Formula 1 2009: The Launch Season
- Thread starter Metar
- 601 comments
- 42,348 views
- Status
- 1,134
- NapoleonMikey
- 7,719
The reason for my wonder is that locating an aperture there has little sense even if cooling is the target - but even less in this case, because that aperture has nowhere to expel the air that enters it... I've looked at it a lot, and I think that it's open on the other side - some odd way of picking up air on the other side and moving it to the underside of the wing. They probably have some reason for it..
Blake
Premium
- 10,976
- NSW, Australia
- haswell00
Easily the most complicated wing so far. Very impressive. I like that the movable flap doesn't extend all the way to the endplate, that's a clever way of controlling the airflow around the tyres.
I love that suspension layout. Makes the rear look really tight. Very shmexy.
I really hope this car goes as good as it looks. Hopefully the KERS system is ready to race pretty early on.
I believe extending the splitter like that is illegal, although its curious that theyd manufacture that nose if they cant race it
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
Well, going by GP Update, the Red Bull have been fastest at Jerez in the capable hands of Sebastien Vettel, 0.3 seconds ahead of Hulkenberg in the Williams and 0.5 seconds ahead of Kovalainen.
Why are some teams running a "driver" shield on the front side of the cockpit and others not. Looks like Williams, BMW and Toyota are, the RBR has a slight lips over the front edge, and the rest just have some form of a longitudinal fin. Its obviously for some aero advantage, but why wouldn't you want the "bubble" of air created for stabilty in driver head movement? Or is the function different entirely?
- 10,373
- Manchester
- Ardius_
Some of you have probably already seen this, but I just found it. The new cars look even weirder in motion:
http://multimedia.f1-live.com/f1/en/videos/videos.php?num=2798
I liked the Toyota before, but now I'm not so sure, everytime you see the car from the front or back it just looks so odd. Side-on and 3/4 look ok.
http://multimedia.f1-live.com/f1/en/videos/videos.php?num=2798
I liked the Toyota before, but now I'm not so sure, everytime you see the car from the front or back it just looks so odd. Side-on and 3/4 look ok.
- 1,134
- NapoleonMikey
i think the problem with that video is that it was shot by a wide screen camera and then forced into a 4:3 resolution. it makes everything look really off.
I'm completely used to the cars now. I never disliked them, but the change took a bit to really understand. I have transitioned so much in fact, that pre-09 spec are starting to look strange to me. I liken it to how a car with a chop-top compares to its stock height counterpart. It looks good, but almost lower than you expect.
Ah, I see now. I misread your first statement. But, I do agree with the aspect ratio change. Not to mention, it seems like they either cut high revving sound bits into slow speed shots or ran the car in low gears to have a wow factor without blurring past the screen, but it doesn't seem to line up. That could also be a testiment to the aspect ratio fooling with me. The video is clearly done for marketing, and not to preview performance, so I think they'll move better when pushed.
- 1,326
- Orange County C
- GTP_Im_Sorry
My guess is about the same:
With the decrease in revs from 19k to 18k a little slower in acceleration and top speed
With the new aero a little less drag so a little faster in acceleration and top speed.
With return to slick tires a little more mechanical grip so higher corner speed
With the new areo a little less downforce so slower corner speed
All of that equals about the same.
Hopefully the new aero will reduce turbulence and the new front wing will increase downforce and passing will be easier.
Take all that, throw in some KERS, mix well and see what happens.
- 550
- Skyline49
I would assume they would be very similar. I would assume that they would be quicker around the fastest tracks (less downforce, KERS) and the slowest tracks (more mechanical grip). I would also guess they will be much slower in the wet, and we'll see a lot of crashes between when it starts raining and people pit. These rules would've negated the drama of last year - Lewis would've been in a solid fifth because Glock would've pitted.
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
Comparatively, the 2009-spec cars have to be going about a second a lap quicker than a rival in order to stand a realistic chance at passing them. This might seem like a rather large figure, but in 2008, it was estimated that the cars had to be going at least two seconds a lap quicker to be able to pass. The teams were consulted in devloping cars that could produce more overtaking - that's how we got stuff like the skinny rear wings - and while it would have been possible to set the aero regulations in such a way that the cars could have been going even quicker compared to each other for this year - ie they might only need half a second a lap to be able to pass - the regulations ere not extended this far. This is because when cars are battling for position, they naturally set slower laptimes. If a driver only needed half a second, we'd get more passing, but all it would take is for the leader to break away and for the others to duke it out for the lower places and the leader wold be virtually untouchable.
ROAD_DOGG33J
Premium
- 14,318
- IL, USA
- holyc0w1
- holyc0w
- 7,719
The new front wing produces far less downforce than last year - pretty much every part of the car produces less downforce this year: It's slightly wider, but the ever-important middle section is neutral, and the remaining surfaces are far less than they used to be, and they're simpler at that (even the RBR).
Au contraire - in these semi-wet conditions, Glock's slicks wouldn't have cooled down so much, and could've retained more heat and thus more grip. No use arguing about it, though, because there's no way to know without replicating the conditions.
They're better in the moist conditions, seeing as the smaller surface (not to be confused with contact-patch) is smaller and therefore less heat is lost: The problem on Glock's tyre was that the temperature dropped to nothing in the cold rain.
In the fully wet conditions, however, slicks will be as much use as the "cut slicks" we had so far: Not much. In these conditions when full-wets (or Inters) are appropriate, however, they'll lap slower: since the rain-tyres are still the same, and downforce is much reduced, we'll see them lap slower in the wet than they used to - supposedly by several seconds a lap. The reason cars won't be much slower this year are the slicks - without those, they're just cars with 60-80% less downforce (no exact figure known, obviously).
Tired Tyres
Premium
- 12,615
- West Yorkshire
- Tired_Tyres
- Tired Tyres
Your missing the point. Had slicks been in use neither Hamilton or Vettel would have pitted either so Glock would never have been in front of them in the first place.
Whenever I've heard a driver with experience of both Slick and Grooved tyres talk about it they've always said that Slicks have much more grip in the wet. I suspect that is why the Intermediate tyre became so important. It never was in the previous Slick era.
Last edited:
Tired Tyres
Premium
- 12,615
- West Yorkshire
- Tired_Tyres
- Tired Tyres
I can't wait for this season to start. Only 42 more days to go.
That doesn't give the ex-Honda team very long to do anything meaningful. I believe Ross Brawn said they needed 6 weeks to change the chassis from the Honda engine to another power plant. 6 weeks is 42 days.
That doesn't give the ex-Honda team very long to do anything meaningful. I believe Ross Brawn said they needed 6 weeks to change the chassis from the Honda engine to another power plant. 6 weeks is 42 days.
- 7,719
- 10,373
- Manchester
- Ardius_
Interesting to note that todays testing had Hamilton fastest with a 2008 rear wing, but only by a 1000 of a second to Vettel. Does this say more about how fast the Red Bull and Williams are or more of how slow the McLaren might be? Its difficult to say not knowing hard they were pushing and what they were testing but interesting to note anyway.
Renault continue to be bottom of the pack in testing and apparently have had reliability issues the last few days. Epic fail or epic sandbagging? Who knows.
Renault continue to be bottom of the pack in testing and apparently have had reliability issues the last few days. Epic fail or epic sandbagging? Who knows.
- 7,719
Today's Renault covered the most laps (133 compared to the old STR's 120+ laps) and wasn't as slow as it was in the previous days.
As for the McLaren, it's a lowish-downforce rear wing with a partially blocked off diffuser: It's designed to test the car itself, not aerodynamics and track-optimized performance, and in the absence of a 2009-legal high-downforce configuration wing, they're using the 2008 one. They also said they're looking to test tyre-wear, which is higher, obviously, with the higher downforce. Prost once won a race by setting his car up with a low-downforce configuration, reducing tyre-wear and allowing him to pit just once instead of two like the others...
As for the McLaren, it's a lowish-downforce rear wing with a partially blocked off diffuser: It's designed to test the car itself, not aerodynamics and track-optimized performance, and in the absence of a 2009-legal high-downforce configuration wing, they're using the 2008 one. They also said they're looking to test tyre-wear, which is higher, obviously, with the higher downforce. Prost once won a race by setting his car up with a low-downforce configuration, reducing tyre-wear and allowing him to pit just once instead of two like the others...
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
- Status
