# New F1 wing proposal... WTF????



## Plaz (Dec 19, 2001)

Might as well go back to three pedals and a stick, too. :rofl:


----------



## Patrick (Dec 23, 2001)

TeamM3 said:


> most of you just want to b1tch about Mosley and the reasons you list are just the excuses you drag up to do it


Mark,

Wow. 

:dunno:

.


----------



## RaceTripper (Apr 12, 2002)

I'll take the split wing if it means more passing. Sponsers won't like the new wing though. That was a very visible part of the car for TV and now it won't be anymore.

I also saw mention of a single tire supplier for 2008. What I didn't see clarified is, with the reintroduction of tire changes, will they allow tire change and refueling on the same pit stop, or will they have to be done in separate stops as it is now?


----------



## WILLIA///M (Apr 15, 2002)

Patrick said:


> My ideas:
> 
> - no traction control
> - no launch control (Renault)
> ...


I agree with just about everything there but would add or alter the following:

- 3.0 liter engine period, only limiting factor is displacement, use 8 or 16 cylinders if you want
- I like the intent of the split wing so I would keep it
- qualifying must include Takuma Sato at all times, last car without damage gets pole
- Max Mosley must write on a blackboard a million times "I will never change F1 rules again", or die trying


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

WILLIA///M said:


> I agree with just about everything there but would add or alter the following:
> 
> - 3.0 liter engine period, only limiting factor is displacement, use 8 or 16 cylinders if you want
> - I like the intent of the split wing so I would keep it
> ...


:bustingup :bustingup


----------



## RaceTripper (Apr 12, 2002)

WILLIA///M said:


> - qualifying must include Takuma Sato at all times, last car without damage gets pole


So what happens if Takuma forgets he's a bull in a china shop & actually fails to run over anyone? (not that that would ever happen)


----------



## racerdave (Sep 15, 2003)

Nick325xiT 5spd said:


> Qualifying sucked balls. You had to be a hero to qualify well if you didn't finish well at the previous race.
> Tire changes were a neutral, but I missed seeing the kick ass pit stops.


These also created some memorable races... seeing Kimi or JPM come through the field after an early qualifying slot... or the one-tire rule with Kimi at the Nurburgring.


----------



## Pinecone (Apr 3, 2002)

Patrick said:


> Well, I am not against the qualifying changes, or the tire change changes, back to slicks changes, but the wing changes suck IMHO.
> 
> I guess what I reallly dislike are the constant changes - I mean, what is next?
> 
> ...


Why spec the number of cylinders?

Set the displacemnt limit and let the teams figure out what works best. No more moeny than switching layouts and displacement every few years.


----------



## SteveT (Dec 22, 2001)

I wonder if this Centerline Downwash Generating Wing is just another way of saying no downforce on the rear of the car? CDG might create smooth flow behind the car, but those small winglets behind the tires will not get enough free air to do much of anything. The rotation of the tires causes a large disruption in the air as the car moves along. If the wings are placed in that very dirty air, they won't do much. At least that's my thought.


----------



## TeamM3 (Dec 24, 2002)

SteveT said:


> I wonder if this Centerline Downwash Generating Wing is just another way of saying no downforce on the rear of the car? CDG might create smooth flow behind the car, but those small winglets behind the tires will not get enough free air to do much of anything. The rotation of the tires causes a large disruption in the air as the car moves along. If the wings are placed in that very dirty air, they won't do much. At least that's my thought.


yep, and instead of the car behind losing front traction, I'm willing to bet the car in front will lose rear traction when the follower pulls in close

it may provide more passing opportunities, I don't see that as a bad thing at all :dunno:


----------



## Mr. E (Dec 19, 2001)

dwette said:


> I'll take the split wing if it means more passing. Sponsers won't like the new wing though. That was a very visible part of the car for TV and now it won't be anymore.


Not so! Witness:

_______ ..... ________
|Lucky| ..... |Strike|
------- ..... --------

_______ ..... ________
| Mild| ..... |Seven |
------- ..... --------

_______ ..... ________
| BMW | ..... | Power|
------- ..... --------


See, the possibilities are endless!


----------



## RaceTripper (Apr 12, 2002)

Mr. E said:


> Not so! Witness:
> ...
> See, the possibilities are endless!


i'm sure the sponsers can be convinced that 2/3 space is just as good. 
They should have 3 winglets:
 _______ _______ _______
| BUD | | WEI | | SER |
------- ------- -------
Bring back the frogs!!!


----------



## Test_Engineer (Sep 11, 2004)

Mr. E said:


> Not so! Witness:
> 
> _______ ..... ________
> |Lucky| ..... |Strike|
> ...


 _______ ..... ________
| NO | ..... |Tobacco|
------- ..... ----------


----------



## coelacanth (Jul 5, 2005)

TeamM3 said:


> yep, and instead of the car behind losing front traction, I'm willing to bet the car in front will lose rear traction when the follower pulls in close
> 
> it may provide more passing opportunities, I don't see that as a bad thing at all :dunno:


There are 2 types of front wings (forgive me, I've forgotten the names), but McLaren runs one type, and Renault, for example runs the other.

You guys probably noticed and heard that the McLaren had a hard time passing because it lost front-wing downforce when following closely. We saw JPM and Kimi struggle to overtake because of this this year.

On the other hand, the Renault cars could sit on another car's tail all day long without a whole lot of front downforce degradation. So the new rear wing will halp McLaren, if they stay with the same front wing. All in all, I hope that it does create more overtaking opportunities, but even without a lot of overtaking the races are still really exciting! :thumbup:

I've also read that tire changes at pit stops will be coming back in 2007. More overtaking, tire changes, slicks, more cars. The next 3 years in F1 are going to be interesting.


----------



## Mr. E (Dec 19, 2001)

coelacanth said:


> You guys probably noticed and heard that the McLaren had a hard time passing because it lost front-wing downforce when following closely. We saw JPM and Kimi struggle to overtake because of this this year.
> 
> On the other hand, the Renault cars could sit on another car's tail all day long without a whole lot of front downforce degradation. So the new rear wing will halp McLaren, if they stay with the same front wing.


Well, the Renaults may have been a bit better than the McLarens at getting around the corner while following another car, but it really wasn't that huge of a difference. Any car will lose most of its downforce in the wake of another car due to simple physics: lessened airflow over the front wing results in less downforce and lowered cornering speed. No getting around that, no matter how the wing is designed!



coelacanth said:


> I've also read that tire changes at pit stops will be coming back in 2007. More overtaking, tire changes, slicks, more cars. The next 3 years in F1 are going to be interesting.


Agreed!


----------



## Mr. E (Dec 19, 2001)

Test_Engineer said:


> _______ ..... ________
> | NO | ..... |Tobacco|
> ------- ..... ----------


 _______ ..... ________
|Good | ..... | Point|
------- ..... --------

We could do this all day!


----------



## Salvator (Oct 14, 2003)

Mr. E said:


> _______ ..... ________
> |Good | ..... | Point|
> ------- ..... --------
> 
> We could do this all day!


You forgot:

------- ..... --------
| Red | ..... | Bull |
------- ..... --------

------- ..... --------
| Red | ..... | Bull 2 |
------- ..... --------

On the other hand, not so good  :

------- ..... --------
| H | ..... | P |
------- ..... --------


----------



## Test_Engineer (Sep 11, 2004)

_______ ..... ________
| MAX | ..... | TURD |
------- ..... --------



I think Patrick can relate! :angel:


----------



## coelacanth (Jul 5, 2005)

___________ ..... ___________
| Squadra | ..... | Toro | ........... Rosso
----------- ..... -----------


----------



## Patrick (Dec 23, 2001)

Test_Engineer said:


> _______ ..... ________
> | MAX | ..... | TURD |
> ------- ..... --------
> 
> ...


 :rofl:

I would pay $100,000 for that sponsorship logo on the McLaren rear wings!

:bigpimp:

.


----------



## CJsCar (May 12, 2005)

TeamM3 said:


> yep, and instead of the car behind losing front traction, I'm willing to bet the car in front will lose rear traction when the follower pulls in close it may provide more passing opportunities, I don't see that as a bad thing at all :dunno:


I agree. All of the data I have read on this I like. A following car should be able to use their mechanical grip to pass without the problem of trying to go around the wake of a car in front. How many times in the past few years have we seen weaker cars holding up faster cars because of aerodynamics? This should allow passing coming out of the corners which is something the sport has been missing for years.

I am ok with limiting the tires for the weekend, but the one set rule must go for safetys sake. I don't care about what engine configuration they use but this is supposed to be the ultimate motorsport so let them change the engine for each course. And make them shift again with a real clutch and lever.

Slick tyres, emphasis on mechanical grip, more passing, a bigger audience, count me in!

PS: for the Max Mosley haters I think Bernie is the bigger problem.


----------



## Nick325xiT 5spd (Dec 24, 2001)

CJsCar said:


> I agree. All of the data I have read on this I like. A following car should be able to use their mechanical grip to pass without the problem of trying to go around the wake of a car in front. How many times in the past few years have we seen weaker cars holding up faster cars because of aerodynamics? This should allow passing coming out of the corners which is something the sport has been missing for years.
> 
> I am ok with limiting the tires for the weekend, but the one set rule must go for safetys sake. I don't care about what engine configuration they use but this is supposed to be the ultimate motorsport so let them change the engine for each course. And make them shift again with a real clutch and lever.
> 
> ...


 I will say that it was interesting to see just how much power they lost by making the engines last two weekends. Does anyone have a calculation of how much extra power it took to push the Renaults that much faster than everyone else?


----------

