Ferrari F10

[timbo]

Otherwise all the teams will have to waste money designing new wheel ducts that aren't wheel covers honest (despite performing the same function). The FIA should also step in at the first race to outlaw these devices as movable aero.

Well, this is how research works -- once they studied wheel covers and their effect they can't just unlearn it. There would be something that performs same function one way or another, I believe.

[myurr]

Otherwise all the teams will have to waste money designing new wheel ducts that aren't wheel covers honest (despite performing the same function). The FIA should also step in at the first race to outlaw these devices as movable aero.

Well, this is how research works -- once they studied wheel covers and their effect they can't just unlearn it. There would be something that performs same function one way or another, I believe.

Then why agree, with the rest of FOTA, to not use wheel covers!? And when circumventing this agreement why implement something that relies on movable aero? Are Ferrari running a version of KERS this year, or have they managed to unlearn how to build a car with that function?

[wesley123]

what ferrari did isnt a wheel cover, it is easy to explain.

The cover what you guys talking about is simply an add on piece to the rim, it gets fit to the rim, thuis it isnt an cover per rules, it is just an rim. With the whell covers it wasnt attached to the rim, now it is thus completely legal.

[bonjon1979]

what ferrari did isnt a wheel cover, it is easy to explain.

The cover what you guys talking about is simply an add on piece to the rim, it gets fit to the rim, thuis it isnt an cover per rules, it is just an rim. With the whell covers it wasnt attached to the rim, now it is thus completely legal.

It contravenes this clear rule:

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.

The only way they were able to get away with it before is because they were described as being used for 'brake cooling'. Since that loophole was closed it would make these illegal as they are clearly attached to the wheel.

[wesley123]

if it is going to be a full part it is legal, then it is just an rim afterall

[myurr]

what ferrari did isnt a wheel cover, it is easy to explain.

The cover what you guys talking about is simply an add on piece to the rim, it gets fit to the rim, thuis it isnt an cover per rules, it is just an rim. With the whell covers it wasnt attached to the rim, now it is thus completely legal.

It contravenes this clear rule:

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.

The only way they were able to get away with it before is because they were described as being used for 'brake cooling'. Since that loophole was closed it would make these illegal as they are clearly attached to the wheel.

Nope even that wouldn't do it - they got away with wheel covers as they were attached to the hub not the wheel, hence they could claim they were part of the brake ducts.

These ducts should be illegal according to the FIA rules, although Ferrari must be confident that they've found a loophole (claiming that they're balance weights maybe?). If there is a loophole then the FIA should rule against their interpretation of the rules, although they do not have a good track record here.

Finally there's the FOTA agreement which is pretty much worthless if Ferrari run these ducts. As such all the teams should just run the wheel covers from last season. These are still legal under FIA rules after all.

[myurr]

if it is going to be a full part it is legal, then it is just an rim afterall

If you really want to go down that road then you're basically saying using the spokes as fan blades would be legal. If Ferrari do manage to argue that these wheels are legal in terms of these ducts being part of the hub, then surly they're still illegal under the movable aero rules.

[JohnsonEvilTwin]

All this chat of "spirit of the rule" from LdM now this?

Ferrari never cease to amaze me how they think its ok for them to be ingeniuos, but heaven forbid anyone else who has the audacity to out-think them.

[Caerdroia]

Finally there's the FOTA agreement which is pretty much worthless if Ferrari run these ducts. As such all the teams should just run the wheel covers from last season. These are still legal under FIA rules after all.

Actually, the covers from last year are illegal. I quoted this earlier in the thread but i'll quote it again..

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

[wesley123]

if the rim is an one piece it is completely legal, no matter what, then there is nothing where you can blame them for.

Actually, the same thing was going on in le mans, porsches rim had something similair melted to it, its homologation was rejected, so porsche made it one piece thus completely legal.

As long as this is one piece it is completely legal simple as what, it is something that cant be discussed per rules.

[timbo]

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

I think what they introduced can fit the above.

I also can't understand that wheel covers banned by FOTA are different, it is also clear that the motivation for banning them was safety, and what Ferrari introduced does not go against that.

[myurr]

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

I think what they introduced can fit the above.

I also can't understand that wheel covers banned by FOTA are different, it is also clear that the motivation for banning them was safety, and what Ferrari introduced does not go against that.

MOVABLE AERO. MOVABLE AERO. MOVABLE AERO. MOVABLE AERO. MOVABLE AERO. MOVABLE AERO.

Or are you saying it's okay to design spokes like fan blades? I can just imagine the uproar from Ferrari fan boys had one of the other teams done just that.

[Pierce89]

What a bunch of disingenuous whiners. If Mclaren came up with these wheels, you would be talking about their design genious. But big,bad Ferrari did it so it must be illegal. I bet they stay all season as they're not breaking any rules.

[Pierce89]

It isn't illegal to design spokes like a fan blade

[bonjon1979]

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

I think what they introduced can fit the above.

I also can't understand that wheel covers banned by FOTA are different, it is also clear that the motivation for banning them was safety, and what Ferrari introduced does not go against that.

When you 'treat' wood do you hammer on a whole load of things on to it or coat it in a 'treatment'. A surface treatment is exactly that - a coating 'treatment' applied to the 'surface'. There's no way this attachment can be considered 'a surface treatment'. Come on, lets be sensible about this.