Horrible. Looks like a junior formula car.
Printable View
Horrible. Looks like a junior formula car.
Quote:
Originally Posted by F1boat
don't watch f1 in 2009 then :D
Well, I've yet to be convinced on that, but we'll have to wait until Australia for the answer.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
It's pretty easy to see. Mechanical grip is less susceptible to disruption by turbulence. Simple as that really.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sleeper
Lots of regulation changes in the past decade have been aimed at making the cars more able to pass other cars, and they haven't really produced a visible result on track.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
The regulation changes work...in theory.
This will work as long as the FIA keep on top of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by theugsquirrel
Hence why I said 'in theory'.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
Well Sleeper was talking about being sceptical whether it would have an effect in teh first race next year :)Quote:
Originally Posted by theugsquirrel
It probably will have a small effect but not much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
F1 is never going to be Touring cars and any changes will have a minimal effect on overtaking.
My advice would be not to get your hopes up.
True :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Knock-on
I personally believe that F1 should be subistuted with the old supertourer rules and we'd have a far better series :)
Ladies and Gentlefolk.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
I give you the 2009 FIA STF1 series.
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/1108643/banger_racing/
better than the 2008 "you touched that other car so 20 lashes and a drive through penalty because we's girly girls here" F1 series :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Knock-on
Edit: No disrespect to women of course because they can race just as well as men given the right opportunities but you get my point
And to think they threw away the Kube's chances at a WDC (as though he had a chance anyway!!)so they could spend the last half of the season developing their new 09 car. (well that is what some say...)
Much work to have that pop out!!
Wow, to quote the words of Arnold when he looked at the predator, "u one ugly mutterfookar........
Can't wait to see the 2009 cars but if the stop-gap cars are anything to go by then F1 cars will look like modernised 1980s cars. I don't know what to feel about the the change in the rules but it may produce more exciting racing. If you ask me, the real problem has never been in the regulations (with the exception of 2-race engine rule & grooved tyres), it's been in the fact that the racers aren't willing to over-take or fight as they used to.
Can someone help me understand this forum?
For YEARS, we bitched and moaned about aero, saying that it ruins the sport, complaining of every single winglet that was added to the chassis, from BMW's infamous nose to Honda's front spoilers.
We said we wanted slicks, we wanted wider cars, and less aero. No?
And now, that's what they've given us. They've significantly reduced aero, and now you guys want it back?
Seriously.... this forum never ceases to amaze me. I've never been able to understand what these members like, and what they don't like. The only thing that seems apparent to me, is that they hate change, no matter what it is. Even if it is the exact same thing that they've argued for years in favour of, when it happens, it's bad.
I really respect ArrowsF1, but if you read his comments in this thread, it seems like he's saying: "meh... nothing is changing...all this fanfare for nothing", where being one of the most knowledgeable members of this forum, he KNOWS exactly what is changing. Yes, the '09 cars will probably have the same overall speed as the '08 cars, but he, like all other members here, exactly knows why this is happening.
For years, we complained about dirty air, about how overtaking is impossible these days because cars can't get close enough, about how grooved tyres don't provide enough grip off racing line.
Now, it's happening guys. The '09 car is what we've been advocating for the past few years.
And all you can say is: it's boring? It's like a kart? It's like made of Lego? It's like Formula BMW?
Who cares? If it provides better racing, who cares?
:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by aryan
I understand what you're saying aryan :cool: I just have two points:Quote:
Originally Posted by aryan
You say "if it provides better racing" and I think that's a big "if" in the light of some of the comments from drivers and the likes of Tony Purnell that I've seen.
Secondly, I like F1 cars to look good. That may be superficial, and I know I lack a detailed understanding of all the technology, but the Lotus 79 was a damn fine looking racing car, as were the Eagle, Lotus 49 etc. In comparison the 2009 spec cars we've seen look all wrong IMHO. Pig ugly. I care about that.
Basically I think the influence of aero has developed too far, and to a large extent it is impossible to "uninvent" it. The 2009 regs have used aero to try to solve an aero problem and only time will tell if this is the right way to go.
Have any drivers said that it will make no difference? Not that I'm aware of. Both Kubica & Gene have said that the overall level of grip will be about the same, but with more emphasis on mechanical grip than aero grip. There is a substantial difference to how that makes a car behave, even if the lap times end up about the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Kudos should be given to the FIA for recognising the aero-grip problem and attempting something to redress the situation.
And how many 1970's cars were hideous? Many more than were stunners.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Since Aero can't be uninvented....well, without adapting the NASCAR formula of a brick on wheels...how else would you want the powers-that-be to approach the problem?Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
It would appear, with all due respect, that you are very happy to criticise the FIA for everything they do (and let's face it, you are on record as saying the 2008 spec cars weren't your cup of tea either) but don't actually offer any solution.
Wheeling out Lotus 79's is not a solution.
:up: Excellent comment!Quote:
Originally Posted by aryan
It's fairly easy to explain why this situation. I said it last year and I'll say it again now and next year and so on, IMO more than 90% of the forum members have a low knowledge of the technology involved, they catch some phrases during the race from the commentators, and that's all. These people couldn't make the difference between a McLaren and a Torro Rosso (or any other F1 car for that matter) if both were painted in the same neutral color.
The only thing for them is aesthetics and the name of their favorite driver and team, that's what differentiates between good and bad, beautiful and ugly.
It's like when people say: "It looks fast!" :\
Excellent point.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
*cough* Aryan *cough*
Everyone should settle down. Let's just enjoy the racing next year.Quote:
Originally Posted by gloomyDAY
kthnxbai
No matter what the regulations, no matter what the technology, some people get it right, some people get it wrong....
(Whilst it pains me to say it, I always thought that the MP4/1C was the sleekest, most perfect shape.....but, jesus, that Lotus 93T was an abomination! And to think it was designed by the genius who brought us the 79!)
I didn't say drivers had said it would make no difference, just that there is a question mark over whether it will or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
The "aero-grip problem" is hardly new.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
I didn't say there weren't hideous F1 cars in the 1970's.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
Perhaps they have it right already. Time will tell.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
In a nutshell my opinion is that the 2009 spec cars are fugly. That's not a criticism of the FIA, it's a comment on my view of how the cars look. It's also not a technical term backed up with technical knowledge as I freely admit. Tony Purnell has said he suspects the new aero rules will do little for racing. That's an opinion too, and he knows a damn sight more than me about these kind of things.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
However, we're not even into 2009 yet so let's wait and see how things pan out. Perhaps the cars will look gorgeous and the racing will be spectacular :s mokin:
There are always question marks. If there wasn't, then running the FIA would be a job any tool in a kilt could do.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Very true, but then all the more kudos to the FIA for not making a 'knee-jerk' reaction to the problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Which just proves that whilst some cars look good (the Lotus 79), others look awful (the Ensign from 1979) under the same regulations. Looks are not part of any F1 designers concern nor can any regulations prevent monstrosity.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
I suspect that, as a harsh critic of the FIA, you would have been quick to proclaim them as having lost the plot had they insisted that the new regulations should be based around aesthetics.
One thing is for certain, the air doesn't care if what it's hitting is pretty or not.
Appearance, appearance... Well, I don't have a problem with the rear wing. It may be smaller, but generally not annoying. However, the front wing seems clearly too big and I suspect they have made some kind of a miscalculation. It's simply unnormal that the front wing is wider than the car itself! Wings may be lost not only at the starts, but also during overtaking, when the cars are closely together side-by-side. It would even look better if they had no front wings - this would also fulfil the goal of "less downforce"!
I personally had no problem with the winglets and stuff, because innovation is what I like to see in F1. But I don't want to see F1 cars starting to look like F3 cars or something like that - and unfortunately the new cars look outdated, leaving a clumsy and underdeveloped impression.