2005 - The cars

  • Thread starter Blake
  • 124 comments
  • 6,603 views
The RB1 must be quite clever since DC's been in the top 5 in most of it's first tests. The front wings not bad but most teams are rinning revised versions anyway. I think the BAR's one scoops forward i bit more too. Oh and the F2004M is downright ugly!! That wing will come off, it doesnt look safe either, why have the FIA not banned it? Ohthats right..its Ferrari!! 👎 👎 :banghead:
 
I dont think the red bull paint job looks good at all........why oh why couldn't they paint it aluminium blue and sliver check.......like they do on the cans.......it would have looked amazing!
 
I read in F1 Racing that Red Bull have spent about £1.2m just painting and re-painting the trucks!!!!! When they dont even have a fuel/lubricant sponsor yet. Whats with that!!??
 
jenson09
I read in F1 Racing that Red Bull have spent about £1.2m just painting and re-painting the trucks!!!!! When they dont even have a fuel/lubricant sponsor yet. Whats with that!!??
Click to expand...

You know the trucks have to look good and plus who needs fuel/lubricant sponsorship anyways? :dunce: :lol:
 
Because if they don't do something, we would soon have over 1,000 hp machines and very high g-forces in cornering and braking.
This is what Formula One is all about, it's about creating the best package within a set of very strict rules and regulations, not about all out speed.
These cars are still very, VERY fast, just not as fast as last year, that's all.
It's better to have a safe Formula One, rather than one where we could potentially lose a driver in a high speed crash.
If the FIA didn't make a change, then they would just keep going faster and faster, and eventually someone would crash, and it would be very severe, possibly even fatal.
Another way to look at it is, they have pretty much found the maximum they can get out of the 3.0L V10's and the current regulations, so the decision to switch to the 2.4L V8's for 2006 is only natural, it gives the engineers something new to work with, and to optimize in coming years.
 
Or the machines would be operated completely by computers and the drivers would only be along for the ride . . .
 
It cant be about out and out speed alone coz Indy cars are faster anyway!!! Not that i like them! As said its about making the best package within the guidelines set. Thats what makes f1, technical innovation. And a whole lotta money!! I cant see any steps taken to reduce costs really working coz all theteams do is find another area to spend it in e.g reduced testing= more wind tunnel time and more expenditure on simulation programmes. Reduced engine sizes= greater expenditure on working out how to biuld one in the first place then more expenditure on getting the power levels up as high as possible. Basically no change.
 
jenson09
It cant be about out and out speed alone coz Indy cars are faster anyway!!!
Click to expand...
Wrong.
Indy cars USED to be faster on an oval circuit anyway, but not any longer. The top speed that the F1 cars achieved before braking into turn one last year at Indy was actually about par than the crap wagons' top speed in the Indy 500. That says a lot considering how much downforce they're running, and how little the Indy cars are running. The crap wagons put out about 700-750 hp, the F1 cars put out well over 900 hp last year, do the math ;)
 
Majarvis
Wrong.
Indy cars USED to be faster on an oval circuit anyway, but not any longer. The top speed that the F1 cars achieved before braking into turn one last year at Indy was actually about par than the crap wagons' top speed in the Indy 500. That says a lot considering how much downforce they're running, and how little the Indy cars are running. The crap wagons put out about 700-750 hp, the F1 cars put out well over 900 hp last year, do the math ;)
Click to expand...

Except that IndyCars last year were slowed down for safety reasons, so they were about 10mph slower then they should be. IndyCars used to reach near 250mph at the end of each straight. F1 cars are not getting anywhere near that diving into Turn 1.

And the amount of horsepower is not the only factor. F1 cars are made for downforce and cornering, IndyCars have only the minimum of downforce to get around the oval.
 
You do know that if the F1 cars would set their front and rear wing to minimum downforce and lenghten their gear ratios they would reach speeds of well over 400 km/h.Nothing is faster on a circuit or oval than an F1 car.Nothing.
 
Fair enough. But lets face it that isnt going to happen any time soon!! Gotta ask, wouldnt it be be way better if they went back to 'slicks'? At least then we could see some late breaking and none of this "I've gotta protect my tyres" nonsense thats going to happen this year. (oh and isnt F1 the only catagory that uses grooves? Im not sure on that! :dunce:
 
GTChamp2003
You do know that if the F1 cars would set their front and rear wing to minimum downforce and lenghten their gear ratios they would reach speeds of well over 400 km/h.Nothing is faster on a circuit or oval than an F1 car.Nothing.
Click to expand...

Um, no. Even setting their wings to their minimum would not make them faster around an oval.

Do you think that huge high nose would help or hinder their top speed?

While we're at it, why not remove the rev limiters placed on IndyCars...
 
With the 2005 regulations, I think the one set of tires for race and qualifying is a big mistake, I really think they should have left tire regulations alone. Not only will it reduce passing, I'll miss the swarm of people jumping all over the car in pit stops :(.

Blake
 
They should have banned re-fuelling. It would have the same effect as having no tyre stops as the tyre manufacturers have to cope with the increased fuel load, therefore hardening the tyres. The reason why Mosley didn't want to ban re-fuelling was that the bigger fuel tank could cause a big fire in an accident. Get ****ed! Fuel tanks are virtually inpenetrable these days. How many pit fires or fires related to the fuel opening have we seen? Bruni last year at Monza, M. Schumacher in Austria in 2003, Diniz at Argentina in 1996, Irvine at Spa in '94 and the infamous Verstappen fire at Hockenheim in the same year. Someone's more likely going to get hurt in a re-fuelling fire than an accident, and one of these days it's going to happen.
 
They'd have to increase the size of the tanks..it would be like in the 70's....and 80's. Refueling = Good, Changing tires = Good, Very disposible V10 engines = Good, Cheap F1 that is just about reduced cost = Bad.

Blake
 
That's their current test car.The real F2005 wont be revealed untill May.I wonder why they call this car F2005,it's a 2004 chassis with 2005 rules modifications.
 
No, that's the F2005, it's not the F2004M. They obviously look similar since the F2004M is a modified F2004 for the new rules.
 
No, the F2004M will race the first 4 GPs of the year, and then the F2005 will take over for the rest of the season.

Like they've always done...

Just because they're showing the car now doesn't mean it's ready to race.
 
Looks like the MP4-20 had a little makeover...

32014_2.jpg
 
Yeah, grabbing any downforce they can I guess. But one thing I hate about that car is the white circle with the black number in it, yuck!

Blake
 
I actually like the very basic look, looks like something from the late 90s almost. But it does have a few winglets and stuff. Also I'm pretty sure Jordan did the least testing of anyone in the off season, and I think they will be strugling to hold off Minardi.

Blake
 
It looks like that because the car is junk. Jordan doesn't have the money to develop the car into something better. That's why they've gone for simply raising the front nose instead of doing the scoop like veryone else is doing.
 
I'm sure they have plently of russian mafia money, it just can't be put to good use yet...the boss guy keeps saying "Money is not an issue"...

Blake
 
Is it me or dos the front end of the new jordan look vey similar to the rubbish 2002 car? what with the heavily angled pylons to the front wing? I think it only looks odd or 'basic' coz it has hardly any sponsorship on it. Now is that coz no one will sponsor them or coz of Russian money? Anyhoo it looks far more basic than the overcomplicated Ferrari. As soon as I saw that I knew they were going to lose this years title. If they need that many aids to get downforce theyre in trouble!! And whats with the 'chin-wing' (as Autosport calls it)!!!! What an ugly way to do a front wing. Its not integrated even a little bit!! Makes the X wings used in 98 seem sensible. Whats the furthest forward the win can go? Could Ferrari get in trouble if it gets knocked forwards or drops down abit?
 

Similar threads

SlowFWD84VT
V8 Street Car Trans-Am Series
Replies
0
Views
1K
SlowFWD84VT
SlowFWD84VT
RappyThePro
World Racing League (WRL) - Sunday's 5 p.m GMT - Official Thread
Replies
3
Views
1K
RappyThePro
RappyThePro
luigidelta
The Diaries of Enea Vailatti
Replies
24
Views
2K
luigidelta
luigidelta
RappyThePro
IRC - PS4 F1 2019 League - Monday's 6 p.m. GMT/1 p.m. EST - OPEN!
Replies
16
Views
1K
RappyThePro
RappyThePro
prisonermonkeys
Caterham CT03 launch
2
Replies
37
Views
10K
LMSCorvetteGT2
LMSCorvetteGT2

Latest Posts

Back