its not the exhaust its the crash structuredot235 wrote:Is that real permament exhaust?? Wow, didn't expect it to be this much visually extended and in this position.
Looks mean though. =D>
http://i.imgur.com/Sa9aIXO.jpg
its not the exhaust its the crash structuredot235 wrote:Is that real permament exhaust?? Wow, didn't expect it to be this much visually extended and in this position.
Looks mean though. =D>
http://i.imgur.com/Sa9aIXO.jpg
That "silver" piece that you see is the heatshield coating on the top of the rear crash structure.dot235 wrote:Is that real permament exhaust?? Wow, didn't expect it to be this much visually extended and in this position.
Looks mean though. =D>
http://i.imgur.com/Sa9aIXO.jpg
f1rules wrote:does this look like apossible 2nd attachment point for the suspension, maybe comparing geometries
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/248 ... 0%20pm.png
That's the part I missed. I saw what looked like two trailing edge extensions, one on either side of the "finger," leaving an F14T-style concave section between that would act like a venturi. Combined with the higher, shorter nose and the "venturi" formed by the pylons, it looked like a hybrid of two design philosophies.Pilatus wrote:Blunt leading edge, and sharp trailing edge - single fin.
Nice comparison.Silent Storm wrote:https://twitter.com/junaidsamodien_/sta ... 6374482944
The '15' had them if I recall correctly, but they were just straight, symmetrical wings visually, without the downward curve.turbof1 wrote:Well don't expect to have any big effect. This is merely finetuning. They probably didn't bother with it in '15. It introduces another airflow structure and for the small gain it brings they probably decided to put effort somewhere else instead.cmF1 wrote:Kinda guessed that myself Turbo! Lol
I don't remember seeing it on the '15
The red line highlights the vertical height difference that separates the floor on the reference plane from the outer 'stepped' floor, that is 50mm higher as per the tech regs.Yurasyk wrote:It seems to be a tunnel under the gearbox.Kalsi wrote:Wanted to focus a little bit on the gearbox, which it doesnt seem so small to me...
Sorry for the bad quality but this is a screenshotted picture from the streaming video you can still see on the ferrari site
They play with lights movement and is not easy to take a good shot with the right light
First image shows what the gearbox shape looks to me:
(Copy paste url in new window for larger image)
http://i.imgur.com/k8hPXlu.jpg
I appoligize for the second one cause those may be reflections that deceived my eyes but... this looked VERY strange to me
Please help me understand what im seeing lol
http://i.imgur.com/Z0qpy6y.png
http://i.imgur.com/FMBZlp3.jpg
I think that is one of the attach/release mechanism points for the nose.f1rules wrote:does this look like apossible 2nd attachment point for the suspension, maybe comparing geometries
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/248 ... 0%20pm.png
Ferrai said that development of the 2016 car started early in the 2015 season.Blaze1 wrote:Nice comparison.Silent Storm wrote:https://twitter.com/junaidsamodien_/sta ... 6374482944
I was wondering if the wheelbase would have increased on he new car, because even though F1 features a high rate of development, I couldn't see anyone slimming a car down and making it appear more compact and so much tighter in such a short period of time. It just wouldn't make sense.
because the intake shape doesnt really indicate what the radiator layout is in the sidepod....its all about what works for your entire car's airflow not just copy another team's solution and assume it will work for your carferkan wrote:Wondering why is Ferrari continuing with vertically longer sidepod intake design in comparison to RBR and in some way Merc's flatter style? Seems like flatter intakes give more space at the bottom to make undercut for air to pass.
RB style
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/wp-content/u ... very-4.jpg
That must mean the 2015 car was very unoptimised for them to make such a leap? I still believe an extended wheelbase has likely also played a part, but repackaging also helped.giantfan10 wrote:Ferrai said that development of the 2016 car started early in the 2015 season.
secondly the Mercedes aero advantage came from having better airflow going to the area above the diffuser. Ferrari pinpointed their nose style and the fact that their car was much thicker around the waist as the chief reason for their airflow deficit... they addressed both
Did you miss all the articles about ferrari moving engine components during the offseason? that was to enable them to have a better coke bottle at the back of the car (gearbox redesign, MGU-K moving from the back of the engine to the left side,clutch in the bell housing and a different radiator position) it was the 2015 engine layout that made the rear of the car so wide so why would it seem so impossible for them to make the rear of the car tighter after they made the room for that exact reason?
no the wheelbase did not increase.