CBeck113 wrote:beelsebob wrote:SatchelCharge wrote:Are we looking at the "TC-esque" rubber trail, then? Looks more like the result of the bumpy track to me.
If that's a bumpy track, they have no suspension on that car, and would have bugger all grip out of corners. In fact, quite the reverse seems to be true.
Have to agree with beelsebob. If you look at the pattern, you can see that the darker marking are alternating from side to side, as if the torque is being transfered from back and forth when wheel spin kicks in - maybe the differential, but is that legal?
Who knows - I was debating this with a friend on twitter last night and looking at the relevant regulations (sections 9.3 and 9.9 of
http://argent.fia.com/web/fia-public.ns ... ATIONS.pdf ), but honestly without the "clarifications" which only the teams have they are completely useless for working out what is allowed and what isn't.
A naïve interpretation of the first clause of 9.3:
No car may be equipped with a system or device which is capable of preventing the driven wheels from spinning under power
suggests it is illegal to have brakes which are strong enough to lock the wheels if you stand on both pedals at the same time, but I imagine everyone has those. But does it rule-out things which prevent a driven wheel, not both, from spinning under power?
Similarly a naïve interpretation of 9.9.1:
Any system or device the design of which is capable of transferring or diverting torque from a slower to a faster rotating wheel is not permitted.
suggests that all useful differentials are illegal.
I speculate that they are all allowed to use mechanical limited-slip differentials, or to simulate the effect of an LSD with an electronic diff. I further speculate that RB have found a set of parameters for their e-diff which (a) look reasonable to the FIA scrutineers and (b) basically gives them traction-control one wheel at a time. By alternating which wheel has it at high-enough frequency they get close to the benefit of a full TC system.
