- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
Team: Monisha Kaltenborn (TP), Eric Gandelin (CD), Willem Toet (HA), Elliot Dason-Barber (HVP), Beat Zehnder (TM), Giampaolo Dall'ara (HTE), Timothée Guerin (HTO), Reto Camenzind (CM)
Drivers: Marcus Ericsson (9), Felipe Nasr (12), Raffaele Marciello (Reserve)
It does seem strange. For a team with budget issues like sauber you would expect them to be very careful with their resources and only develop upgrades that are much more likely to work.Sniffit wrote:Are both Sauber cars running the old wing? If so any information on why? Does it cause such an imbalance in the car? I mean if they have such problems with downforce on a track like Monaco one would think that's try and hang on as much wings as possible. I was convinced that they would have solved the issue after Barcelona.
It's entirely plausible that the new wing is more efficient, but doesn't produce as much downforce. That, or it sets up the air for the back of the car better, but doesn't produce as much downforce.Sniffit wrote:Are both Sauber cars running the old wing? If so any information on why? Does it cause such an imbalance in the car? I mean if they have such problems with downforce on a track like Monaco one would think that's try and hang on as much wings as possible. I was convinced that they would have solved the issue after Barcelona.
That makes the assumption that the main cost is in the production of the part. In actual fact, I expect that the main costs are in the design and simulation of the part (by an order of magnitude or two in fact). Depending on exactly where on that curve they lie, it may be that it is in fact cheaper to make the parts and stick them on the car than to try to do detailed simulation before making them.It does seem strange. For a team with budget issues like sauber you would expect them to be very careful with their resources and only develop upgrades that are much more likely to work.
There is absolutely no chance that a team would produce parts that haven't been developed first to 'save money'. You aren't saving money if they don't work and you can't use them.Moose wrote:It's entirely plausible that the new wing is more efficient, but doesn't produce as much downforce. That, or it sets up the air for the back of the car better, but doesn't produce as much downforce.Sniffit wrote:Are both Sauber cars running the old wing? If so any information on why? Does it cause such an imbalance in the car? I mean if they have such problems with downforce on a track like Monaco one would think that's try and hang on as much wings as possible. I was convinced that they would have solved the issue after Barcelona.
Monaco needs a very pointy front end, so either of those (or several other possibilities) would explain wanting to use the older wing.
That makes the assumption that the main cost is in the production of the part. In actual fact, I expect that the main costs are in the design and simulation of the part (by an order of magnitude or two in fact). Depending on exactly where on that curve they lie, it may be that it is in fact cheaper to make the parts and stick them on the car than to try to do detailed simulation before making them.It does seem strange. For a team with budget issues like sauber you would expect them to be very careful with their resources and only develop upgrades that are much more likely to work.
Who says? It may be (and almost certainly is) cheaper to produce the part, stick it on the car, and use some flow-vis than it is to do hours and hours of analysis in the wind tunnel and on CFD with several highly paid engineers staring at the results and trying to interpret them. It's also significantly more accurate.JDC123 wrote:There is absolutely no chance that a team would produce parts that haven't been developed first to 'save money'. You aren't saving money if they don't work and you can't use them.
And waste precious track time and resources building something no one has got any idea whatsoever if it will actually work at all. Throwing spaghetti at the wall only works if you got no idea what you are doing to begin with, and that is exactly what isn't the case in F1.Moose wrote:Who says? It may be (and almost certainly is) cheaper to produce the part, stick it on the car, and use some flow-vis than it is to do hours and hours of analysis in the wind tunnel and on CFD with several highly paid engineers staring at the results and trying to interpret them. It's also significantly more accurate.JDC123 wrote:There is absolutely no chance that a team would produce parts that haven't been developed first to 'save money'. You aren't saving money if they don't work and you can't use them.
