F1 2014 Car Comparison Thread

[Pierce89]

Take a look at the other early 2009 FW designs, bar the Brawn... the R29 FW wasnt the simplest one.

I was referring to the inwash endplates more than anything else.

Speaking of rough seasons, though, I think it's a bit funny that the teams represented in the OWG that drew up those regulations - Ferrari, McLaren, and Renault - all struggled in 2009. You'd think it would be other way around.

The early Renault FWEPs weren't in wash but every wash. They pushed air in, out, and up.



Edit: Dammit man, I, like bhall, hate when I start a new page. I feel like nobody will know what I'm on about.

[Juzh]

simpler =/= slower. Not necessarily.

[henra]

Good comparison F1 cars :
Mercedes W05 VS Redbull RB10. Mercedes is small in nose sidepod and airbox
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fi0K93S9rWU

(Partly) disagree. Not a good comparison of the noses. Rather on tabloid level physics.

The wing mounts of the RB are completely behind the appendage. Therefore at the point of the wing mounts the RB has effectively the full x-section. The only thing which will reduce volume flow somewhat is the reduced speed of the air due to turbulences/induced drag caused by the appendage upfront. Due to its Profile (teardrop/airfoil shaped in the vertical axis) the air will converge behind the appendage.
Volume flow through the nose of RB and Merc shouldn't be too different. The F14T on the other hand will be a completely different matter.

[SpainFAN]

Good comparison F1 cars :
Mercedes W05 VS Redbull RB10. Mercedes is small in nose sidepod and airbox
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fi0K93S9rWU

(Partly) disagree. Not a good comparison of the noses. Rather on tabloid level physics.

The wing mounts of the RB are completely behind the appendage. Therefore at the point of the wing mounts the RB has effectively the full x-section. The only thing which will reduce volume flow somewhat is the reduced speed of the air due to turbulences/induced drag caused by the appendage upfront. Due to its Profile (teardrop/airfoil shaped in the vertical axis) the air will converge behind the appendage.
Volume flow through the nose of RB and Merc shouldn't be too different. The F14T on the other hand will be a completely different matter.

you know... I was looking at that video, trying to figure out what they where implying... but I like your line of though henra.
I was looking that the RB appendix, and in essence I thought about the venturi that is creates on both sides of at convergence. This negative pressure would suck such more of the air in and around the "mouth opening" of the nose and move greater volume around the sidepod. This air would then energise the sidepod giving greater downforce.

[Pierce89]

Take a look at the other early 2009 FW designs, bar the Brawn... the R29 FW wasnt the simplest one.

I was referring to the inwash endplates more than anything else.

Speaking of rough seasons, though, I think it's a bit funny that the teams represented in the OWG that drew up those regulations - Ferrari, McLaren, and Renault - all struggled in 2009. You'd think it would be other way around.

The way I've heard it is thus: The three teams mentioned missed all the loopholes because by writing the regulations, they read them and saw what they meant for them to say rather than recognizing the holes in the wording. The rules they wrote weren't intended to allow a DDD, so they never saw it. They just saw the regs as they originally "intended" them to be. In other words they read the regs and only saw the proverbial "spirit of the regulations".

[SiLo]

You'd think if they were re-writing the regs for the sport, they might include all the teams in such decisions?

[beelsebob]

You'd think if they were re-writing the regs for the sport, they might include all the teams in such decisions?

Why would you do that? That just leads to arguments, overly long process, and a cluster --- design by committee result. It's almost always better to involve only the key players in decision making processes.

[zioture]

Comparison Ferrari F14T, Mercedes W05, Redbull RB10 Montecarlo

[Glyn]

Comparison Ferrari F14T, Mercedes W05, Redbull RB10 Montecarlo
https://scontent-a-mxp.xx.fbcdn.net/hph ... 7271_o.jpg

Does this picture make it abundantly clear that the Mercedes has a "better" FW.... and "more" aerodynamic bits on the car?

[beelsebob]

Comparison Ferrari F14T, Mercedes W05, Redbull RB10 Montecarlo
https://scontent-a-mxp.xx.fbcdn.net/hph ... 7271_o.jpg

Does this picture make it abundantly clear that the Mercedes has a "better" FW.... and "more" aerodynamic bits on the car?

[zioture]

Comparison Ferrari F14T, Mercedes W05, Redbull RB10 Montecarlo
https://scontent-a-mxp.xx.fbcdn.net/hph ... 7271_o.jpg

Does this picture make it abundantly clear that the Mercedes has a "better" FW.... and "more" aerodynamic bits on the car?

For Front Wing look this pic

[beelsebob]

What about it... All this picture highlights is that the various teams need their Y250 vortex in a slightly different place.

[OO7]

For Front Wing look this pic

It's interesting how Red Bull have gone for maximum span on the forward most planes, whereas Mercedes have gone for a design consists of a narrower main plane, with subsequent planes getting progressively wider, to turn the flow outside of the front wheels in a more obvious/pronounced manner.

[Pierce89]

For Front Wing look this pic

http://www.newsf1.it/wp-content/uploads ... eriore.jpg

It's interesting how Red Bull have gone for maximum span on the forward most planes, whereas Mercedes have gone for a design consists of a narrower main plane, with subsequent planes getting progressively wider, to turn the flow outside of the front wheels in a more obvious/pronounced manner.

That is interesting. It seems to confirm the general consensus that as usual RB have a setup aimed at max df, whereas Merc seems more concerned with aero efficiency overall than pure df. IMHO, the on track performance also confirms this.

[Juzh]

For Front Wing look this pic

http://www.newsf1.it/wp-content/uploads ... eriore.jpg

It's interesting how Red Bull have gone for maximum span on the forward most planes, whereas Mercedes have gone for a design consists of a narrower main plane, with subsequent planes getting progressively wider, to turn the flow outside of the front wheels in a more obvious/pronounced manner.

That is interesting. It seems to confirm the general consensus that as usual RB have a setup aimed at max df, whereas Merc seems more concerned with aero efficiency overall than pure df. IMHO, the on track performance also confirms this.

RB9 was the most efficient car on the grid by far. RB had foregone max DF at no matter the cost back in 2011. RB5 and 6 were bricks indeed but then the situation changed. Merc kinda took over that role in 2013.
There's not enough data and continuity to draw any kind of conclusions for 2014 imo.