It helps run a softer suspension set-up may be!!Chuckjr wrote:I know the main use for a high rake is for lowering the front wing angle of attack and lower front edga as well as increased diffuser volume output. Are there other bennifits in regard to suspension that it helps?
Why not? Space is tight and there may be nowhere else to put it. Further, it could well be filled with air, to operate the valves, so would have little weight.Goran2812 wrote:argh, that aluminium tank on top of the left sidepod... doesn't make sense at all to put it there...
yes i know, but that tank, and another, smaller on the other sides are the reason they have those larger bulges on top of the sidepods... that has to obstruct airflow in some way...gilgen wrote:Why not? Space is tight and there may be nowhere else to put it. Further, it could well be filled with air, to operate the valves, so would have little weight.Goran2812 wrote:argh, that aluminium tank on top of the left sidepod... doesn't make sense at all to put it there...
Perfect. Thanks mate. RB is clearly back to their old ways. Our FW looks awful high off the ground in comparison too.Mazdaboy wrote:Here is a rake comparsion CX:
It's pretty decent, there aren't many great shots of the cars from the exact same angle from Bahrain. It looks like the Ferrari was taken from a slightly different angle, but it's a good comparison I think. I think we all agree Ferrari can't currently run the same amount of rake as some of the others.radosav wrote:this ain't good comparison. look at the plank board, the angle of pcture isn't the same, or ferrari is closer to photographer.
i know, i wanted to say that photos are taken when cars are in the corner where track is angled , and cars aren't in the same racing line (ferrari took wider line) so it looks like ferrari's front wing is much higher from the ground.Crucial_Xtreme wrote:It's pretty decent, there aren't many great shots of the cars from the exact same angle from Bahrain. It looks like the Ferrari was taken from a slightly different angle, but it's a good comparison I think. I think we all agree Ferrari can't currently run the same amount of rake as some of the others.radosav wrote:this ain't good comparison. look at the plank board, the angle of pcture isn't the same, or ferrari is closer to photographer.
Can someone explain to me what I should be looking for here? To my, untrained, eyes there's not much difference between all three. I take it on faith from other, better qualified, members of the forum that there is a difference, so my question is what areas should I be looking at in order to judge this? Thanks.Crucial_Xtreme wrote:Perfect. Thanks mate. RB is clearly back to their old ways. Our FW looks awful high off the ground in comparison too.Mazdaboy wrote:Here is a rake comparsion CX: