A case to go back to smaller wheels and tyres

[Taxi645]

I made a separate thread on the the wheel arch proposal, because wet racing was only a small part of the subject of this thread:
https://tentenths.com/forum/showthre...93#post4134693

[S griffin]

I don't think there's a need to change the wheel size. We've seen in the season just gone there isn't too much that needs to be changed

[Taxi645]

Originally Posted by S griffin

I don't think there's a need to change the wheel size. We've seen in the season just gone there isn't too much that needs to be changed

Smaller cars with smaller lighter wheels and tires and flexible aero that strongly cut are drag would allow yet again smaller and lighter powertrains and drastically reduced fuel volume and weight without the need for fuel stops.


Smaller lighter cars would be:


1 Much more nimble and fun to drive again (while maintaining current safety standards).
2 Cheaper to built and transport.
3 Use much less fuel.
4 Have better visibility.
5 Have less wet weather problems.
6 Have cheaper and easier to transport and handle tyres.
7 Be much more future compatible when the shift is more and more made to electric, where heavy batteries are the biggest problem.


So is there a need? That depends on your perspective, but I do think it could greatly contribute to a better F1 car that is more future proof.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Taxi645

Smaller lighter cars would be:


1 Much more nimble and fun to drive again (while maintaining current safety standards).
2 Cheaper to built and transport.
3 Use much less fuel.
4 Have better visibility.
5 Have less wet weather problems.
6 Have cheaper and easier to transport and handle tyres.
7 Be much more future compatible when the shift is more and more made to electric, where heavy batteries are the biggest problem.

I'm not sure that all of those characteristics are certain.

Could you expand on why smaller cars would be:
1 maintaining current safety standards - a significant part of the current car size is devoted to safety structures.
2 Cheaper to built - does smaller automatically mean cheaper? There may be less raw material, but miniaturisation of components in other fields has not automatically meant reduced cost.
7 Be much more future compatible when the shift is more and more made to electric, where heavy batteries are the biggest problem. - how so? Most automotive fields are seeing larger vehicles as the standard, as a result of modernisation.


But what I also note is that the argument is now being made for smaller cars as a whole, not just smaller wheels and tyres. I think that is a different argument entirely.

Smaller cars - one case
Smaller wheels on the current cars - a different case altogether.

[Taxi645]

[QUOTE=crmalcolm;4134834]I'm not sure that all of those characteristics are certain.

Could you expand on why smaller cars would be:

maintaining current safety standards - a significant part of the current car size is devoted to safety structures.

Do you really want me to explain how a smaller fuel tank, a smaller and lighter engine, Dropping the MGU-H, a smaller lighter gearbox and smaller and lighter wheels and tyres would lead to smaller lighter cars when maintain equal safety standards?

2 Cheaper to built - does smaller automatically mean cheaper? There may be less raw material, but miniaturisation of components in other fields has not automatically meant reduced cost.

In this case it does, indeed mainly due to less RAW material and transport cost. Miniaturization in the field of for instance micro ships is a completely different thing. You don't need less of more or less the same, you need completely new technologies to push the boundaries of what is possible. So the comparison does not work.

7 Be much more future compatible when the shift is more and more made to electric, where heavy batteries are the biggest problem. - how so? Most automotive fields are seeing larger vehicles as the standard, as a result of modernisation.

Already explained on this board. The most restrictive component in electric racing is the limited energy density of the batteries. An F1 car has quite a significant potential efficiency gain through flexible aero and size reduction. With more efficiency you can run a smaller battery and/or run it longer.

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

But what I also note is that the argument is now being made for smaller cars as a whole, not just smaller wheels and tyres. I think that is a different argument entirely.

Smaller cars - one case
Smaller wheels on the current cars - a different case altogether.

On this board and also partly in this thread, I have consistently argued for:


1 Smaller, simpler and lighter powertrains
2 Smaller cars
3 Smaller wheels and tyres
4 Reduced aero drag through flexible aero.


You suggest that I'm shifting my narrative whereas if you were paying attention and would invest more effort into understanding what someone is saying rather than in arguing, you would've notices there is no shift in narrative, all arguments have been made before and it all is interconnected.


All these four above points are being made to improve the handling, racebility and sustainability in both cost and fuel use. The reason I made a separate thread about smaller wheels and tyres that each subject is complex enough separately. To put everything in one thread would lead to a monster of a messy thread.


Anyway, this is all discussed before. Probably, I should know better than to make the same argument over and over.





Now, I'll get back from my high horse again.

[P38 in workshop]

As much as I would like the cars to be smaller and lighter,I fear it would be an exercise in creating much more complicated structures from ever more exotic materials.I would be equally happy to see road cars have their wheel sizes reduced so that they look more like race cars and that seems just as unlikely.Not for practical reasons,but because of what non engineers think looks "cool".The smaller wheels would reduce the amount of intrusion into the footwells and luggage space and consume less material in production.Then maybe F1 could follow the trend.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Maybe mud guards aren’t such a bad idea?

[...]

For fun you could only fit it if they was a chance of rain. That might be a silly.

Or maybe not as silly as you thought?

"Nikolas Tombazis, the head of the FIA F1 technical department, is confident the wheel arches will be ready for 2024. But he hopes they might be ready for the second half of ’23, provided a design can be finalised and the teams agree to this happening.

This would mean the wheel arches would be available for high-risk rain events such as the Belgian, Japanese and Brazilian Grands Prix next season."

"“We only think it’s going to be something that hopefully gets used on a couple of occasions a year, maybe three,” said Tombazis of the wheel arches. “We don’t want it to be every time there’s a drop of rain."

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by P38 in workshop

As much as I would like the cars to be smaller and lighter,I fear it would be an exercise in creating much more complicated structures from ever more exotic materials.

This is F1 we're talking about. When have F1 engineers taken a simple idea and stuck with it?

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

This is F1 we're talking about. When have F1 engineers taken a simple idea and stuck with it?

I can understand the argument but the safety structures are a part of the regulation and designers will do whatever they need to.
If making cars smaller and lighter yet with the requisite safety structure they will find a way.
Developing new ideas and materials is all a part of the exercise.

They FIA and brawn would have known the likelihood of spray with underbody aero so it isn't a surprise. To call it a problem is a surprise.

Or are people just adopting the common narrative?
Tyres used to be a competitive development process so we always got the best that could be produced.
Now it is a business contract with built in performance objectives.

Is the dog chasing its tail?
Or is the cat stalking a mechanical mouse?

[Taxi645]

Originally Posted by P38 in workshop

As much as I would like the cars to be smaller and lighter,I fear it would be an exercise in creating much more complicated structures from ever more exotic materials.

Well, F1 is targeting a reduction in the wheelbase to 3.300mm form the current 3.600mm. So for now the target still seem to be smaller and lighter cars.

Below is a bit of a poor attempt to show the effect of tyre diameter on how "wide" a tyre and car looks.



Above is the current F1 car at 2.000m wide and 405mm width tyres. Below is a Super Formula car at 1.900mm wide and only 360mm wide tyres.

See how the huge tyre diameter of the F1 car changes the proportions of the car? To me the Super Formula car has a lower wider feel because of the smaller diameter tires, even though the car as a whole and the tyres itself are more narrow.

[Taxi645]

FIA confirms, 2026 cars to become smaller and lighter.

https://the-race.com/formula-1/f1s-p...-cars-in-2026/


“Then there’s where the opportunity is, and there’s about 15-20kg because of more complex systems on the cars and there’s about 30-35kg on car dimensions. So cars being much longer and wider, bigger tyres and so on.
“And we believe in the car dimensions there lies an opportunity. We would want 2026 cars to be quite a lot shorter and probably maybe a bit narrower as well and all of that is going to contain the weight increase."



So he mentions the larger tyres along with the length and the width as part of the dimensions where an opportunity lies for weight loss. Perhaps the first hints of smaller wheels and tyres being considered for 2026?



More weight reduction would be possible with different powertrain choices, but the desire to have a very large electric component to allow a soft landing towards full electric in the future, makes sure the weight reduction is limited to about 35kg as pointed out in the article.

[P38 in workshop]

Thank goodness for the change.It has been quite painful to see the current monster cars at Monaco in particular and at a few tighter corners of other circuits.Fifteen inch wheels might have been a more sensible option all along and incidentally,doesn't it seem odd that we are looking at millimetres coming out of the wheelbase,Kilogrammes coming off the weight and inches of wheel diameter?


I don't suppose the pit crews will mind having to fling lighter wheels around,will they?

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Taxi645

FIA confirms, 2026 cars to become smaller and lighter.

https://the-race.com/formula-1/f1s-p...-cars-in-2026/

I don't think it is a confirmation, but an intention at the moment.

And I see no hint that the wheels will change in any way. The cars might become a little bit shorter, but I think that will be about all.

[P38 in workshop]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

I don't think it is a confirmation, but an intention at the moment.

And I see no hint that the wheels will change in any way. The cars might become a little bit shorter, but I think that will be about all.

I would have thought that taking 300mm out of the wheelbase would be quite significant.A long time ago I remember Tyrrell adding five inches to their wheelbase to improve handling and at the time that was a big change.


Losing 100 kilos would be nice too,but I won't hold my breath on that one.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

I don't think it is a confirmation, but an intention at the moment.

And I see no hint that the wheels will change in any way. The cars might become a little bit shorter, but I think that will be about all.

I agree

The cars didn't gain weight because the FIA said so. The teams asked for the increased weight. Each time there was a change, the team asked for an increase in the minimum weight. It is probably cheaper for a team to incorporate a new change by increasing the weight vs. finding a way to keep the weight the same or to reduce it. Cost is the driver here (see comments below).

It is my understanding that for the first part of 2022 season, the Red Bull was overweight. And it's late season form was partially due to them finally getting it down to the limit. So it appears the teams struggle to get to minimum weight as it is.

I welcome any idea of the car being smaller, lighter as long as it doesn't revert any safety feature (which they will not do). I can see making it shorter will reduce some weight. Yes, MGU-H will take some weight away. But is it not expected that the battery is going to be larger in 2026? The 2026 total power unit solution... do we really know if it is net "negative" with respect to weight? It might be, but let see. It should be less "complex" than today.

https://www.fia.com/news/fia-formula...edia-statement

From the above, their stated goals are:

1. Significantly reduced drag to improve sustainability and efficiency and complement the Power Unit characteristics.
2. Maintain and improve on recent lessons learned about close racing and cars being able to follow each other.
3. Reduce car dimensions.
4. Reduce or contain car mass.
5. Sustainability: Continue path towards the standardisation or simplification of strategically-selected components for cost-cutting purposes. Expand the usage of sustainable materials or technologies and focus on recyclability.
6. Continued innovation in terms of car safety, moving towards active and connected safety systems.

I expect in the end it will be more about "contain" vs. "reduce" the car mass.

While it is not stated as a goal above, teams will not want the cars to be radically different than today due to the cost of switching over and loss of knowledge. For example are they likely to make significant tire changes in 2026? My guess is no. If anything, they could reduce the width ever so slightly if that gives them something, but I just don't see them throwing away the data between now and 2026 with respect to tires. Especially as it is likely the 2026 cars will mostly likely use the same aero concepts as today.

Richard

[Taxi645]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

I welcome any idea of the car being smaller, lighter as long as it doesn't revert any safety feature (which they will not do). I can see making it shorter will reduce some weight. Yes, MGU-H will take some weight away. But is it not expected that the battery is going to be larger in 2026? The 2026 total power unit solution... do we really know if it is net "negative" with respect to weight?

No, we don't. As pointed out above it is a result of choosing a drive train that provides them with a soft landing towards fully electric in the future (that's also one of the reasons why they need to work on reducing drag).


I think a simple V6 turbo, with a light and simple hybrid system (KERS as used earlier), reduced drag and synthetic fuel would've have been more than enough from a sustainability point of view. That would have provided a much lighter car. Around 700-725kg would be possible with reduced dimensions and current safety standards. They could have even gone for a 1.5L V4 to shave even more weight and size of the thing (1.5L being the capacity limit of the eighties inline-4 turbo's).


Oh well, I understand the manufacturers and the FIA want to slowly migrate to more electrification even if it is only for appearances. Better some reduction in size and weight than nothing at all. Any ways, I'm quite confident wheels and tyres will be part of that equation, but let's wait and see.

[Taxi645]

FIA boss wants lighter F1 cars:
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/f...cars/10480625/

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/m...stic/10483198/

If we look at the reasons for the weight gains over the years it has been:

- Hybrid drivetrains
- Safety
- Size of the cars (related to the hybrid tech)
- Size of wheels and tires.

If the FIA boss is serious about this and if we ask ourselves which of the above four reasons would they change I think we can conclude the following:

- It will not be safety
- It will not be the chosen 2026 hybrid regulations.

So the only two avenues still open to reduce weight is to reduce the size of the cars and the size of the wheels and tires. Let's see how serious he is about his desire.

[chillibowl]

Russell makes a good point though...the increasing size, weight, strength of the cars can make the them potentially more dangerous/less safe all be it he is unsure where that tipping point is.

but in the other article, Max also makes a good point basically saying, because of safety and batteries, good luck finding the areas where weight can be reduced.

i suppose it would have to be done incrementally, 10-15 kilos a year and then hopefully in 20 odd years the cars can get back to where they were 20 odd years ago?

but thats a long time to wait...a wild predication here (pulled more from sci-fi really) but in 20 years time, are we more likely than not to see cars on track being piloted remotely which would have the knock on effect of eliminating the need for weight and size added for safety reasons?

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Taxi645

FIA boss wants lighter F1 cars:
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/f...cars/10480625/

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/m...stic/10483198/

If we look at the reasons for the weight gains over the years it has been:

- Hybrid drivetrains
- Safety
- Size of the cars (related to the hybrid tech)
- Size of wheels and tires.

If the FIA boss is serious about this and if we ask ourselves which of the above four reasons would they change I think we can conclude the following:

- It will not be safety
- It will not be the chosen 2026 hybrid regulations.

So the only two avenues still open to reduce weight is to reduce the size of the cars and the size of the wheels and tires. Let's see how serious he is about his desire.

Someone posted some details awhile back so to quantification of where the weight has come from. I wish I could quickly find it to reference it. But, IIRC, generally speaking... increase in wheels and tires size is relatively small given all of the other factors. Hybrid power unit and safety features are the drivers of heavier cars.

I also posted somewhere that while they list weight and/or size reduction as a goal, it is generally at odds with other priorities they list and it is likely that any weight reduction might be minimal or some token amount (10s of kg and much much less than 100kg is my expectation). Lastly, given they have just recently switched to the larger tires (for practicality of supply reasons being a big driver), I don't see them reducing the diameter of the tires or wheels. I can imagine some potential reduction in width, but again, minor. Just like the switch from the old to new tire was probably a bit costly to the teams (new solutions to support the properties of the shorter sidewall, loss of prior data, etc.) there is no probably little appetite to switch back to a smaller diameter tire or wheel.

Richard

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

Someone posted some details awhile back so to quantification of where the weight has come from. I wish I could quickly find it to reference it. But, IIRC, generally speaking... increase in wheels and tires size is relatively small given all of the other factors. Hybrid power unit and safety features are the drivers of heavier cars.

I dug around and found it here...

https://tentenths.com/forum/showpost...&postcount=145

It was V8 Fireworks who provided the breakdown. I categorized all that he listed as either Wheels, Safety, PSU or Other. For the 2017 entry that was +20kg, I split that 50/50 between Other and Wheels

Category	Weight (kg)	Percentage
Wheels	30	20%
Safety	45	31%
PSU	59	40%
Other	13	9%

So tires/wheels maybe a bit more than I remembered, but only 20% of the weight gain since 2013.

Richard

[bathurst77]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

Max also makes a good point basically saying, because of safety and batteries, good luck finding the areas where weight can be reduced.

Somehow I think that if they lower the minimum weight rule by a few % every year but maintain the same safety and spending rules, the geniuses in the F1 factories will find a way.
Maybe leading to clever ideas and one of the mid/rear teams finding a breakthrough.

[bathurst77]

Im an old fart now (and damned good at it!)
I love the look of the 70/80s big back wheels and small front wheels,
maybe remove any wheel size/number restrictions and let the designers go crazy (just spit balling for the sake of discussion of ideas)

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by bathurst77

Somehow I think that if they lower the minimum weight rule by a few % every year but maintain the same safety and spending rules, the geniuses in the F1 factories will find a way.
Maybe leading to clever ideas and one of the mid/rear teams finding a breakthrough.

You would hope so. I think the problem is... teams already struggle at times to get down to minimum weight. And the teams are not afraid to ask to increase the weight. I think in recent times, as there has been a new ask (such as wheel covers, or fairings over the wheels), that instead of the teams finding a way to add those items and keep the prior minimum weight, they instead lobby to increase the minimum weight to account for the new item. Halo is a good example.

Personally, I think the only way to reduce weight in a significant way would be to reduce the complexity of the power units. They could do that by moving away from the hybrid solutions and focus on simple ICE solutions. But there is close to zero chance that will happen.

When the new regulations are announced for 2026, I will be shocked if they reduce the weight by more than 20kg and can imagine that might consider 5-10kg reduction a win.

Richard

[bathurst77]

Be nice if they could make the cars much smaller both width and length. but It can never happen with the safety aero and big power units

[Sodemo]

The cars look so sluggish now in low speed corners compared to when the cars weighed 500kg in the early 90s.

Reduce the size of the wheels by 2-3 inches, reduce the max wheelbase by 100mm reduce the overall length by 200mm. I think 750kg is a realistic target.