Williams FW33

[Formula None]

Yes, hopefully it'll be podium finishes and not DNFs, that their planning those brief driver exit shots for...

This car would be even more killer if it's gearbox was both low (as is) and long like the RB & Ferrari to accommodate suspension actuation points farther forward. They'd get that RB smooth taper angle to the rear, combined with the void in front of the beam wing. Next year, maybe?

[i70q7m7ghw]

I do think this is one of the better looking cars this year =D> The livery is great!

[mrk189]

unfortunately it will be slow like all recent years where any williams car was hyped up. Without major backing from a manufacturer they are at a severe disadvantage and do not have the vast resources available to mclaren, ferrari, redbull, merc etc Very difficult to see Williams climbing back up the order no matter how innovative their car is. I just recall the FW26 which was extremely innovative only to be the beginning of a great downfall.

I will nevertheless remain an avid williams f1 fan and hope and pray that I am wrong.

[McG]

I hope so too, maybe Cosworth will show that they are just as good as the rest of the engines, they did well last year with the 3 new teams + Williams and could be back up to speed now with that experience. Weren't Cosworth one of the most powerful engines in F1 not that long ago? With Jaguar I think.

Are Williams going to be using that flywheel KERS they had been developing? That could be good?

[Mandrake]

Are Williams going to be using that flywheel KERS they had been developing? That could be good?

No Flywheel KERS, they are going to use a battery powered KERS, if at all.

[gridwalker]

I hope so too, maybe Cosworth will show that they are just as good as the rest of the engines, they did well last year with the 3 new teams + Williams and could be back up to speed now with that experience. Weren't Cosworth one of the most powerful engines in F1 not that long ago? With Jaguar I think.

Are Williams going to be using that flywheel KERS they had been developing? That could be good?

I don't think that I've ever heard anyone rate a Cossie built engine as the most powerful in F1 : during the Jaguar days, the BMW engine in the back of the Williams was often cited as the most powerful lump on the grid ...

When I spent some time at the Cosworth R&D centre in Northampton (back in the Zetek-R days) I was taught that their development methodology focussed on packaging, efficiency and providing smooth power delivery, rather than maximising the brute force of peak power output. This might have changed over the years, but Cosworth have never seemed to provide the gutsiest engine in the field.

[Raptor22]

I hope so too, maybe Cosworth will show that they are just as good as the rest of the engines, they did well last year with the 3 new teams + Williams and could be back up to speed now with that experience. Weren't Cosworth one of the most powerful engines in F1 not that long ago? With Jaguar I think.

Are Williams going to be using that flywheel KERS they had been developing? That could be good?

I don't think that I've ever heard anyone rate a Cossie built engine as the most powerful in F1 : during the Jaguar days, the BMW engine in the back of the Williams was often cited as the most powerful lump on the grid ...

When I spent some time at the Cosworth R&D centre in Northampton (back in the Zetek-R days) I was taught that their development methodology focussed on packaging, efficiency and delivering smooth power delivery, rather than maximising the brute force of peak power output. This might have changed over the years, but Cosworth have never seemed to provide the gutsiest engine in the field.

your statementis borne out by others including Rory Byrne who as responsible for the B192 to B196 Benetton race cars.
Although it was the B193 and B194 that used the ZETEC-R specifically Byrne has staed many times that it was a gem of an engine producing possibly the highest torque across the flatest powerband of all the engines of that era.

[roadie]

I'm slightly worried that like last year, the car won't be as good as the cars around it on high fuel loads. This allied with the greater fragility of the tyres may cause to the tyres to go off earlier in the GP.

[axle]

The good thing about that radical rear end is that it can't be copied quickly...and trust me it's an advantage if the comments from the other team's engineers are evidence enough.

The CA2010 had, according to what I read last year, a higher peak power than the competition....but was thirsty and didn't drive as well as the Mercedes Rubens had used at Brawn. So fuel consumption and driveability were the area's they worked hardest on.
The 2011, with Kers, will no doubt be a fettled version of the 2010 in those key areas (despite the ban).

I think they will go for the RedBull diffuser blowing solution and get that inplace for the first race...maybe even next weeks test.

I have a good feeling, they arn't hamstrung with a lack of the latest gadgets like in 2009. And they arn't bedding in a new powertrain like in 2010...

I see solid top ten finishes especially whilst McLaren are struggling.

[dren]

I think Williams may be in even better shape than what is thought here.

[McG]

I hope so too, maybe Cosworth will show that they are just as good as the rest of the engines, they did well last year with the 3 new teams + Williams and could be back up to speed now with that experience. Weren't Cosworth one of the most powerful engines in F1 not that long ago? With Jaguar I think.

Are Williams going to be using that flywheel KERS they had been developing? That could be good?

I don't think that I've ever heard anyone rate a Cossie built engine as the most powerful in F1 : during the Jaguar days, the BMW engine in the back of the Williams was often cited as the most powerful lump on the grid ...

When I spent some time at the Cosworth R&D centre in Northampton (back in the Zetek-R days) I was taught that their development methodology focussed on packaging, efficiency and providing smooth power delivery, rather than maximising the brute force of peak power output. This might have changed over the years, but Cosworth have never seemed to provide the gutsiest engine in the field.

I said one of the most powerful, not the most powerful.

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2006/10/29/f ... -cosworth/

"Like Schumacher, Cosworth remained at the top of their game until the end and early in the season their new V8 engines were among the most powerful on the grid. Sadly, the desire of their customers to partner up with manufacturer suppliers has left them without a team for the foreseeable future."

That quote is about the V8 with Williams, but I remember reading in a magazine (F1 ITV or F1 magazine), that they were ONE of the most powerful V10's, at a point, when with Jaguar.

Not too hard considering the engine list in 04

Ferrari 053
BMW P84
Mercedes FO 110Q
Renault RS24
Honda RA004E
Petronas 04A (ferrari) Sauber
Cosworth CR-6 Jaguar
Toyota RVX-04
Ford RS2 Jordan
Cosworth CR-3L Minardu

[ringo]

Theoretically if the engineers are worth their weight in gold, the monetary resources should not be a deciding factor.
All it takes is a few good iterations of a design to determine who's at the front of the grid.
There is no direct link with a good design and the amount of money a team has. It's not proportional at all.
You can make a great car with poor resources, but you can't make a great car with poor engineers.

There is nothing preventing Williams from being the best car on the grid. All they need is enough resources to run the basic programs and keep up a basic pace of development. Excessive resources doesn't make a great concept.
Looking at the FW33 it doesn't have a stumbling block on it's body. It has a "free" potential for development. If they aren't the fastest they can easily copy and upgrade any section of the car to get there. With that gearbox, anything is possible in the rear.

The ability to mimic certain shapes in certain areas is the only thing stopping one car from equaling another, since the main differences are aerodynamic.
Suspension is the only other question, but i guess experienced enough teams know all about developing that aspect.

[mrk189]

Theoretically if the engineers are worth their weight in gold, the monetary resources should not be a deciding factor.
All it takes is a few good iterations of a design to determine who's at the front of the grid.
There is no direct link with a good design and the amount of money a team has. It's not proportional at all.
You can make a great car with poor resources, but you can't make a great car with poor engineers.

There is nothing preventing Williams from being the best car on the grid. All they need is enough resources to run the basic programs and keep up a basic pace of development. Excessive resources doesn't make a great concept.
Looking at the FW33 it doesn't have a stumbling block on it's body. It has a "free" potential for development. If they aren't the fastest they can easily copy and upgrade any section of the car to get there. With that gearbox, anything is possible in the rear.

The ability to mimic certain shapes in certain areas is the only thing stopping one car from equaling another, since the main differences are aerodynamic.
Suspension is the only other question, but i guess experienced enough teams know all about developing that aspect.

What you say is all true but money makes it much easier even if it tends to lead to a more wasteful attitude at times. Having the backing of a manufacturer or a major source of funds has always proven to be beneficial in formula 1. Yes the engineers play a major role but just think of how much money redbull have thrown at adrian newey in order to develop their car or how much money ferrari threw at ross brawn in the early 2000s.

There have been obviously a few heroes from time to time who manage on budgets which are below average but I think they are few and far between generally with quite some luck as well. e.g. Brawn gp.

Taking the Williams example, whenever the car was backed by a major manufacturer it has done well, e.g. Honda, Renault and BMW. The extra resources that brings for R&D is invaluable and also the ability to spend the money which you would use to buy engines on other development instead.

I continue to believe that until they find such backing it will be very difficult for them to recover and move back towards the front of the grid.

I hope they prove me completely wrong somehow.

[Raptor22]

I believe Adrian Newey took a substantial pay cut when moving from McLAren to RedBull. He said that having the freedom to design whatever he wanted to waswell worth the reduction in pay. He may be one of the most highly paid engineers on the grid but he is also the most well looked after. If he wants leave, he gets leave.

[djos]

I believe Adrian Newey took a substantial pay cut when moving from McLAren to RedBull. He said that having the freedom to design whatever he wanted to waswell worth the reduction in pay. He may be one of the most highly paid engineers on the grid but he is also the most well looked after. If he wants leave, he gets leave.

Yeah but the word is that in '09 he got a massive pay rise.