venkyhere wrote: ↑07 Nov 2024, 13:21
It's amazing how there is no such thing as 'truth' and everything is a 'narrative'.
Here is Jonathan Noble, claiming that 5mm extra tyre diameter causing a 5mm extra ride height (actually 2.5mm), combined with stiffer sidewalls of the inter tyre, screwed up the aero map of some teams more than for the others (as if teams were unaware of this, especially when they are allowed to change the car post sprint, before the two wet sessions on Sunday) :
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/did- ... /10670924/ It's a well written deep dive, cafefully cherrypicking data, inorder to ensure that those who read it go away with the takeaway -
"it was the car, not the driving that decided the result of the race".
Here is a youtube channel, where the guy analyses the 'actual driving' :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQTE02S ... JsYXB0aW1l
Interesting perspective there. MV is really a step beyond most in his appreciation of just how the grip is available, and just as importantly, how it leeches away at certain points. Before that race started I felt it was right into his zone of skills, and so it proved.
We both contributed to RB 20 thread in reference to that chassis and it's more obvious static rake, which I feel was very useful here in this wet race scenario. It may not be able to produce an absolute peak load in dry performance,, with diminished track adhesion present though it should give a wider window of operation. It's already naturally in that slightly lifted status to easily accept the inter tire envelope of performance.
Evidence I could observe .... when that RB was exiting Juncao ? there is a big compressive lift in track surface there approximately 100 mtrs out .... this chassis was compressing up to the peak, to then drop over that with a relatively "sumptuous " travel on rear suspension post that kick up. It just showed a softer more mellowed and extended rear travel in that scenario. That in itself promotes rear grip without spiking chassis load accumulation into the tire to cause the tire to go over peak and loose traction.
Tire wall stiffness, in that linked article. I can't readily see that they were saying it moves to stiffer, is that something I've missed ?
Ordinarily, with diminished tire to surface "grip" a tire needs to be more flexible in it's overall structure to maintain the desired movement (within itself) to generate chassis response. Even more so when it will be run at reduced ambient temperature plus water cooling. Also one reason to chase cooling water when they are used on a drying track.
This stuff is more a tire specific thread to get deeper into detail, but then someone will likely come along to hand out ridicule to an open conversation .... like they did in that under/oversteer thread