[Team] The 2012 F1 CAR LAUNCH THREAD

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

They need to go back to the ultra wide rear tyres.

For aesthetic reasons, maybe. But you couldn't have that much grip with that much downforce and still expect good safe racing. Tyre technology has come a long way in terms of grip and durability since F1 tyres were at their widest.

[steve nielsen]

Mclaren had fake exhaust at the presentation

[Lotusonpole]

Originally Posted by Oran Park Forever

and here's a stunning Lotus!



sorry, just had to do this before I threw up over my keyboard!!


.

Pass the tissues please.
After seeing this Lotus baeuty and looking at the new ugly stepped noses, I just burst into tears.

[steve nielsen]

Originally Posted by Lotusonpole

Pass the tissues please.
After seeing this Lotus baeuty and looking at the new ugly stepped noses, I just burst into tears.

[Marbot]

Apparently there is some sort of debate going on between some teams and the FIA with regard to how the cars look this season.

Charlie Whiting seems to be denying any knowledge that he was told some time ago by some engineers that the cars would look awful as the regulations stood.

No doubt the FIA were expecting them all to look like the McLaren, when in fact there was a more obvious interpretation of the rules.

[Marbot]

Slot above nose on Red Bull is just for "driver cooling", Newey says.

"The slot in the nose is simply driver cooling. Traditionally the driver cooling slot is at the front of the nose, but really for styling as much as anything we moved it to where you now see it to break up the aesthetics of the ramp."

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/97390

Does anyone believe that?

Lots of pictures of nice looking cars, but they were from a time when the designers were using drawing boards and not computers.

[bella]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Apparently there is some sort of debate going on between some teams and the FIA with regard to how the cars look this season.

Charlie Whiting seems to be denying any knowledge that he was told some time ago by some engineers that the cars would look awful as the regulations stood.

No doubt the FIA were expecting them all to look like the McLaren, when in fact there was a more obvious interpretation of the rules.

this is a quote from autosport.com's testing blog:

Certainly, they are here to stay and cosmetic concerns aren't high on the agenda, as Scuderia Toro Rosso's charismatic technical director Giorgio Ascanelli pointed out.

"They are not nice, I must say," he admitted. "James Allison from Lotus wanted a rule to avoid them looking so ugly. But Charlie Whiting said it would be the first time we made a rule to avoid cars being ugly."

i mean, can you really legislate against awkward looking cars?

[slicktoast]

The Williams' step is begging for a set of UOP Shadow eyes.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by bella

i mean, can you really legislate against awkward looking cars?

Not really. When you start to draw up regulations that are solely in place to make the cars look better, then that's the time to think about what it is that F1 is really all about.

[Lotusonpole]

Originally Posted by steve nielsen

Just when I thought I'd pulled my self together.....

However reluctantly, I agree, you can't legislate against ugliness.
Rules are set and interpreted and as long as they conform then ugly or not, so be it.

It is such a shame that with each set of new rules the cars tend to get uglier and uglier. Although apart from the wide front wing and the narrow rear one I quite liked the cleaner lines of the last set of rules.

[steve nielsen]

Originally Posted by bella

i mean, can you really legislate against awkward looking cars?

they already did in the past

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by steve nielsen

they already did in the past

Fortunately, that particular loophole was cleared up on safety grounds. But yes, they weren't pretty, that's for sure.

[bella]

Originally Posted by Lotusonpole

It is such a shame that with each set of new rules the cars tend to get uglier and uglier. Although apart from the wide front wing and the narrow rear one I quite liked the cleaner lines of the last set of rules.

i think it comes with setting maximum dimensions in different areas of the car design - that means the teams have been working outside of those dimensions to gain as much from those rules as possible. the reflex reaction to that is to reduce to stay within those rules and try and maximise as soon as you reach a point on the car where you're outside of the rules. the alternative is how mclaren have approached the nose issue and go for a completely different strategy that doesn't require maxing out in those areas. that's why their car doesn't look quite so silly.

if that makes sense.

[Mr V]

Originally Posted by steve nielsen

they already did in the past

We all know the real reason they were banned, but the official one was on safety grounds, not what was pleasing to the eye.

[Sodemo]

Originally Posted by Marbot

For aesthetic reasons, maybe. But you couldn't have that much grip with that much downforce and still expect good safe racing. Tyre technology has come a long way in terms of grip and durability since F1 tyres were at their widest.

The answer there is simple, cut the downforce levels by 70-80% or thereabouts. Then fit the monster wheels at the back.

[Wims]

The monster wheels are incredibly ugly. Please no monster out of proportion wheels lol

[luke g28]

Ferrari having a go at copying mclaren

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by luke g28

Ferrari having a go at copying mclaren

I think that it was Ferrari who unveiled them to the world first.

It looks like they've taken a hacksaw to it!

[luke g28]

Originally Posted by Marbot

I think that it was Ferrari who unveiled them to the world first.

It looks like they've taken a hacksaw to it!

Both launched with fake covers over the exhaust. Ferrari tested with a sealed cone that finished at exactly the same time as the exhaust exit, Mclaren tested with extended bodywork around the exhaust and a slot cut through from above. Thereby the air that flows over the side pods hits the exhaust stream and pushes it down to the rear wheel hub.

They are using air to manipulate the exhaust stream as they are not allowed to use bodywork. In the same way that they created a virtual diffuser with the exhaust gases.

[Oran Park Forever]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

The answer there is simple, cut the downforce levels by 70-80% or thereabouts. Then fit the monster wheels at the back.

Another (even simpler) answer is harden up the tyre compounds........& return some proportion front to rear.

Just because there is all this 'technology', doesn't mean they have to be basically a 10 lap screamer!
Pirelli can make any compound.......fact!

It's taken the "pit lane is part of the race track " theory to the extreme!


.

[Oran Park Forever]

Originally Posted by steve nielsen

Officially, the last ever pretty F1 car!

..............& designed on a computer............& endlessly tested in a wind tunnel!............& was competitive (to a point).............& won!

Computers & wind tunnels did not kill aesthetics in F1, more it was the FIA's choice of 'odd' dimensions which teams have to work within......

& the era of the 'step nose' should be the last straw.

Just like Ground Effect, Active Suspension, F duct, Blown Diffuser etc.....they all had their time in F1, were perfected by most teams, then routinely banned by the FIA. Effectively giving the teams another area to perfect in doing so........you know, technological advancements, not beating the same theory to death!

It's time to ban raised noses, they've been in the sport more than long enough, they're partly responsible for the 'dirty air' issue that drivers forever complain about..............& now look what they've been reduced to!

A complete eyesore on the sport as well as the car!!


.

[Sodemo]

Perhaps they should mandate that the front wing must be "directly attached to the nose section", without the use of "pillars" (which they use now).

Originally Posted by Oran Park Forever

Another (even simpler) answer is harden up the tyre compounds........& return some proportion front to rear.

Just because there is all this 'technology', doesn't mean they have to be basically a 10 lap screamer!
Pirelli can make any compound.......fact!

It's taken the "pit lane is part of the race track " theory to the extreme!


.

Harder tyre compounds would be both good and bad. Good because it would mean less marbles offline, so better for overtaking, and bad because it would mean less mechanical grip, and what the cars need is more mechanical grip, or rather the balance between mechanical and aero adjusted in the favour of mechanical.

[aneesh99]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Indeed.

There, so far, seems to be two schools of thought on this subject. McLaren's and then everyone else's.

Nick Wirth obviously did the CFD for McLaren

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Oran Park Forever

Another (even simpler) answer is harden up the tyre compounds........& return some proportion front to rear.

Just because there is all this 'technology', doesn't mean they have to be basically a 10 lap screamer!

Pirelli can make any compound.......fact!

It's taken the "pit lane is part of the race track " theory to the extreme!

This is only the answer if you're fine with the race being won after the first few corners, during which time it will be imperative that you overtake what you can, when you can, (after that happens TV viewers/spectators can go away and do something else before returning to watch the last 10 minutes) before settling down to an eternity of staring at the gearbox of perhaps a much slower car in front of you that got a somewhat lucky start, and you know isn't suddenly going to disappear from view unless the driver makes an error (unlikely), the car breaks down (even more unlikely) or indeed the race ends (inevitably).

Of course, there's always DRS.

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by aneesh99

Nick Wirth obviously did the CFD for McLaren

McLaren will take the 2012 constructors championship...