Force India VJM02

[xpensive]

First of all, define "inside track"?

[PNSD]

Whats going to bother me about this is that I do not feel FI will get the credit they deserve if its a good car. Poeple will turn around and say its because of Mclaren...

[axle]

Whats going to bother me about this is that I do not feel FI will get the credit they deserve if its a good car. Poeple will turn around and say its because of Mclaren...

Indeed the haters are going to be annoyingly vocal this year.

[kilcoo316]

Nope this is a clone of the basic McLaren chassis. The aero is different but the basic chassis is the same.
Areas to look at:-

Front suspension.
Height of the nose (not the tip, the whole thing).
Area where the nose joins the cockpit.
Airbox.
Wheelbase.
Exhaust Location.
Cockpit Location.

Front suspension: Correct - because it has to be somewhat compatible with the rear suspension - which is pretty much defined by McLaren's gearbox pick-up points.

Height of the nose - nah - the angles are different to the splitter.

Area where nose joins cockpit - what do you mean? - The physical area (m^2) or just the general design around that region - as I said, the lead into the splitter is different.

Airbox - which comes from the engine parameters

Wheelbase - which comes from weight distribution - again, engine, KERs & gearbox

Exhaust location - Again - packing around the gearbox and rear suspension defines it mostly.

Cockpit location - Given what the wheelbase needs to be (due to the longitudinal weight distribution of the gearbox/engine/KERs - where else do you think they are going to put the driver? But anyway - take a closer look - the cockpits are not in exactly the same location.



It is similar to the McLaren for rather basic and obvious engineering reasons - not necessary because FI copied the McLaren drawings.

[kilcoo316]

Nobody said identical [-X but it's clear to see the FI "designer" was sitting next to the McLaren designer during the theory exam

Its clearly not.


Crystal clearly not.


To be brutally frank - anyone that thinks they are identical chassis with a few aero changes simply do not know what they are talking about.

They are completely different monococques - with completely different lay-ups which define completely different torsional properties. The mechanical differences only increase from there.


The front suspension is similar because it has to be. The exhausts are similar because they have to be. The rear suspension is identical because it has to be.

Not because they copied.

[xpensive]

Come on kilcoo, why be so shy and humble, share with us your infinite wisdom?

[kilcoo316]

Come on kilcoo, why be so shy and humble, share with us your infinite wisdom?

Well - its a silly argument.

Others (with seemingly good sources) have point out the silliness of it.



I'm just pointing out the basic engineering reasons for them being similar. If its a coming across as a little 'to the point' - well, perhaps the person talking silliness should have considered their opinion when told by people better informed than themself.


Oh and the line:

But it's still the McLaren chassis underneath. If you can't see that your just not understanding how it's the same car.

Is always worth a good reply to

[xpensive]

Just for the record kilcoo, silly or not, just explain how you came to the conclusion the monocoques in question had "completely different lay-ups which define completely different torsional properties"?

I for one will wait eagerly for being enlighted.

[axle]

Just for the record kilcoo, silly or not, just explain how you came to the conclusion the monocoques in question had "completely different lay-ups which define completely different torsional properties"?

I for one will wait eagerly for being enlighted.

OMG do you understand nothing about how an F1 car is constructed?

[xpensive]

I have a vague idea, but that was not my question. Please try and read it again.

[i70q7m7ghw]

I'm sorry but everyone on this board is equal, nobody's opinion can be more trusted just because of the belief they are on the inside track. It doesn't matter how close anyone is to the sport, unless your actually standing over the shoulder of the McLaren/Force India designers nothing you see/hear is certain.

"people better informed than themself." - How do we know they are better informed?

It astonishes me the amount of times people seem to forget these are discussion boards, not fact boards.

Also, can I see some pictures showing the differences in nose height etc.? From what I can see the dimensions of the front of these two cars look the same right back to the airbox.

[jwielage]

Having not been involved in this discussion I have no vested interest in who is right. In my opinion there appear to be more differences than similarities between these two chasis. Now clearly this is a very subjective statement but my reasoning is this.
If we were to construct some kind of index to rate how similar cars are by taking a batery of measurements and statistics I think we would find that their are a couple of cars "similare" to the McLarren. I would bet that the VJM02 isn't even the closest relative to the MP4-24. Assuming that they are sharing a chasis just because of their "technical partnership" isn't fair.

You can't tell me that the drasticly different aero treatment at rear end of the car is not indicative of some underlying differences in design philosophy. And that such aesthetical differences are only supperficial, doesn't seem reasonable to me either.

Keep in mind the RB4 and the STR3 looked nearly identical, now those cars shared the same chasis. Drawing any comparison with these two cars would not be fair.

Again these are all just subjective statements.

[i70q7m7ghw]

If you put a different nose on the STR3, removed some of the winglets, changed the rear wing and heck even went as far as to re-profile the sidepod inlets would that make it a different chassis?

[kilcoo316]

Just for the record kilcoo, silly or not, just explain how you came to the conclusion the monocoques in question had "completely different lay-ups which define completely different torsional properties"?

I for one will wait eagerly for being enlighted.

I'm sorry, but it is not the work of a minute to go through composite material properties and how geometry affects lay-up affects global mechanical properties.


Trust me when I say a different geometry will have different real lay-up angles (due to things like draping effects) which will have different global mechanical properties.


I suppose you could go search composite laminate theory (CLT) yourself if you want - there are loads of books that cover the mechanical aspects.

[kilcoo316]

From what I can see the dimensions of the front of these two cars look the same right back to the airbox.

I suggest you go to an opticans!

The splitters are nothing alike.

Which is pretty necessary, since the sidepods are nothing alike either.