Red Bull Racing's technical chief Adrian Newey has admitted to concern that the new lower nose regulations introduced in Formula One may have uninentionally made driver safety worse.
This way, a team can change the weight balance front-to-back while still remaining at the minimum weigth.SectorOne wrote:311+366 = 677kg?
I thought the minimum weight during the whole event without fuel can be no less then 685kg´s at all times?
what am i missing?
Not less than.SectorOne wrote:311+366 = 677kg?
I thought the minimum weight during the whole event without fuel can be no less then 685kg´s at all times?
what am i missing?
The same reason as they've done it for many years – to make sure the lap times stay reasonably constant, and to make safety stay reasonably constant.godlameroso wrote:Minimum weight of non hybrid LMP-1 cars will be 835kg next year, will be interesting to see what's faster. The current aero regs work why make the cars even slower? Determined to be outclassed by other race series?
What's the point of calling yourself the pinnacle of motorsports when half the cars are at roughly the same pace as a top GP-2 car? Or when closed wheel sports cars are barely heavier, have wider chassis, wider wheels, less restrictive aero, less drag, and better racing?beelsebob wrote:The same reason as they've done it for many years – to make sure the lap times stay reasonably constant, and to make safety stay reasonably constant.godlameroso wrote:Minimum weight of non hybrid LMP-1 cars will be 835kg next year, will be interesting to see what's faster. The current aero regs work why make the cars even slower? Determined to be outclassed by other race series?
what is the point of following F1 if you're so sure of those facts?godlameroso wrote:
What's the point of calling yourself the pinnacle of motorsports when half the cars are at roughly the same pace as a top GP-2 car? Or when closed wheel sports cars are barely heavier, have wider chassis, wider wheels, less restrictive aero, less drag, and better racing?
Who said it's called the pinnacle of motor sport?godlameroso wrote:What's the point of calling yourself the pinnacle of motorsports when half the cars are at roughly the same pace as a top GP-2 car? Or when closed wheel sports cars are barely heavier, have wider chassis, wider wheels, less restrictive aero, less drag, and better racing?beelsebob wrote:The same reason as they've done it for many years – to make sure the lap times stay reasonably constant, and to make safety stay reasonably constant.godlameroso wrote:Minimum weight of non hybrid LMP-1 cars will be 835kg next year, will be interesting to see what's faster. The current aero regs work why make the cars even slower? Determined to be outclassed by other race series?
Where do these 5s come from that are repeated over and over again?turbof1 wrote:... but we are set to loose another 5s a lap next year.
And it does – no other motor sports teams would be anywhere near this successful with the constraints of the rules.turbof1 wrote:No offense, beelsebob, but when you have by miles the most expensive motorsport out there, expectations that it whipes the floor with the other series are pretty reasonable.
What makes you think we're going to lose 5s a lap next year? Remember, this year's cars were meant to be a second a lap slower than last year's – instead, they're a second a lap faster.It used to be just that, but we are set to loose another 5s a lap next year. I do not expect the teams to eventually recuperate that. And that is sad you know; the teams put in alot of work to keep making the cars faster, but it just doesn't show this way.
Except that it doesn't show, just because of the constraints. Way too many constraints. Look it in a different way: a F1 team spends 5 to 10 times as much as a GP2 team, to be only 6 seconds faster.beelsebob wrote: And it does – no other motor sports teams would be anywhere near this successful with the constraints of the rules.
huh? no they weren't. They only lost DRS; nowhere near a full second and which got compensated anyway by more peak-performing tyres. Cars were expected to win 1s overall, which they have. That's just a very wild assumption of yours that doesn't make sence.What makes you think we're going to lose 5s a lap next year? Remember, this year's cars were meant to be a second a lap slower than last year's – instead, they're a second a lap faster.
Wow, both having a much harder problem to solve, and being 6 seconds a lap faster... that's pretty --- impressive!turbof1 wrote:Except that it doesn't show, just because of the constraints. Way too many constraints. Look it in a different way: a F1 team spends 5 to 10 times as much as a GP2 team, to be only 6 seconds faster.beelsebob wrote: And it does – no other motor sports teams would be anywhere near this successful with the constraints of the rules.
Even if this is the time they'd lose based on the current state of aero, we can then assume that they'll gain 1.5-2 seconds a lap just from getting better at designing cars from year to year. That leaves us at a 1 second time loss. Which is in the bounds of the normal lap time variation of F1. Give it a year after that and they'll be a second a lap faster than current cars, plus, the engines will have developed (which they're ofc not doing just now), and we can expect them to be significantly faster than this year already. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if they were already tightening up the regulations some more come 2015!huh? no they weren't. They only lost DRS; nowhere near a full second and which got compensated anyway by more peak-performing tyres. Cars were expected to win 1s overall, which they have. That's just a very wild assumption of yours that doesn't make sence.What makes you think we're going to lose 5s a lap next year? Remember, this year's cars were meant to be a second a lap slower than last year's – instead, they're a second a lap faster.
I can't find the article anymore on amus, they made a calculation. Let's safely assume they excagerated it and say they'll loose 3 seconds. Still way too much.
