myurr wrote:
WTF!? I've been saying the same thing to you consistently and constantly. You said wait until the cars are launched, now you're saying wait until the first race.
You're the one saying that pull rod was a no brainer and that teams shouldn't ask questions they should just use it, no ifs or buts, as it has no downsides. You're the one that said that Ferrari were going to run a push rod setup. You're the one with egg all over your face now trying to backtrack.
Yep i'd still make the jump. Why not? If it works well it works well.
They have testing facilities for a reason. Each team knows what they are getting into when they commit to something.
Blindly choosing the pullrod is not really risky. Remember it's not like baking a cake, where you never know what the result is until you taste it. Testing is being carried out along the way, so it's unlikely that a team would choose a path that works against what they want to achieve.
For instance let's say renault wants the the pull rod setup. They would carry out tests to make sure that the car is well integrated with the KERS and single diffusor before the car touches the track.
Where's the risk? We all saw what rebull did in 2009 and 2010.
Nicely packaged and still narrower than the F150 in the rear.
KERS is the major question.
Copying is not going to guarantee wins, but it puts you in a proven and tested position.
For the F150 I would choose the push rod suspension as it's clearly the layout that works best with that car.
It's easy to say that now.
But the real point you keep so obviously missing is that I wouldn't choose one or the other up front. I would work on the overall concept and then see which suspension layout fits best without causing compromises elsewhere. Neither is the right or wrong solution, they both have their merits, and neither is going to make or break a championship challenge.
You chose one up front. but you don't commit to it until it's satisfactory. You probably have 2 alternate designs that you compare to your main choice, and you see if it's worth pursuing. However having proof of concept from Redbull's 2 successful years is worth noting. This is what i mean by blindly adopting a working solution. Especially for a smaller team like lotus.
All else being equal then the pull rod holds a minor C of G benefit. But as everyone keeps trying to point out to you, and Ferrari are demonstrating, each causes compromises and those compromises can easily outweigh that small C of G benefit.
You don't know what ferrari are doing as yet. So hold that thought. It may well be totally different to what anyone has seen.
I am actually glad that they still don't have a conventional setup because it proves that they were aware of the disadvantages of the previous design. Theirs is nothing what anyone here honestly expected.
Edit: The disadvantage in Ferrari's case is going to be either packaging (they didn't have room for the components low down) and / or aero (they wanted a taller narrower solution rather than a shorter but wider one, allowing for a tighter rear in their design).
I don't think the width of the pull rod setup affects how narrow the gearbox is. Most of the parts are actually in front of the narrow part.
I have a feeling KERS and the romoval of the DDD has to do with ferrari's choice, and maybe reliability.
Not saying that one suspension is less reliable, but changing from one to the other may have transitional problems.
Ferrari are simply sticking to what they know.
I'll wait and see.
So many things can happen from now.