I wonder how would they look like

[Joie de vivre]

... if the regulations went back on those in 2008, narrower front wing, wider rear wing ...

what would be solutions for exhaust, front wing, diffusers ...

what do you think

[ajdavison2]

I think they wouldn't look altogether any different from how we remember, as apart from potentially sprouting some more fins or something; I think by the end of the 2008 and previous era set of rules, they had been maximised by the engineers. If there were any gains in development I think it would've been in the EBD department IMO.

[N12ck]

also, i think we would see ebd's, flexible front wings, i think they would go with the redbull shape sidepods now but with loads of winglets added,

[wesley123]

V-nose would be usefull though due to the central section of the front wing, acting kinda like a vertical splitter

[tommylommykins]

Don't flexiwings depend on being right next to the ground to work, due to the venturi/diffuser effect?

Because the old-rules front wings were so high off the ground, would it be less advantageous for the teams to go for flexiwings?

(sidenote -- easy solution for banning flexiwings in 2013: Just raise the minimum height of front wings so it isn't worth making them flexy in the first place?)

[N12ck]

no, because trawl back through the forums they had flexiwings in 2007 and 2008!!

[spinmastermic]

They'd all have Ferrari's nose cone hole

[tommylommykins]

no, because trawl back through the forums they had flexiwings in 2007 and 2008!!

Weren't those different sorts of flexing? Flexing to close up the slots in the wing, rather than flexing to increase venturi effect at the front?

[Joie de vivre]

It would also be interesting if Ferrari and McLaren would be dominant again like they were in 2008.

[Just_a_fan]

Don't flexiwings depend on being right next to the ground to work, due to the venturi/diffuser effect?

Because the old-rules front wings were so high off the ground, would it be less advantageous for the teams to go for flexiwings?

(sidenote -- easy solution for banning flexiwings in 2013: Just raise the minimum height of front wings so it isn't worth making them flexy in the first place?)

As the wing gets closer to the ground, the more efficient its downforce production (until it gets too close and then "stalls"). Once it's within its chord length above the ground this starts to happen and the effect increases non-linearly as it gets closer to the ground. So any flex that got the wing a bit closer to the ground would be beneficial - not as much as today, of course, but still beneficial.

[marekk]

Don't flexiwings depend on being right next to the ground to work, due to the venturi/diffuser effect?

Because the old-rules front wings were so high off the ground, would it be less advantageous for the teams to go for flexiwings?

(sidenote -- easy solution for banning flexiwings in 2013: Just raise the minimum height of front wings so it isn't worth making them flexy in the first place?)

As the wing gets closer to the ground, the more efficient its downforce production (until it gets too close and then "stalls"). Once it's within its chord length above the ground this starts to happen and the effect increases non-linearly as it gets closer to the ground. So any flex that got the wing a bit closer to the ground would be beneficial - not as much as today, of course, but still beneficial.

Actually ground effect starts at the height equal to wingspan, not wing chord, so those old wings would benefit from flexing, but not much - lift/height function really starts to curve at low ride heights.
Drag reduction for highly loaded (high angle of attack, low speed) wing would be far more significant.

Currently used wings are in reality wing + diffuser combo, and this diffuser part works really only in close proximity to the ground, with big gains from decreased ride height (up to the stall of course).

[Sayshina]

Actually ground effect starts at the height equal to wingspan, not wing chord, so those old wings would benefit from flexing, but not much - lift/height function really starts to curve at low ride heights.

Given that we're not at all certain how exactly they're able to flex the wings and still pass the FIA tests, one would still assume a shorter wing would be stiffer and less prone to flex. One would also assume that the aero profiled center section would make it harder to flex the outboard ends.

At any rate, I'm fairly certain we're going to see new, much stricter flex tests at some point this season, and that would also be the case if the old rules were used. They've made it pretty clear they intend to continue changing the tests until they finally manage to ban it, or at least limit it to the point where it stops being a media issue.

[govind112]

they would have those bmw winglets on the front wing i think

[raymondu999]

no, because trawl back through the forums they had flexiwings in 2007 and 2008!!

Yep. I remember that a few midfielder teams in 2007 (or 2008, I forget) were complaining that RBR (surprise!) had a flexing rear wing. And on the video, it was clearly flexing too. Go figure.

[wesley123]

not only that but flexing bridge wings and other parts where done too back then.

Also that rear wing flex had already been done for ages, Minardi in barcelona 2002, the car suddenly loses its rear wing. Same happened with Irvine in france that year. In 2004 on Hungary, causing the driver then to mis the rest of the season due to the following crash. What is interresting of all these crashes is that the complete rear wing detaches, not a part that cracks or anything, the whole rear wing detaches.

And ehre raikkonen in 2004;
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhwPSAI-dOo[/youtube]

And the 2008 mclaren front wing;
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euApiLdX ... re=related[/youtube]