These lovely conditions remind me of N.O.T's favourite poster in the Toyota garage - http://www.hs.fi/webkuva/taysi/960/1476589820387?ts=302
Printable View
These lovely conditions remind me of N.O.T's favourite poster in the Toyota garage - http://www.hs.fi/webkuva/taysi/960/1476589820387?ts=302
nice gallery of citroen test https://www.facebook.com/KuceraPhoto...type=3&theater
https://scontent-ams3-1.xx.fbcdn.net...04420570_o.jpg
Neuville in Spain. The rear wing looks quite high.
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/2016...9b7ebf9340.jpg
Looks like a completely new wing?Quote:
Originally Posted by EightGear
Citröen doing some imense work on the aerodynamics. This is test car #9, and every one of them has had changes - impressive. Now focus seems to be on front downforce and air flow around fenders.Quote:
Originally Posted by EstWRC
Rear wing: Very advanced. Mounting is "GT prototype style" on top, the top plane has a "wavy" form to be optimised for the air stream, but prob also make it work as best as possible when the car has an angle of attack.
Have side boards.
Have a separated lower spoiler, wich prob works together with the diffusor and the underside.
Rear fenders: Going away from the Polo/Hyundai esque "boxes", the fenders are more "classic" fender flares, but with advanced aerodynamics, with air outlet and "air controllers".
Front fenders: Now with more "Ford esque" canards/front spoiler. Air outlet and "air controller" and "boosted" wheel well by inlets by the head lights. This pr in an effort to balance front/rear downforce (work on higher front downforce).
Diffusor/rear: Still extended, but looks shorter, if thats the case its prob to balance downforce forwards. Bigger "holes" behimd the rear wheels.
Car starting to look very "developed", and the deletion of Citroën DS3 design ques like the plastic around the fenders etc shows the intent. This car is going to be very good.
Wow, quite an analysis. Somebody on the forum said the aero package is not that important.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lundefaret
Wonder why Citroen are just getting their advanced aero on the C3 now ?
M-Sport who were last to have a 2017 car to run had it's aero on from scratch...
They have added piece by piece, its called development..Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie WRC
one more of Mads/Tänak https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5imNL8sLfw
nice photo with Tanak
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cw4p6R8WIAAE9ij.jpg:large
So M-Sport developed all their aero in a wind-tunnel and fitted it to the car in one go, but Citroen had to do theirs on the car and test each part a piece at a time ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lundefaret
I read that M-Sport have been praised for their aero-work
You don't work in any sort of technical development, right?
I think it's a case where we've seen two completely different development curves. Citroen did all those early tests with a focus on testing parts, engines, suspension, internals etc. So aero wasn't an immediate priority. I'm not an expert but I also think there's been a degree of waiting to see what the other manufacturers would do. To my untrained eye once the Toyota came out everyone's rear wing/aero changed etc. VW, Hyundai and Toyota have also evolved visually each time we saw them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie WRC
Because Ford's new car (not counting the mule) debuted what, three and a half months, after #Test1 they didn't have the luxury of developing in stages.
Doesn't one car is better than the other. You just work to the timeline you have.
It looks like the front splitter sends a lot of snow on the windshield. It may be one downside of the new aero package because I don't know how such effect could be limited. I'm waiting to see some footage from Swedish-like testing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Oliveira
Is it possible (by rules) that aerodynamic would be race specific or even stage specific... I think that team would homologate a super downforce version and remove certain parts to make it work for certain situation? Or homologate different bumpers and wings?
Can we expect cars to be a little more sideways in mid and slow corners because aerodinamic will stabilizate rear at high speed, so rear suspension setup can be little more flickable?
I was thinking the same thing, Citroen may be advantaged by the early testing of the "basic" parts. It reminds me of the 'negative' example of Seat who had a badly balanced base that they tried to compensate with tricks in the active diffs. So Citroen may have a good approach in trying to get a good base before they add more advanced aero elements.Quote:
Originally Posted by Simmi
Also over the season it's possible the aero will converge as they copy each other's design, provided this is allowed by the rules. Ford initially came out with more advanced aero but I guess the rest are now putting the final elements on the cars. Especially the front diveplanes beneath the headlights I think give a good amount of downforce and the lack of those elements is probably why we saw a lot of the cars initially jumping with the nose high in the air. Citroen's early tests in Finland come to mind.
There is no drama here, VW were testing 17' car for more than year, but only 2-3 months ago changed/developed completely the aero design.
From these photos one can see that the splitter also fills the radiator with snow. Together with the higher power it may be a serious issue especially for the first starter.
Maybe they'll have this 0-car in Monte. :D
http://www.mtmtech.cz/editor/filesto...11-2011051.jpg
Maybe Latvala get the job ;)
http://cdn-7.motorsport.com/images/m...on-tractor.jpg
This test is very good for M-Sport before homologation ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
Do you have to to be a rally fan ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
It was a a genuine question re the very different aero development of the two cars.
Mine was too.
Camilli
https://youtu.be/Een58mfH6Z4
https://twitter.com/traxx_wif/status/796795337612623873
Proper atmosphere Monte-Carlo
Is it me or is Camilli all over the place? It seems as if the power was too much to handle for him.Quote:
Originally Posted by dimviii
WOW look that: https://twitter.com/rourebel/status/796838902690709504
yes specially at first passes.Quote:
Originally Posted by smsgrafica
https://scontent-bru2-1.xx.fbcdn.net...37564409_o.jpg
Monte Carlo testing footage is always tricky as it's rarely possible to know which tyres or which kind of setup they use. For Monte Carlo it's necessary to test all imaginable combinations even pretty stupid ones because very often shit happens.Quote:
Originally Posted by dimviii
I don't think it comes down to settings.
from a guy was present at test.
Last test day of the Fiesta with many stops and therefore little taxiing. First of all there was a breakage of the box at about noon, they left 3 hours later before again to recreate quite quickly. Compared to Tanak last Tuesday, Camilli is much more spectacular but also less efficient.
this site claims that Tommi had a nasty crash while testing for Monte and was taken to hospital for checks
https://translate.google.ee/translat...%2F&edit-text=
http://www.worldrallyisfree.com/2016...s-une-crashee/
True, car back in Finland for bodywork..Quote:
Originally Posted by EstWRC
Great video.Quote:
Originally Posted by EstWRC
Assuming it's not something serious BUT what if it was? In my opinion it's not very professional to combine the position of team principal with a test driver because an injury during test accident can virtually paralyze the team operation in crucial moments where fast acting is needed (for example in a fight for Ogier). That applies even more for egocentric structure like the one of Tommi.Quote:
Originally Posted by AMSS
Camilli on the limit: https://youtu.be/A-mcz7rKC5c