Sergio Pininfarina (1926-2012)

[MadMatt]

Yesterday, at the age of 85, Sergio Piningfarina died. He was mostly known for his Ferrari creations but he was also involved in many other design projects. For me his greatest piece was the Ferrari F40.



RIP to someone who made millions of kids dreaming of owning such machines !

[ecapox]

If i ever inherit, win, steal, find, millions of dollars, euros, pounds or any other non-multiplied-by-1000 currency, an F40 is the first thing i'd buy. THE FIRST.

"Sorry honey, we just inherited $34m. Going to buy an F40. I'll be back when i buy one."

[Dragonfly]

A great artist.
R.I.P.

[ds.raikkonen]

I still have my r/c F40 from childhood days. Indeed, it's the best prancing horse till date. R.I.P. Sergio Pininfarina, thank you for designing such iconic automobiles!

[Pup]

I'll never give up a chance to post a photo of Pininfarina's Sigma concept for F1, which would have changed the sport dramatically (for the better, imo) had it been adopted...

[N12ck]

was that ever raced?

[Pup]

No, there were two built, but only as concept cars - as far as I know. Ferrari has one and Pininfarina the other.

I'm guilty of posting that pic a bit too often, but it always surprises me how few F1 fans know it exists. I really wish someone in F1 would take a look back at that car, since I think it offers some really elegant solutions to some of the problems the sport still faces today. Some of it's features have already been adopted, like bladder fuel tanks and impact zones.

It's a bit retro looking, but to me it looks pretty fresh, considering it's a 40+ year old design.

[MadMatt]

No, there were two or three built, but only as concept cars as far as I know. I really wish someone in F1 would take a look back at that car, since I think it offers some really elegant solutions to some of the problems the sport still faces today.

Maybe you could explain further what you think this car may solve in today's problems ? We are on a technical after all !

[Pup]

Ah, since you ask...



First, I think the wheel protection accomplishes a number of things while still keeping the open-wheel tradition. That photo doesn't show it well, but there's a full rear bumper protecting the rears also. The safety aspect is obvious I think, but it would also allow closer racing, as incidents like Hamilton/Maldonado's would be far less likely to end in tears. One could argue that the closer racing would cancel out the added safety, and I might agree - but even if so, you could get better racing for no net loss of safety.

Secondly, I think the center-mounted wing accomplishes a couple of things. From a safety standpoint, it provides better rollover protection than the roll hoops we have now for one. And I think you could add a canpy, or a partial one as shown, without affecting the look of the car. At least this design seems to lend itself better to a canopy if the sport heads down that route. But I also think that aerodynamically, a single center-mounted wing would produce less dirty air behind the car than today's rear wings and at the same time be less susceptible to traveling in dirty air like today's front wings. There would still be dirty air of course, but without the leading car coupling the rear wing to the diffuser and having that disruption maximized right at the rear of the car, and without the trailing car being dependent on a front wing that's meters away from that disruption, then it's far more likely that the trailing car can follow closer through the corners. And also, similar to above, not having delicate wings cantilevered off the cars means fewer races ruined by a trip to the pits, fewer safety cars, etc.

Third, and this is debatable of course, but I think this layout lends itself to more aerodynamic designs as opposed to the full-on downforce designs we have now.

Fourth, the wide body gives more room for the engineers (read: Adrian Newey) to work, with ample room for cooling.

Fifth - not to be underestimated - the wider body provides more room for sponsors. (I've always argued that F1's problem is on the income side of the equation, not the cost.)

Sixth - wider cockpit. We're in the middle of an obesity epidemic, you know, and JPM might want to come back someday.

Finally, it looks awesome. It's mean and racy, and looks dangerous and very F1, even though it accommodates all of the safety features that have been pushed of late. I'm not a huge safety nut when it comes to motorsport, but I do think that if you can provide protection easily and without taking away from other aspects of the sport, then you shoud.

[MadMatt]

As you've made a quite long post, let me react on some points, do you ?

First, I think the wheel protection accomplishes a number of things while still keeping the open-wheel tradition. That photo doesn't show it well, but there's a full rear bumper protecting the rears also. The safety aspect is obvious I think, but it would also allow closer racing, as incidents like Hamilton/Maldonado's would be far less likely to end in tears. One could argue that the closer racing would cancel out the added safety, and I might agree - but even if so, you could get better racing for no net loss of safety.

I fully agree on this. The wheel protection on that car looks big enough to avoid incidents like the one you mentioned. On the other hand I must say that if you have a small contact with another car (which happen more than we think), it may damage the side bodywork and lead to a puncture if it cuts the tire. I agree that having to change a tire is better than ending in the wall (or the sand, errrrr tarmac areas) but still, that must be taken in consideration.

By closer racing do you mean that because the wheel are protected the drivers might want to get closer to each other (on the track of course, I see you coming !) ? I doubt they are afraid of that at the moment, despite the exposed wheels ! But I can imagine they would be less afraid of being more aggressive !

Secondly, I think the center-mounted wing accomplishes a couple of things. From a safety standpoint, it provides better rollover protection than the roll hoops we have now for one. And I think you could add a canpy, or a partial one as shown, without affecting the look of the car. At least this design seems to lend itself better to a canopy if the sport heads down that route. But I also think that aerodynamically, a single center-mounted wing would produce less dirty air behind the car than today's rear wings and at the same time be less susceptible to traveling in dirty air like today's front wings. There would still be dirty air of course, but without the leading car coupling the rear wing to the diffuser and having that disruption maximized right at the rear of the car, and without the trailing car being dependent on a front wing that's meters away from that disruption, then it's far more likely that the trailing car can follow closer through the corners. And also, similar to above, not having delicate wings cantilevered off the cars means fewer races ruined by a trip to the pits, fewer safety cars, etc.

I am no aero expert (understand that I had no lessons on aerodynamics on cars and that I base all what I say on what I've read out of books or on careful "analyze" of what was written on internet), but I think the car would lack rear downforce, isn't it ? The diffuser may not be sufficient to produce the needed downforce, I'm afraid, but that needs to be proven !

The canopy idea is quite good actually !

Fourth, the wide body gives more room for the engineers (read: Adrian Newey) to work, with ample room for cooling.

I doubt they have problems with cooling, judging by the really small vents that we see on today's car !

Fifth - not to be underestimated - the wider body provides more room for sponsors. (I've always argued that F1's problem is on the income side of the equation, not the cost.)

This I agree with you totally ! The sport needs more income, and having more surface is an idea, but I would say that promoting the sport better would be my first action. The lambda spectator doesn't understand DRS, KERS and all these features. I am fully against making the sport a show like they do in the USA, but I think we need more INTERESTING tracks, not "laboratory" tracks without any spirit.

When you ask someone which track he knows, he will probably answer Spa, Monza. They are here for quite some time I agree, but they have "something" ! I've always been against Tilke tracks because they are so artificial. I made drawings of dozen of tracks which would produce more interesting races, I am SURE about that, and that's with taking in consideration safety and so on. The key in my opinion is the elevation, but that's another subject I think !

Finally, it looks awesome. It's mean and racy, and looks dangerous and very F1, even though it accommodates all of the safety features that have been pushed of late. I'm not a huge safety nut when it comes to motorsport, but I do think that if you can provide protection easily and without taking away from other aspects of the sport, then you shoud.

Not my fav' car I would say, but I agree it looks awesome ! Considering it was made in 1969 it is a great piece of car !

[cheapracer]

I probably like more Pininfarina styled cars than any other individual styling house but we'll all die one day, that's a given.