[Team] 2024 Team Launch Dates & Testing

[E.B]

Originally Posted by Skam85

I guess stripping it down to carbon makes it about 0.00047s a lap faster, which means they should all only be about 2.99953s per lap slower than the RB now.

Its a bit more time than that. Albeit still not enough to bridge the gap to RB.

F1 cars have around 6kg of paint (according to Alfa Romeo team manager Beat Zehnder)

So the maximum theoretical mass gain is 6kg, or around 0.18s/lap (considering a 0.3s/lap weight sensitivity) if the car still ends up over the minimum mass

A 3kg gain would bring around 0.1s!

https://twitter.com/FDataAnalysis/st...08330391183362

[Richard C]

So... given they created a weight allowance for drivers (so they didn't have to starve down to low weight), if this trend of bare carbon/little in the way of paint continues, I can imagine them creating a paint requirement. Something like a rough calculation of typical car surface area x paint thickness x density of paint. Values for paint thickness and density would have to be typical/representative. And if teams don't cover their cars they would have to add ballast to make up for it. In short... not painting your car does not result in weight loss. All in the name of making the cars pretty for fans and maybe sponsors. I can imagine sponsors may want more of "their" colors on the car.

I am only half joking.

Richard

[Tourer]

Maybe someone needs to invent a process for colouring carbon so that the cars can be bare carbon but colours other than black?

[Richard C]

Not sure where to post this. But it is looking more like Sauber will not be able to use "Stake" on the car.

https://www.gpfans.com/en/f1-news/10...investigation/

It seems like they knew they would have to run "Kick" in a few countries, but are running afoul of Swiss laws as well.



(Image from Reddit)

Richard

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by Tourer

Maybe someone needs to invent a process for colouring carbon so that the cars can be bare carbon but colours other than black?

It is already possible to tint carbon fibre during it's processing; how effective that is in providing vivid colours, I am uncertain. I also not able to say whether that adds weight to the finished product nor whether it would affect it's original strength.

[PhilipR]

The interesting point for me is that by year 3 I imagine all teams are meeting the weight limit with no issues what so ever.
So the bare carbon is just to lower the weight further and add ballast in other areas. I think F1 has opened a can of worms now that will be difficult to close without regulations in place

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by Richard C

I am only half joking.

Yeah, that's what worries me.....

[Skam85]

Interesting fact is that the two cars with the most colour last year were the only ones to win races.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

Yeah, that's what worries me.....

The more I think about this, the more I can imagine it might happen. And I think the way to write the rules could be done in a more straightforward way. I think it would work out something like this...

1. Cars would be defined to have roughly a specific exterior surface area that would be a candidate for some type of paint. This would be a value they would work out and we be a fixed values for all cars. This could be negotiated down to a less than 100% value.

2. Similar to the above, there would be considered to be a practical minimum thickness of paint and the same goes for minimum paint density. This minimal density should allow for enough pigment in the paint to produce colorful cars. It could be more complicated to address base, color and clear coat, but no doubt they could create a workable solution.

The minimal painted area X thickness X density would generate a specific anticipated weight in which the teams couldn't get around. So they might as well use pigmented paint to provide a more "classic" style of livery.

Teams would be expected (via the regulations) to do the following

* Paint the entire exterior to meet the minimum exterior surface area coverage requirement
* Use paint that meets the density requirements (to prevent teams from using ultra low density... such as with low or minimal pigmentation... to circumvent the intent of the regulations)
* FIA would use something such as ultrasonic paint thickness gauges to measure a specific set of locations on a car, but would be able to spot check any other location on the car. Samples of paint from the car can be taken at any time to verify paint density.

Richard

[bathurst77]

Originally Posted by Richard C

The more I think about this, the more I can imagine it might happen. And I think the way to write the rules could be done in a more straightforward way. I think it would work out something like this...

Richard

"All exposed exterior carbon fibre must be covered by xmm thickness of approved coating material." (ie paint, wraps or decals)

If the teams are forced to cover it, they can used colours at no weight cost. (assuming the weight difference of coloured wrap and clear wrap is miniscule)

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by bathurst77

"All exposed exterior carbon fibre must be covered by xmm thickness of approved coating material." (ie paint, wraps or decals)

If the teams are forced to cover it, they can used colours at no weight cost. (assuming the weight difference of coloured wrap and clear wrap is miniscule)

Basically the same as what I am saying. And your simplification would work as the rules would be simple, but the working process would be a series of defined practical procedures plus probably some specifications as to what might make up a "approved coating" to aid in teams knowing what would and would not likely be approved. Of which the coating specifications which would again likely be defined in such a way that attempts at light weight, low pigment coatings would not be approved. As you say "coating" is probably the correct term as you don't limit them to traditional paints so that other methods (such as wraps) could be used. In the end, teams would have no reason not to implement more traditional liveries. Sponsorship needs would provide the push for that. The sponsorship push would be successful as it would have no performance negatives.

Richard

[MaxLL]

Originally Posted by Richard C

Not sure where to post this. But it is looking more like Sauber will not be able to use "Stake" on the car.

https://www.gpfans.com/en/f1-news/10...investigation/

It seems like they knew they would have to run "Kick" in a few countries, but are running afoul of Swiss laws as well.

Richard

I think the Swiss will force them to change their advertising methodology. They're a very meticulous people. And if the Swiss decide to test something, they will get to the bottom of it. But at the same time, the Swiss themselves gamble and love it. I know a few Swiss people.

[chillibowl]

team CashApp bringing back those old school RB cans/Toro Rosso livery vibe!



their kit looks really good as well. their name aside, i like it a lot!

[Aysedasi]

Crap name, nice livery......

[Richard C]

Yes, that livery looks good. That white bull over blue when they ran that style a few years ago (2018?) was and still is a fantastic look.

Richard

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

Crap name, nice livery......

Couldn’t have put it better myself. Cash App does sound like what we feel about that name after all

[Guthrie]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

team CashApp bringing back those old school RB cans/Toro Rosso livery vibe!



their kit looks really good as well. their name aside, i like it a lot!

Lovely to see the Torro Rosso colors ??

[S griffin]

It is ironic the team with the most hated name has the best livery so far

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Richard C

Yes, that livery looks good. That white bull over blue when they ran that style a few years ago (2018?) was and still is a fantastic look.

Richard

That white bull almost looks more like an elephant....
Nah. I searched it and it is a bull.
But from one angle it did look like big ears and tusks....

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

That white bull almost looks more like an elephant....
Nah. I searched it and it is a bull.
But from one angle it did look like big ears and tusks....

Haha. I am not sure if it is white or is supposed to be silver?

This reminds me of a private joke I have with my wife. There is a regional grocery store here named "Food Lion". We joke that the logo is not a Lion, but rather a Dog. So we had universally call it "Food Dog" for such a long time that I think our kids when younger thought that was the actual name.

Richard

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Richard C

Haha. I am not sure if it is white or is supposed to be silver?

This reminds me of a private joke I have with my wife. There is a regional grocery store here named "Food Lion". We joke that the logo is not a Lion, but rather a Dog. So we had universally call it "Food Dog" for such a long time that I think our kids when younger thought that was the actual name.

Richard

I think it is actually supposed to be silver as in a light 'aluminum silver' and metallic blue, a very nice combo. One thing I'm noticing is that several pundits/journalists are calling for RBR to be persuaded to sell VCARB.

Note persuaded not forced, it has the appearance of being kinder.
I have an opinion about this but in the light of the teams decision on Andretti I think the whole idea is a joke.

[chillibowl]

not much change with the livery but the car...not sure what to think about the design though.

it looks aggressive in a way that i lack the expertise to understand but it's appropriately green because it has this Frankenstein's monster vibe to it?

[S griffin]

I think the car looks fine. Let’s hope for Alonso’s sake it’s not only as quick as last year, but also more consistent

[bjohnsonsmith]

I like the look of Aston Martin, that gets my vote.

[chillibowl]

a little less black and really like the yellow stripes. a classic look!