Existing Users: Because of an update to the forum software you will need to reset your password. Please use the "Forgot?" link on the sign in form to do so. If that doesn't work, send me an email at feedback@forzaminardi.com and I'll sort you out!
Hmm, I like the look of this....... NOT!!!
Comments
[Edited on 24/10/2005 by exzack]
In my opinion, F1 cars do not have to be "beautiful", but racing animals. Do you remember those horrible cars that raced in the '70s? I love them!
Anyway, it will not happen before 2007, most probably in 2008. t will be discussed at the next FIA meeting in Rome next week.
[Edited on 24/10/2005 by manlio27]
Your rule changes for 2006/7, gentlemen and ladies!!!
2006
* Tyre changes re-introduced
* Knockout qualifying system approved
2007
* Radical rear wing in
* Slick tyres!
This is OFFICAL- just from autosport-atlas.com
But if they really get the results they are aiming for, I don't know. Look at this pic:
The "dirty"air is still on the outside, where most of the downforce of the frontwing is generated.
Conspiracy theory: FIA got the idea from TOIT? ;)
[Edited on 24/10/2005 by vuurmuur]
Remember, around 65% of the drag on a modern F1 car is caused by the tyres. The turbulance caused by the rear wheels is massive, hence why it's optimal for the wing to be in the middle of the car, rather than behind the wheels. My guess is that the tech directors class this wing as too dangerous, and it gets scrapped.
Then the rear winglets can be wider/broader as well, right???
A simpler option would be to keep the rear wing in the same place but reduce its size. Thats if drag is the problem. Its no point going down the split wing road if teams can still put wings and strakes on the body work. Just how stable will that wing design be as well.
As for slicks. Seems the FIA are banking on Bridgestone taking up the slack. But Bridgestone's brand awareness has risen as a result of direst competition with Michelin. If neither take up the contract where does it leave the teams?
The FIA has only used a computer program (no windtunnel) and it seems rather amateurish. Gary Anderson condemns the proposal as a 'first year's failed project'.