Ferrari F10

[alelanza]

So how does that spring loaded mechanism fit in here?

14.7 Wheel retention:
All cars, whilst under their own power, must be fitted with devices which will retain the wheel fastener in the event of it coming loose.
After the wheel nut is fastened, these devices must be manually fitted in a separate action to that of securing the wheel nut.

[autogyro]

So how does that spring loaded mechanism fit in here?

14.7 Wheel retention:
All cars, whilst under their own power, must be fitted with devices which will retain the wheel fastener in the event of it coming loose.
After the wheel nut is fastened, these devices must be manually fitted in a separate action to that of securing the wheel nut.

So the wheel nut guy simply removes the nut gun and as a passing gesture pushes the spring loaded ear in and lets it fly back.
Rule achieved I think.

[Poleman]

So how does that spring loaded mechanism fit in here?

14.7 Wheel retention:
All cars, whilst under their own power, must be fitted with devices which will retain the wheel fastener in the event of it coming loose.
After the wheel nut is fastened, these devices must be manually fitted in a separate action to that of securing the wheel nut.

So the wheel nut guy simply removes the nut gun and as a passing gesture pushes the spring loaded ear in and lets it fly back.
Rule achieved I think.

But i think that the story is that the nut itself was designed NOT to require a gesture from the nut guy,even if its "fake" so can save time...If still needs the nut guy to do a manual move then whats the point?Have in mind that as the mechanic makes the "fake" fastening gesture,the car still waits no?

[autogyro]

No because he knows that the nut is secure before he pushes the ear.
The car can come off the jack at least a second earlier.

[Mysticf1]

Does it really fit in with "Manually fitted" as stipulated, emphasis on fitted.

not in my mind anyway

[bonjon1979]

Obviously wheel covers are still within the FIA regs, and it was only FOTA that agreed to not use them, so i wonder what the FOTA agreement's specific wording was.
Ferrari have obviously found a loophole within FOTA's wording, to run those black wheel covers.
i wonder what the other teams are thinking of this development, as there is no avenue for official protest..

cheeky to say the least!

The ducts may not rotate with the wheels nor may they, or any of their mountings, protrude axially beyond the outer face of the wheel fastener;
No part of the car, other than those specifically defined in Articles 12.8.1 and 12.8.2, may obscure any part of the wheel when viewed from the outside of the car towards the car centre line along the axis of the wheel

---

12.8.1
The only parts which may be physically attached to the wheel in addition to the tyre are surface treatments
for appearance and protection, valves for filling and discharging the tyre, balance weights, drive pegs, tyre
pressure and temperature monitoring devices and spacers on the inboard mounting face of identical
specification on all wheels for the same axle

12.8.2
The wheel must be attached to the car with a single fastener. The outer diameter of the fastener must not
exceed 105mm and the axial length must not exceed 75mm. The wheel fastener may not attach or mount
any part to the car except the wheel assembly described in Article 12.8.1

If they are actually covers, i'm not sure how they're legal with the above in the rules. ^^

That's the beauty of this design, they are not covers, they are part of the wheel and most likely not removable (welded on).

They are clearly attached to the wheel - (welded on is also a means of attaching them). We have seen the wheel without them and the joins where the parts were later attached. I really can't see how they're legal unless they can describe them as balance weights (unlikely).

[myurr]

They are clearly attached to the wheel - (welded on is also a means of attaching them). We have seen the wheel without them and the joins where the parts were later attached. I really can't see how they're legal unless they can describe them as balance weights (unlikely).

After all Ferrari's whining about some of the diffusers on other cars they go and pull this one - regardless of the technical legalities (I believe them to be illegal) the worst part is that they so clearly go against the gentleman's agreement that they signed up to through FOTA. McLaren and Williams may as well just go ahead and install KERS as clearly FOTAs agreements aren't worth a dime.

[djos]

That's the beauty of this design, they are not covers, they are part of the wheel and most likely not removable (welded on).

They are clearly attached to the wheel - (welded on is also a means of attaching them). We have seen the wheel without them and the joins where the parts were later attached. I really can't see how they're legal unless they can describe them as balance weights (unlikely).

There is nothing in the rules preventing teams from using wheel made up of multiple components. It's not like these "nozzles" are made from Carbon fibre and merely clip on, they are integral to the wheel design and could easily be argued as part of the spoke design (unlike the wheel nut which seems to have an illegal automatic retention system).

[myurr]

There is nothing in the rules preventing teams from using wheel made up of multiple components. It's not like these "nozzles" are made from Carbon fibre and merely clip on, they are integral to the wheel design and could easily be argued as part of the spoke design.

Except we've seen them run the wheels without those covers so they're clearly not structural. Therefore they're either aesthetic (which no team would do because of the weight) or aero, in which case they're probably illegal and certainly against the spirit of the gentleman's agreement that Ferrari agreed to via FOTA.

[djos]

There is nothing in the rules preventing teams from using wheel made up of multiple components. It's not like these "nozzles" are made from Carbon fibre and merely clip on, they are integral to the wheel design and could easily be argued as part of the spoke design.

Except we've seen them run the wheels without those covers so they're clearly not structural. Therefore they're either aesthetic (which no team would do because of the weight) or aero, in which case they're probably illegal and certainly against the spirit of the gentleman's agreement that Ferrari agreed to via FOTA.

The thing is tho that "Wheel Covers" where banned, not creative wheel-spoke designs.

It's highly unlikely (imo as an armchair spectator) that the wake caused by the "nozzles" will be as disruptive/useful as the carbon covers where. The nozzles help with extracting hot air from the brakes and are unlikely to have any significant aero-advantage.

[myurr]

unlikely to have any significant aero-advantage.

If that were true then they wouldn't run them. This year brake wear is going to be critical and most of the teams are running very large brake ducts. These carry a drag penalty. By flouting their gentleman's agreement Ferrari will be able to run smaller brake ducts, resulting in lower drag and better fuel economy.

The thing is tho that "Wheel Covers" where banned, not creative wheel-spoke designs.

Conveniently ignoring the fact that these ducts are not part of the spokes, but an addition. We've seen the wheels without the ducts but with the mounting points in place.

[djos]

unlikely to have any significant aero-advantage.

If that were true then they wouldn't run them. This year brake wear is going to be critical and most of the teams are running very large brake ducts. These carry a drag penalty. By flouting their gentleman's agreement Ferrari will be able to run smaller brake ducts, resulting in lower drag and better fuel economy.

You've just pointed out why the teams need better venting of the brakes ... think about it for a minute.

[myurr]

You've just pointed out why the teams need better venting of the brakes ... think about it for a minute.

I don't doubt that they are beneficial - wouldn't be kicking up a fuss if I thought Ferrari weren't benefiting from them.

Fact is though, that Ferrari entered into a gentleman's agreement with FOTA to remove wheel covers. Just because these ducts are made of metal and are welded to the rims doesn't stop them being wheel covers!

This is no different to McLaren fitting KERS and running it to only 90% capacity - that too would be technically legal but in breach of their agreement with FOTA.

[djos]

You've just pointed out why the teams need better venting of the brakes ... think about it for a minute.

I don't doubt that they are beneficial - wouldn't be kicking up a fuss if I thought Ferrari weren't benefiting from them.

Fact is though, that Ferrari entered into a gentleman's agreement with FOTA to remove wheel covers. Just because these ducts are made of metal and are welded to the rims doesn't stop them being wheel covers!

This is no different to McLaren fitting KERS and running it to only 90% capacity - that too would be technically legal but in breach of their agreement with FOTA.

I'm no Ferrari fan but these aren't wheel covers by any definition as they don't cover anything, they are just guides which may produce a nozzle effect improving the brake cooling.

[imightbewrong]

You've just pointed out why the teams need better venting of the brakes ... think about it for a minute.

I don't doubt that they are beneficial - wouldn't be kicking up a fuss if I thought Ferrari weren't benefiting from them.

Fact is though, that Ferrari entered into a gentleman's agreement with FOTA to remove wheel covers. Just because these ducts are made of metal and are welded to the rims doesn't stop them being wheel covers!

This is no different to McLaren fitting KERS and running it to only 90% capacity - that too would be technically legal but in breach of their agreement with FOTA.

Do we even know why FOTA decided not to use the wheel covers? Was it because of the safety issues or cost issues or something entirely different?

I'm not sure what you are getting so upset about? These are clearly very different from the wheel covers used last years. Until we see a wording on what FOTA agreed not to use and why I think it is a bit early to crucify Ferrari because of it..