A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter do not belong here.
Intego wrote:I think they made the splitter flex to get the needed rake, but I'm no expert.
(And still it is not proven whether there's something going on at all.)
They raise the rear end via the rear suspension so the splitter tip is actually slightly higher than usual (although then they would lower the front suspension to compensate) so no flexing is required.
scarbs wrote:Clearly Red Bull run some 15cm of rear ride height and very little front ride height. The geometry means that the splitter is in the way, so it has to flex.
Depends where you measure front ride height. The whole car acts as a lever with the front wheels acting as a fulcrum. This means the splitter is not affected much while the FW is really low. Back when the plank could be of several parts they would flex it upwards a lot and lower the front ride height. That got more DF up front while preserving rear ride height and thus DF. RBR don't have to preserve rear ride height because of their EBD design. Not saying the splitter won't flex just that it is not that necessary anymore.
MIKEY_! wrote:I think they can have a small titanium bit at the front of the plank. Remember when Hamilton's splitter broke at Australia and didn't exceed wear limits.
That was accidental damage, so it doesn't have to pass scrutineering. Just like Button missing half his rear wing endplate, or Rosberg missing part of his side pod.
That actually opens up a whole can of worms, no? I mean, what if teams ran so low their plank wore out; a LOT. Then out of the last corner, last lap, oops! My bib stay broke
There is a precedent for this: Spa 1994, with Schumacher being disqualified for plank consumption and benetton blaming a 360° over a kerb during the race for that
He said the compromised start to his lap was just one of several issues that left him on row three.
"I'd started the lap with quite a bit of dirt on the tyres and we saw the reflection of that in sector one," Webber said. "I made a little mistake in the hairpin and didn't open the DRS from the hairpin to Spoon [because the system will not activate without the throttle 100 per cent open]. I don't know how much time I lost with that. It didn't help."
So when we see these RB cars opening DRS mid corner, you know they're stepping on it flat out. Shows the difference in grip.
Ringo; I fail to see your reasoning here.
1; why on earth would you open DRS when you AREN'T full throttle? On the straights everyone is full throttle. But in the times when you're grip limited; and you CAN'T go full throttle; you'd be better off with the extra grip of DRS
2; being full throttle also gives them more exhaust gasses helping their downforce
@ ray you never truly know all the factors.
Who knows if there is instance where DRS can be opened and the driver is not on full throttle?
If the car has surplus grip, it could make sense.
But i'm not making a case for that.
Having this comment from webber, it's easy to see exactly where the redbull gets it Q3 pace.
I agree that Red Bull can open up full throttle earlier than others; or at least has demonstrated this earlier. But if the car has surplus grip; why would the driver NOT be on full throttle?
Sorry I'm not trying to argue with you here or anything, but I don't see the logic in that.
I mean; I'm no aero guy; and I would know much less than you about stabilizing flow etc. DRS to me basically decreases rear grip; and decreases drag. So I don't see a situation where you would be on part throttle; and be opening DRS.
Unless you're in a corner; being on part throttle usually means you're accelerating. For which you need traction, and more rear grip. And you'd be able to get your foot on the floor much faster if you had DRS shut
The only way you would open the DRS when not at full throttle is if you have enough grip to open the throttle all the way from the rest of the car. If that is the case you are running way to mush DF and will be compromised in the race.
Not really. Say the car was setup for light fuel, or heavy fuel.
The car's behavior will change with the change in fuel. Whichever you set up for, the car will either be behaving sub optimally at one phase, meaning too much DF setting or too little. Whatever the situation is.
There is too little i know to really conclude on something without confirmation, such as from Mark Webber. But maybe it was in the rules already.
whatever the case, it's amazing that once again, like Turkey 2010 turn 8, the redbull is in a class of it's own.
Which is faster though,
130 with DRS and less downforce or 130R without DRS and more downforce?
Wouldn't lack of DRS in the turn in tomorrows race suggest it is being taken with surpluss grip?
Is this a compromise for the race?
scarbs wrote:Clearly Red Bull run some 15cm of rear ride height and very little front ride height. The geometry means that the splitter is in the way, so it has to flex.
