agreed, but what we don't know for sure is if they are "structural". If they are deemed to not be structural, then they are considered body work, and illegal.richard_leeds wrote:The rules define the allowed geometry for the suspension arms. McLaren suspension complies with that geometry. End of story.
It's just like the rules about brake cooling, the teams can have any shape they like as long as it fits within the defined shape in the rules.
Ha I was just deleting my post because I'm wrong! Ignore me. I can't count.richard_leeds wrote:How is this different from the wishbone on the other cars?bonjon1979 wrote:The big issue for me is that there are more than six suspension members. The top 'A' shaped suspension arm is two suspension members (the regs state that any suspension member splitting in two counts as two arms regardless of how it started). Then there is the lower wishbone. That's six on each side - so what are the other 4 at the back counted as? It's clearly more than six suspension members.
Of course they're structural, if you take the rear wishbone off, the suspension collapses.acosmichippo wrote: agreed, but what we don't know for sure is if they are "structural". If they are deemed to not be structural, then they are considered body work, and illegal.
I don't mean the whole wishbone, obviously. I mean the part that makes it that specific shape. Maybe that is the whole wishbone, but I don't think there's any way for us to know that for sure.PhillipM wrote:Of course they're structural, if you take the rear wishbone off, the suspension collapses.acosmichippo wrote: agreed, but what we don't know for sure is if they are "structural". If they are deemed to not be structural, then they are considered body work, and illegal.
Whilst I can see it being a bolt on part for testing, I don't think many F1 teams would deliberately make a suspension member heavier than it would need to be when racing, I'd expect to see refined versions for race use.acosmichippo wrote: I don't mean the whole wishbone, obviously. I mean the part that makes it that specific shape. Maybe that is the whole wishbone, but I don't think there's any way for us to know that for sure.
I see it differently. A good example why the rules must be written right and not people decide what's in the spirit and what's not was the mass damper.WilliamsF1 wrote:Personally the rules are fine, feel the enforcement is not being done in the way it is to be. In this case it is clear (blatantly) that the purpose of the devices is aero and not so much structural. It should be clarified ASAP that it is outside the spirit of the rule and needs to be dealt with a heavy hand.rjsa wrote:WilliamsF1 wrote:I dint understand Charlie Whiting,
Beam wing banned, Mclaren find a replacement solution for the beam wing, which i guess is legal, but then what is the point of banning the beam wing?
That's the whole problem with the way F1 is ruled.
Rulemakers cant outsmart designers, so each thing they impose constrains to one device it generates another strange apendix to the car, to be later dealt with again, generating another weird outcome.
They need to re-write it from scratch - the aero rules I mean.
Delays in such clarifications gives room for political maneuvering and that just sucks.
Then that wouldn't really be F1, as we all know the rules are read twice... Once to know the rules, twice to work out ways round them.rjsa wrote:
Rules need a rewirte from the bottom, with clear and concise rulling, leaving room for dvelopment in very well defined areas.
That's with every set of rules. But this - to use programming slang - spaghetti set of rules is broken.enkidu wrote:Then that wouldn't really be F1, as we all know the rules are read twice... Once to know the rules, twice to work out ways round them.rjsa wrote:
Rules need a rewirte from the bottom, with clear and concise rulling, leaving room for dvelopment in very well defined areas.
The mass damper was totally different as it was moving weights which is banned.
Something like this, you mean?enkidu wrote:If they ban McLarens rear suspension then they will need to make everyones suspension in F1 just round tubes.
Beat me to it, think this proves people wrong who think it isn't legal!
