improve corner speeds but make the cars unpredictable in a crash or any off track excursion into the kitty litter or grass.

    I hate the idea of a spec series but standard front and rear wings which generate up to 50% of the current grip in addition to ground effect aero seems a good alternative.

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Leeds, England
    Posts
    1,508
    Like
    0
    Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    I still just say we should keep the cars how they are now, with these regs, just ban double diffusers (which they are anyway), blown diffusers,turning vanes, and winglets on the front and rear wings.

    That will create the spectacle that they were going for in 2009.

    I was watching the season review of 2009 the other day, and the front wings that were on the Renault in Australia were almost completely clean of aero bits. All the cars should be like that. Yes the teams should be allowed to shape the sidepods, engine cover, wings, and even have F-ducts, but it's all these other bits that I don't like.

  10. #30
    Admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Chester-le-Street, United Kingdom
    Posts
    38,577
    Like
    78
    Liked 125 Times in 92 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by woody2goody
    I was watching the season review of 2009 the other day, and the front wings that were on the Renault in Australia were almost completely clean of aero bits. All the cars should be like that. Yes the teams should be allowed to shape the sidepods, engine cover, wings, and even have F-ducts, but it's all these other bits that I don't like.
    They should ban F-ducts too. They are clever, yes, but they detract from the actual skill of driving the car. All these trick double diffusers, blown diffusers, f-ducts should be completely done away with.
    Please 'like' our facebook page http://www.facebook.com/motorsportforums

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •