Lotus E22 Renault

[mikeerfol]

The first non-pen*s car. Thanks god.

Looks great

Yeah, the first co*k car

Btw

@ScarbsF1: Not sure how Lotus make the twin tusk arrangement meet the reg "a single external cross section of more than 9000mm² "

[Gridlock]

They're not the same length, right? It's not just some intern with little concept of perspective?

[scarlet]

Yep, right tusk looks longer to me.

[outer_bongolia]

I would love to see this lotus lock a McLaren nose to nose. That'd be a nice view.

[Blanchimont]

Interesting that they made the nose asymetrical, but I can't believe that the FIA let them get away with it (i.e. aerodynamic function of the vanity panel, which must be the shorter side of the nose) ... there will be many changes before the second test, since this solution will be much better than the Williams & McLaren solutions.

It's also possible that both fingers belong to the crash structure. But why do you think that the Lotus solution is better than the others? The rules demand that you the cross section 50mm behind the tip has to have a minimum cross section of 9000mm², that's the cross section of the right finger. The second finger increases the cross section from 50mm behind the tip onwards and also doubles the turbolences and weight.

[bidong]

I would love to see this lotus lock a McLaren nose to nose. That'd be a nice view.

how to make a 2015 f1 car. make babies

[atlantis]

Is that nose legal?

[scarlet]

Interesting that they made the nose asymetrical, but I can't believe that the FIA let them get away with it (i.e. aerodynamic function of the vanity panel, which must be the shorter side of the nose) ... there will be many changes before the second test, since this solution will be much better than the Williams & McLaren solutions.

It's also possible that both fingers belong to the crash structure. But why do you think that the Lotus solution is better than the others? The rules demand that you the cross section 50mm behind the tip has to have a minimum cross section of 9000mm², that's the cross section of the right finger. The second finger increases the cross section from 50mm behind the tip onwards and also doubles the turbolences and weight.

And I don't think it's guaranteed that you'll get more airflow through under the car with this design anyway.

[beelsebob]

Interesting that they made the nose asymetrical, but I can't believe that the FIA let them get away with it (i.e. aerodynamic function of the vanity panel, which must be the shorter side of the nose) ... there will be many changes before the second test, since this solution will be much better than the Williams & McLaren solutions.

It's also possible that both fingers belong to the crash structure. But why do you think that the Lotus solution is better than the others? The rules demand that you the cross section 50mm behind the tip has to have a minimum cross section of 9000mm², that's the cross section of the right finger. The second finger increases the cross section from 50mm behind the tip onwards and also doubles the turbolences and weight.

Nope, it appears lotus are exploiting a loop hole here. There's nothing in the crash structure regulation that says that it must have a *single* cross section. Only that it's total cross sectional area must be 9000mm².

[astracrazy]

wtf is that. what is this sport coming to

[Blanchimont]

There's nothing in the crash structure regulation that says that it must have a *single* cross section. Only that it's total cross sectional area must be 9000mm².

15.4.3:
... It must have a single external cross section, in horizontal projection, of more than 9000mm² at a point 50mm behind its forward-most point. ...

[Blackout]

Me too thinks the Lotus sidepod inlets seem to be smaller than the Merc powered cars (williams and Mclaren atleast)
But wait an see

[beelsebob]

There's nothing in the crash structure regulation that says that it must have a *single* cross section. Only that it's total cross sectional area must be 9000mm².

15.4.3:
... It must have a single external cross section, in horizontal projection, of more than 9000mm² at a point 50mm behind its forward-most point. ...

Nope.

15.4.3:
It must have a minimum external cross section, in horizontal projection, of 9000mm2 at a point 50mm behind its forward-most point.

http://argent.fia.com/web/fia-public.ns ... _20.07.pdf

[atlantis]

Is it me or the right part of the nose seems shorter than the left?

[Blanchimont]

There's nothing in the crash structure regulation that says that it must have a *single* cross section. Only that it's total cross sectional area must be 9000mm².

15.4.3:
... It must have a single external cross section, in horizontal projection, of more than 9000mm² at a point 50mm behind its forward-most point. ...

Nope.

15.4.3:
It must have a minimum external cross section, in horizontal projection, of 9000mm2 at a point 50mm behind its forward-most point.

http://argent.fia.com/web/fia-public.ns ... _20.07.pdf

Better use this one: http://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/ ... -12-09.pdf