The F1 Technical Developments Thread

Ford Prefect said:
It?s hard to tell from a distance, and I really haven?t been able to keep up with F1 this season. But if they keep the flow going by just leaving the throttle open and not injecting fuel, they should (and I?m just guessing here) have more reserves as far as EV temperatures are concerned, so the logic thing to do would be to make the shafts thinner to improve gas flow. If that?s gone they?d have to adapt the valves. The simpler answer is, of course, that they don?t want to lose the aerodynamic advantages, so that?s just as likely...
Click to expand...

that would help in off throttle situations, but they need the diameter while on throttle, or the exhaust gasses won't be able to get out fast enough...
 
aaaand back again:

After an intense 24 hours of controversy over the issue, with McLaren and Red Bull Racing clashing over allowances that have been handed to their respective engine partners ahead of the British Grand Prix, the matter reached a head on Saturday morning.

Following consultation with engine representatives on Friday night, FIA race director Charlie Whiting wrote to the teams shortly before final free practice to inform them about the governing body's stance on the matter.

He told them that the FIA would stick with the position it held on the Thursday at Silverstone - where Mercedes-Benz was allowed to use an engine over-run under braking for reliability reasons relating to crank case pressure.

However, a concession handed to teams on Friday that would have allowed the Renault-powered teams, including Red Bull Racing, to run at 50 per cent throttle under braking has been withdrawn.

The allowance had been given to Renault because the French car maker claimed it needed to have such a level under braking to help with exhaust valve reliability.

The latest stance means that world championship leader Red Bull Racing will be forced to revert to the maximum 10 per cent limit at 18,000rpm that has been imposed on all teams - so could hurt its competitive form.
Click to expand...
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/92953
 
"so could hurt its competitive form "

But it won't

Does any of this remind any of you of 94 and 95? stupid rules designed exclusively to slow Schumacher and Benetton?
 
And we're back with silly FIA decisions again

Autosport said:
Formula 1's ruling body, the FIA, has decided to backtrack on its blown diffuser clampdown following days of controversy over the matter.

The FIA said on Saturday afternoon that if all Formula 1 teams agree, the clampdown will be withdrawn from the next race in Germany.
Click to expand...

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/92980
 
Can't see Ferrari agreeing to that, and probably fair enough too. But this whole issue has been a clumsy, ill-conceived farce from the FIA and the only reasonable thing to do is to retract the ban for the remaining races of 2011 and implement it for 2012.
 
That was the reasonable thing to do all along (like Horner & Whitmarsh said) but it seems like the FIA has another way of sorting things out.
 
What's really funny about this is the Fia are allowing a method which wastes fuel while banning a method which saves fuel all while trying to make the sport more Eco mental.
 
Ferrari will agree as they won't want to rock the boat. The same with the small teams as they won't want to be creating enemies. Not sure about the midfielders though.
 
Peter3hg said:
Ferrari will agree as they won't want to rock the boat. The same with the small teams as they won't want to be creating enemies. Not sure about the midfielders though.
Click to expand...

I think Williams and Sauber would be the ones to make the most noise. Williams started this whole mess around the Spanish GP because of their poor start to the season, but they may be willing to drop it because of their future contract with Renault; do you really want to piss off your engine partner? Sauber though have nothing to lose, Ferrari have benefited from the ban so they're not going to care if they protest.
 
nicjasno said:
How does burning fuel in the exhaust aid reliability, and why wasn't that an issue in previosu years (since the engine is practicalkly the same)? Total bullshit. Same rules for all.
Click to expand...

Mercedes and Renault have been doing it like this for years apparently.
 
This can't be good.

I know, everybody always complains about change but this is going too far. I really hope this was just a test and nothing more. If this is seriously the future of F1 then I am disappoint. Might as well close up the wheels and put decibel restrictions on the engines.

 
It's Jalopnik. Even though it's written with a "j", it does not mean there's actual journalism involved. A FIA affiliate ran a test with a jet fighter canopy? OMG OMG OMG they'll put greenhouses on the car!!11!!

How Pinifarina comes from there to decibel restrictions and closed wheely is beyond me...

...closed cockpits, closed wheels, that reminds me of something:
group_c_race.jpg
 
Dr_Grip said:
It's Jalopnik. Even though it's written with a "j", it does not mean there's actual journalism involved. A FIA affiliate ran a test with a jet fighter canopy? OMG OMG OMG they'll put greenhouses on the car!!11!!

How Pinifarina comes from there to decibel restrictions and closed wheely is beyond me...

...closed cockpits, closed wheels, that reminds me of something:
group_c_race.jpg
Click to expand...

Just running the train of thought /rant sorry >.<

It still worries me though that they even spend money testing something like this. With what the bullshit FIA was and is (very much so IS) capable of, I'm worried.
 
Anything that improves driver safety is worth it in the long run. Even if it makes cars uglier. If it saves lives then how is that a bad thing?

It's not like the cars will slow down with a canopy. At least, I dont think so. But if a spring comes off the back of a car and makes it's way towards a driver again, at least they will be protected. I'm sure Massa would be all for it.
 
buckers13 said:
Anything that improves driver safety is worth it in the long run. Even if it makes cars uglier. If it saves lives then how is that a bad thing?

It's not like the cars will slow down with a canopy. At least, I dont think so. But if a spring comes off the back of a car and makes it's way towards a driver again, at least they will be protected. I'm sure Massa would be all for it.
Click to expand...

It's just....not the same. It would be like closing the wheel arches to reduce the chance of a rogue tyre flying off. Or the recurring SLOW THE FUCK DOWN CUZ ITS DANGEROUS.

Just wouldn't be F1; that's coming from someone who's finally accepted the 1.4L........(albeit it's a 6pot now but still)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top