Why doesn't it belong in F1? A standardised hole for the starter motor hardly makes them spec cars. Give designers a box and they'll tell you it's something else.......
Printable View
Why doesn't it belong in F1? A standardised hole for the starter motor hardly makes them spec cars. Give designers a box and they'll tell you it's something else.......
It's a hole. Given a maximum surface area they could at least try to use it for downforce as well. Give them a "spec" part and someone will cry that "Team X has the FIA under their thumb".Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
How come everybody is crying foul on specifically McLaren on this? Mercedes GP and two other teams (one being Renault) also need to change, but don't get people's scorn.
http://en.espnf1.com/australia/motor...ory/11868.html
Favouritsm perhaps? Or perhaps this is like Fox News version of "Fair and Balanced"
Its as if Mosely never left! Only Todt is worse because he doesn't have the fortitude and determination of Max. He loves committees and consensus.
I am sure the team from Woking will take this in their stride - imagine if it makes the car quicker! Ferrari - will really be hopping mad!
I am sure Mclaren wish THEY could have been nominated legal cheats like Ferrari were with their secret technical veto arrangement.
I am sure Mclaren will have the measure of the prancing donkey and the Red bs cars - and it will be sweet whether it is Jenson or Lewis that wins.
Clearly Fox does not adhere to your views!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
Renault are used to this sort of thing - remember the front wing saga.
Errrr Rollo, I don't see McLaren being singled out?
Rubbish, if another design would have been better they wouldn't have used the present one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Devote
LOL SD strikes me as a sort of Comical Ali type figure :)Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
The Bahrain track ran red with the bloody of Ferrari and it's drivers! Ferrari were embarassed! All hail the mighty silver cars! Victory will be ours!
Good point BUT you know what he means. The design they had at Bahrain was the best one up to that point for their car as it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by henners88
Todt is getting things done and there is nothing wrong with taking more into consideration before taking action. It is the trait of considered and intelligent leaders.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Devote
I guess you donīt see the irony in this clip:Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Devote
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afMsX...eature=related
do you?
I doubt they will be able to extract more air through a much smaller hole, so I fail to see how the FIA limitation will automatically make them improve their design.Quote:
Originally Posted by henners88
Sure in the long term they will find a better solution, a solution they would have anyway found during the cars development cycle.
There's spec mid-plane on the front wing, no aero foils on the sidepods.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
A spec hole for starter motor? Won't be long till more and more parts get standardised
Clever use of the regs by the teams which just goes to show that the more they try and clamp down on the rules, the more the seive leaks.
It would be nice to suppose the Fia will give some standard rules that allow innovation but that goes against the controlling culture of the FIA.
I personally think they should have;
Standard wings - front and rear - that produce next to no downforce but provide sponsor space.
No diffusers, and a standard floor.
Everything else should be within not particularly or overrestrictive rules.
Agreed. Screw the people who whine about standard bitsQuote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
Or even wingless F1 cars would be interesting. Perhaps tyre technology have come on leaps and bounds more than we realise.
Great, let's turn F1 into NASCAR!Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
F1 will be the pinnacle.... not!
Or, cars with benign wings.....Quote:
Originally Posted by wedge
Spec parts in certain areas could be agreed by trading free reign on, for example, engines. All the FIA has to do is say;
"no limitation on engine or energy recovery, but you will only get x fuel for the weekend.
Gearboxes are unrestricted so long as they are manual.
Amen Brother! How I would LOVE to see a V12 take on a KERS boosted V8, or a turbo charged V6.Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
With manual gearboxes, If I may add.
Yes, given spec parts the "pinnacle" of motorsports to progress to a point that it uses less tech than street cars!Quote:
Originally Posted by wedge
What's this obsession with being the pinnacle even if that means being slightly boring?Quote:
Originally Posted by wedge
Top shelf technology can't be boring.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
But who among us watches racing to see technology? A high tech parade is still a parade.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
Exactly. It seems that people like wedge and ioan can't see the wood for the trees.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior
Intelligent people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior
I do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior
So people who watch racing to actually see people race are unintelligent? That does not compute.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
You are right it doesn't compute, because you are wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
It was asked who is watching F1 for technology. Tamb answered that intelligent people do that, he didn't say that the intelligent people do only that.
His answer did not imply what you somehow managed to deduct using false logic.
Who among us watch racing to actually see people race?
Fair point :p :s mokin:
Because F1 has, will, and should be - to a certain extent to the detriment of the 'show' and driver aids - a technological arms race.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
If I wanted entertainment then I watch NASCAR. From a technical standpoint the homogeneity of the COT had sucked the life out of it. Gone are the days of Jeff Gordon driving a T-Rex, a car built specifically to push the envelope of the rules and made the rest of the garage and NASCAR sit up, take notice and ban it.
Go read a bloody magazine, leave the SPORT that is F1 to be a SPORT.Quote:
Originally Posted by wedge
:laugh:Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
A sport? :confused:
What kind of sport is that where 99% of the work is done by a mechanical device aka engine?! And where the engineers count for like 70% of the final outcome!
I always thought it was a technology exhibition where the best car manufacturers show what hey can achieve.
So what you're saying is if you put me in a top car I'll be withing 1% of Alonso, Massa, Hamilton and friends? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
I never said that, where did you read it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
This issue is over with now, move on.
Are you pino's niece or something? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mia 01
One teams of engineers/designers competing to build the better race car against teams.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
The key word being competition. That has been the essence of racing.
Don't like it? Watch NASCAR, IRL, GP2, WSR or better even better - Go read a bloody magazine!
Almost all Sports are reliant on Technology even if it's a runner with space age designed sneakers, advanced fibre materials and specially designed axcercise and training devices.
At the end of the day, it's the nut behind the wheel that turns it otherwise we wouldn't have anything to compare drivers against. Is Hamilton agressive with a tail happy technique? Is Button measured and acurate? Does Massa have the equalivent of a glass jaw when under pressure?
Technology is hugely important but I like to think that a driver has a small part to play as well.