2022 Italian Grand Prix - Monza, Sep 09 - 11

[Big Tea]

Aero and chassis should definitely be a dominant factor that determines the pace as is the only thing that is in full control of teams, not some OEM that invests abnormal amount of money to build an engine that noone has a chance to match or copy in any way.

So anyone with money can copy an engine, but not aero?

[dxpetrov]

Exactly the opposite, try again.

[Big Tea]

Exactly the opposite, try again.

So, why can they not build aero if they can build an engine?
An engine has a lead time of several years, Aero some months?

[Mogster]

6 months into new regulations it was always going to be this way. Someone was always likely to get it very right with the others playing catch up. Now the cats are out of the bag next year we may start to see some convergence.

The important thing is that the cars can run closer together. The regs have worked as intended, better if anything.

[ringo]

It's all the same. Engines are easier to copy. Less restrictions, and easier to test an engine.
Aero is more difficult, as it's harder to test and benchmark.

I noticed today that the Aston Martin was slow, despite having redbull style pods. It goes to show that much of the aero is in the floor, and not necessarily the sidepods.

[mendis]

It's all the same. Engines are easier to copy. Less restrictions, and easier to test an engine.
Aero is more difficult, as it's harder to test and benchmark.

I noticed today that the Aston Martin was slow, despite having redbull style pods. It goes to show that much of the aero is in the floor, and not necessarily the sidepods.

How do you easily copy something that's not visible? Mercedes chief designer John Owen in one of his interviews (I guess in 2020) a while back said, they were happy that everybody spoke about their engine and not the aero. He was surprised nobody was copying their aero and everyone was looking at Red Bull to copy. He was happy with that situation because engine was hiding and was not easy to copy whereas aero was visible to naked eye and easily copyable.

[chrisc90]

It's all the same. Engines are easier to copy. Less restrictions, and easier to test an engine.
Aero is more difficult, as it's harder to test and benchmark.

I noticed today that the Aston Martin was slow, despite having redbull style pods. It goes to show that much of the aero is in the floor, and not necessarily the sidepods.

How do you easily copy something that's not visible? Mercedes chief designer John Owen in one of his interviews (I guess in 2020) a while back said, they were happy that everybody spoke about their engine and not the aero. He was surprised nobody was copying their aero and everyone was looking at Red Bull to copy. He was happy with that situation because engine was hiding and was not easy to copy whereas aero was visible to naked eye and easily copyable.

probably because the power of the Merc engine made up for the poor aero they had compared to other teams.

[dxpetrov]

It's all the same. Engines are easier to copy. Less restrictions, and easier to test an engine.
Aero is more difficult, as it's harder to test and benchmark.

I noticed today that the Aston Martin was slow, despite having redbull style pods. It goes to show that much of the aero is in the floor, and not necessarily the sidepods.

Absolutely not. Teams are not developing engines, but engine manufacturers. Only few teams are connected with their mother OEM but that's not prevalent. On the other hand, all teams have a chance to hire better aero and technical team to produce a better chassis.

[vorticism]

It's all the same. Engines are easier to copy.

[Just_a_fan]

Anyway I have no interest in arguing with someone who always pedals out the same bad faith points. Agree to disagree, as I already said

Ah, insult and walk away. OK, fine.

[HondaPOD]

So this year Hamilton will not win another WDC because he is mathematically out (he can score at most 332 pt).

[Just_a_fan]

The point of the aero regs was to allow cars to follow one another more closely which they achieved.. why do people always say this nonsense?

Why did they want the cars closer ? To race. Did you see the HUGE gaps between the top 6-7 before the SC?

They wanted the car behind to lose less downforce when driving behind another F1 car, which has obviously been a huge success.

The rules have been a great success with regard to following closely. The side effect of close following is that the tow is dramatically reduced. This is an entirely obvious and expected consequence. Anyone that is surprised by this doesn't understand the technicalities.

[AR3-GP]

6 months into new regulations it was always going to be this way. Someone was always likely to get it very right with the others playing catch up. Now the cats are out of the bag next year we may start to see some convergence.

The important thing is that the cars can run closer together. The regs have worked as intended, better if anything.

With the restrictions on windtunnel time handed out to the higher place runners, we might see some convergence over 2-3 years.

Williams looks like they are getting a lot out of all that windtunnel time. They showed up with a B-spec car mid season and it looks like a midfield car when Albon and De Vries are at the wheel.

[mendis]

That Latifi guy is being made to look so bad. A new guy jumping into the car without any practice is wiping floor with him. He can't be in F1.

[vorticism]

That Latifi guy is being made to look so bad. A new guy jumping into the car without any practice is wiping floor with him. He can't be in F1.

He's a pay driver who brough the Sofina sponsorship. Your issue is more with Williams than Latifi.