As silly as this rule seems its not the first. I remember when the rear wing endplates were enlarged some time ago for sponsorship/asthetic reasons.FrukostScones wrote:Still a shame a rule with quasi nonfunctional BS was introduced.
Weren't those proposals put to rest?Tim.Wright wrote:and the reduction in front wing width and nose height starting 2014
I don't think those parts were axedtimbo wrote:Weren't those proposals put to rest?Tim.Wright wrote:and the reduction in front wing width and nose height starting 2014
They weren't, the WMSC was a bit unclear, but the 2014 regulations are. Narrower front wing, lower beam wing/No beam wing, lower noses etc..timbo wrote:Weren't those proposals put to rest?Tim.Wright wrote:and the reduction in front wing width and nose height starting 2014
You've seen the new FI? which year?multisync wrote:Having seen the new FI on the rolling road I can say it certainly looks nicer but there are a lot more detailing around the car to keep interest.
Ogami musashi wrote:You've seen the new FI? which year?multisync wrote:Having seen the new FI on the rolling road I can say it certainly looks nicer but there are a lot more detailing around the car to keep interest.
Can we hope for some pics (after the car launch, of course)?multisync wrote:Ogami musashi wrote:You've seen the new FI? which year?multisync wrote:Having seen the new FI on the rolling road I can say it certainly looks nicer but there are a lot more detailing around the car to keep interest.
most years: inc this one..
You imagine there's no NDA of some sort?RB7ate9 wrote:Can we hope for some pics (after the car launch, of course)?
Does it have a dead zone?multisync wrote:Ogami musashi wrote:You've seen the new FI? which year?multisync wrote:Having seen the new FI on the rolling road I can say it certainly looks nicer but there are a lot more detailing around the car to keep interest.
most years: inc this one..