"IF" this is what it seems, I still wonder at it's legality. After thinking about how the rules are written, and it's supposed construction and application, it just may be able to wiggle through a few loopholes. And if so, congratulations to Ferrari (no sarcasm intended) in pushing the rules and interpretations as far as possible. It's not cheating or anything, this is how rules work.
But I bow to Reca's statement, this may just be nothing but a rumor, at best.
Another Ferrari strength in China will be the 248 F1's suspension package, which along with improved engine driveability, will greatly assist tyre-wear management - in combination with Bridgestone tyres featuring a low degree of hysteresis. This means the rubber is better able to adapt to variations in asphalt roughness - the lower the hysteresis, the lower the tyre wear and the higher the top speed. Such tyres work well with the 248 F1's suspension, which was revised in the summer to better exploit the tyres' potential performance and to enhance their durability. Front and rear suspension follow the same principle, with a central transverse damper, plus horizontal rotational dampers, coupled with torsion bars (see detail). Not only is this layout extremely compact, it means stiffness settings can be changed extremely quickly - very useful in rapidly determining the best set-up, especially during qualifying.
"Aerodynamics are for people who can't build good engines" Enzo Ferrari
With all due respect, that article is more propaganda than engineering analysis. All Formula One car suspensions are as easily tuned, it's more about being able to alter the characteristics between qualifying and the start of the race. At present, no one is allowed to touch the cars with only such exceptions as specified in article 117 of the Sporting Regulations. http://www.fia.com/resources/documents/ ... ATIONS.pdf
i dont know now then, and certainly i am not going to argue with you about f1 cars now am i?
so you think it doesnt exists? let me just say that if it does really exists its quite a big advantage or maybe its something that other teams already have without much fuss.
"Aerodynamics are for people who can't build good engines" Enzo Ferrari
the formula1.com article just describes the suspension sustem on pretty much all the cars with a horizontal 3rd damper with 2 horizontal damper+torsion bar. Ferrari maybe the odd ball out using the rotary dampers, but nothing different in core to the other cars....the EM fluid is now available in many production cars, but I doubt they will be allowed to run such a thing when it is quite explicitly prohibited in the rule....
Trust me zen, this isn't an argument clinic. If it was we would be discussing such issues such as a gentleman named Michael, or getting hit on the head lessons. But in things like suspensions and the inner technical workings of a car, we're all in search of "the truth". What I meant to say is that in the Formula1 tech article, they describe a pretty generic system that most have in one form or another. But they all definitely are tuneable in about every aspect you can think of, from wheelbase to caster, to specific compression settings at high velocity shock travel.
But this supposed system is about the shock fluid, and that it's properties may be altered by electric signal. There are tons of production cars on the road that have servos on the shocks that rotate or move valves, and change the shock characteristics. They can be driver selected, or sometimes the car's computer decides based on how aggressive you are driving it. But that kind of stuff is expressly forbidden in F1. When active damping was banned, one concept was that the shock characteristics were to be unchanged once qualifying was over. Set up the suspension, and hope it's the right settings on race day.
With this fluid that can be altered, it is questionable whether it is legal, but it sure opens up neat possibilities. What if it rains? make the fluid as "thin" as possible and make the suspension as supple as possible. Or if you have a dry track, and are willing to sacrifice tire wear and driver comfort for competitive speed? Cahnge the electric signal and make the fluid "thicker".
Oh, and by the way, love the avatar. Ronnie Peterson was one of my heroes, I consider him one of the very quickest drivers ever.
yeah i can get what you're saying now. thinking about it i'm sure other have something like this one form or another but maybe theirs isnt so advertised.
Regarding Ronnie, well my father rubbed him down on me hence my second name and when i saw the collection of VHS and DVDs i can really see why he liked him, balls to the walls stuff although if you ask me he was a bit ragged, maybe thats why he supports kimi now.
"Aerodynamics are for people who can't build good engines" Enzo Ferrari
"124) In order that the scrutineers may be completely satisfied that no alterations have been made to the suspension systems or aerodynamic configuration of the car (with the exception of the front wing) whilst in post-qualifying parc fermé, it must be clear from physical inspection that changes cannot be made without
the use of tools."
Using an electrical current to change the damper settings would surely contravene the above.
This thread sounds and smells like a Red Herring to me; it would have shown up elsewhere if it were true.
The technology has been around for some time now; quite frequently you can read reports of manufacturers trying this sort of thing - I seem to recall Mercedes trying the system once.
Many years ago I read an article in a car magazine that had testing data between Mario and Ronnie when they were teammates. Mario was much smoother and consistent, but Ronnie somehow managed to get the tires to work at slip angles considered outside of normal practice. He could get the car to perform beyond what we consider the traction circle.
Smooth drivers are to be admired for their precision, consistency, and concentration. But somehow, to me, I love the drivers who can throw the cars around the track. Montoya, Senna, Ronnie Peterson, Kevin Harvick, Paul Tracy, and of course, Gilles Villeneuve were always exciting to watch.
If you put a bunch of "smooth" drivers on the track, they all drive the same, it's hard to notice much difference. But throw in someone like Kimi, or Montoya, and suddenly the race takes on an extra dimension, and that driver stands out with a very distinct and powerful personality.
Great Drivers you've mentioned there Dave no doubt, but putting Senna on one side, no-one was really successful. But I agree, there is more in F1 or driver per se, than success and winning, thats why Gilles and Ronnie will be more in people's hearts and minds than, say Piquet.
"Aerodynamics are for people who can't build good engines" Enzo Ferrari
Sometimes just building up a win record isn't everything. All competitors strive for the win, but there are people out there that show class and passion. And that adds to the enrichment of any sort. I can name countless "underdogs" who are cherished and respected by a lot of knowledgable fans, because of character. Peter Sauber, Giancarlo Minardi, Sterling Moss, the list is endless.
Sometimes it's not the destination that is important, but the voyage.
RH1300S wrote:Thanks for the link to the regs Dave...........
How about this?
"124) In order that the scrutineers may be completely satisfied that no alterations have been made to the suspension systems or aerodynamic configuration of the car (with the exception of the front wing) whilst in post-qualifying parc fermé, it must be clear from physical inspection that changes cannot be made without
the use of tools."
Using an electrical current to change the damper settings would surely contravene the above.
What if you have to use a tool to remove the engine cover?
DaveKillens wrote:Sometimes just building up a win record isn't everything. All competitors strive for the win, but there are people out there that show class and passion. And that adds to the enrichment of any sort. I can name countless "underdogs" who are cherished and respected by a lot of knowledgable fans, because of character. Peter Sauber, Giancarlo Minardi, Sterling Moss, the list is endless.
Sometimes it's not the destination that is important, but the voyage.
"losers always talk about doing there best, winners go home and F*ck the prom queen" ,sean connery
zac510 wrote:What if you have to use a tool to remove the engine cover?
I don't think that qualifies as "changing". A component is removed for access, then put back in it's original place. Nothing is altered, at least in the conditions post qualifying and pre-race.
But what if it's just a rotary switch? You just need to twist it manually, no need of "tools. (unless you have a low oponion of the person doing it)
You have a good point flyinfrog, winning is everything at the moment. But then you get to post-retirement, and drivers are remembered for things apart from the sheer statistics.
Winning may get you lots of money and cool statistics in the record book, but it doesn't guarantee respect or a place in fan's hearts.
