old tech

[Sonic]

A little something to pass the time whilst we all wait for Brazil.

If you could bring back any piece of banned or past technology to current F1 what would it be? Active cars, ABS, Ground effects?

Go.

[veeten]

Ground effects.

First by The Chapparal sports car team back in '68, and later by Team Lotus in '77, it has proven itself to be best application, bar none.

All other types of engineering ideas were individual efforts, but GA was used, in different ways, by many teams. And it eliminates the need for all those silly add-ons on the car's body.

[harsha]

okay....educate a noob

what is Ground Effect?

[veeten]

Ground Effects... a history. :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_effect_in_cars

[wedge]

Active suspension. Aid mechanical grip and under aero? Would help if wings were banned.

[harsha]

thanks...will read

looks like a good article

[Josti]

I like to see the manual gearbox back in F1 cars.

But logically, it's unlikely since (F1) technology always moves forward.

[Sonic]

Six wheelers? :D

Seriously though, if I could get any tech back in F1 it would be ground effects, followed by Active cars if I couldn't have GE.

[Shifter]

Ground effects, because there was no good reason to ban it. GP2 uses it an I don't think they crash harder than F1 cars.

[harsha]

er..why was it banned in the first place...

reading the wikipedia article,did the death of gilles have anything to do with that :?:

[Lee Roy]

Allowing teams more latitude in building engines. I recally 1995 when the season was contested with V-12's, V-10's and V-8's.

[Robinho]

er..why was it banned in the first place...

reading the wikipedia article,did the death of gilles have anything to do with that :?:

it was banned as the cars could corner so quickly with it that when it failed (due to a mechanical issue or bumpy surface breaking the "seal") the cars we having far larger accidents and at the time the safety of the cars and circuits was not up to much.

[Sonic]

Allowing teams more latitude in building engines. I recally 1995 when the season was contested with V-12's, V-10's and V-8's.

Here, here!

What a joyous cacophony of noise those grids were.

[Saint Devote]

A little something to pass the time whilst we all wait for Brazil.

If you could bring back any piece of banned or past technology to current F1 what would it be? Active cars, ABS, Ground effects?

Go.

:D :D :D Och aye laddie!!! This is a question that a purist like myself seasoned by 35 racing seasons mulls over every day - muttering and bitching about the current way of bringing everything in racing DOWN to the lowest common multiple!

Sigh - how far have we fallen when DETUNING is mentioned in order to bring an engine like Mercedes down to the level of the weak.

Definitely ENGINES should be allowed to roam free like the buffalo - and as I can see above there are those that well remember the glorious days when different engines could be heard.

Just closing one's eyes during practice the difference between the Matra v12 or Ferrari flat-12 or Renault v6 turbo or Ford Cosworth DFV 8 and so on...

Next - bring back wide rear tires.

Also, take every single bit of aero and BURN IT in a celebration that would rival any Guy Fawkes demonstration. The GUY on top would be the symbolic aerodynamicist - apologies to Adrian Newey of course - I HATE AERO in every shape or form because it destroyed RACING.

NB: Do not bring back GA - because the accidents when something went wrong were quick and violent.

In a nutshell: I want the type of racing cars that Gilles and Jacques Villeneuve wanted/want.

Big engines, FAT tires, no aero at all and let the real racing drivers - RACING drivers - be set free :s mokin:

[DexDexter]

V12 engines, simply because of the sound. :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1InrgZiv30

[ArrowsFA1]

Ground effects...it eliminates the need for all those silly add-ons on the car's body.
:up:
The banning of ground effect led, in part, to the massive "advances" made in aerodynamics and the correspondingly huge investment needed. The ultimate effect of that has been to reduce the opportunities for overtaking because the disturbed air caused by these current ultra-efficient cars is such a factor.

Certainly ground effect led to the cars being horrible to drive. Rock hard suspension was needed to maintain the ground effect, and drivers compared racing to hanging on to a bucking bronco!! Active suspension could have solved that problem, but it came along to late.

Maybe now ground effect could be looked at again.

[Sleeper]

Definitely Ground effect, but not to the extant that it was in 82, because that would be really dangerous.

[Knock-on]

Turbo's. Make life a bit more interesting :D

[Sonic]

NB: Do not bring back GA - because the accidents when something went wrong were quick and violent.


Hi St D. That's often stated as a reason Ground effects should not return but I think you'd agree that there have been several major changes over the years that means GE could return safely.

For starters late 70's, early 80's tracks hadn't really heard the words "run off area" so if a car left the circuit it was pretty certain to hit something - hard. To use Martin Brundle's words we now have super market car parks on the outside of every apex.

Secondly, a modern F1 car is way safer than one from the GE era.

Finally, the Lotus 79 was said to produce 3800lbs of downforce at 180mph. Non GE aero exceeded that figure in about 1996 when 4000lbs of downforce could be expected at similar speed. (This figure is from a good old fashioned book so I can't post a link). So I think if we stripped of the upper body wings and replaced them with ground effects we wouldn't see lap times rocket dramatically.

Then we could get back to big fat cars, and big fat tyres and no ruddy wings!

Ah to dream :)

[Sonic]

:up:
Certainly ground effect led to the cars being horrible to drive. Rock hard suspension was needed to maintain the ground effect, and drivers compared racing to hanging on to a bucking bronco!! Active suspension could have solved that problem, but it came along to late.


Good point. My long rambling post (numer 19) totally forgot the discomfort factor.

[Dave B]

I've said before my idea of F1 design utopia:

Here's a box into which your car must fit. Here's a fixed amount of fuel for each race. Now go and design a car. Any car.

[wedge]

I've said before my idea of F1 design utopia:

Here's a box into which your car must fit. Here's a fixed amount of fuel for each race. Now go and design a car. Any car.

Define 'box'

[SGWilko]

Define 'box'

The geometric shape I have just placed in front of you.

Now quit moaning and go build a car....

:D

[Knock-on]

I've said before my idea of F1 design utopia:

Here's a box into which your car must fit. Here's a fixed amount of fuel for each race. Now go and design a car. Any car.

How would you control who wins then :rolleyes:

The Banana boats leaving and asked if you want a lift back ;)

[SGWilko]

How would you control who wins then :rolleyes:

The Banana boats leaving and asked if you want a lift back ;)

Up the Clyde?

[Knock-on]

Up the Clyde?

Who's Clyde? Didn't think Mr Brockman was that way inclined ;)

[SGWilko]

Who's Clyde? Didn't think Mr Brockman was that way inclined ;)

Old Scots saying - 'Up the Clyde in a banana skin'

Clyde being a river.

No nonsense here boy! :)

[Knock-on]

Clyde being a river.



How Bonnie :D

[Dave B]

Who's Clyde? Didn't think Mr Brockman was that way inclined ;)
Left turn, Clyde! :D

[chuck34]

I've said before my idea of F1 design utopia:

Here's a box into which your car must fit. Here's a fixed amount of fuel for each race. Now go and design a car. Any car.

Perfect. Except it shouldn't be amount of fuel, it should be amount of energy. Therefore, if you want to make an electric car, or solar power, or banana power, or whatever you can. Don't limit things, except to the box.

[Lee Roy]

You'd need one more box. A smaller one where you state "here's all the money you can spend".

[Sonic]

But then the FIA will blow it by saying; All boxes are created equal, but some are more equal than others ;)

[woody2goody]

Ground effects.

First by The Chapparal sports car team back in '68

Was it this by any chance? :

http://www.slotforum.com/images/Scalextric/chaparral-1.jpg

[chuck34]

You'd need one more box. A smaller one where you state "here's all the money you can spend".

Why? Back in "the glory days" there was no such restriction. Why the facination with controlling costs now?

[ArrowsFA1]

Why the facination with controlling costs now?
It's a good question. Costs in F1 have undoubtedly risen, and budgets of $400m a year to run two cars is a lot of money. But, why should the FIA dictate how much teams can spend?

In the modern era, where sponsorship dominates, what the teams spend has been determined by what sponsorship money they can raise. That in turn is determined by the economic situation those sponsors find themselves in.

At present the money available to the teams is reducing, regardless of the FIA. Companies generally do not have $m's of spare cash to "throw away" on sport at the moment. It's the natural way of things. In years to come those companies will have spare cash, and may decide to promote themselves via F1, and the teams will be lining up trying to prove they are the best place for them to spend it! Competition for sponsors is every bit as fierce as the on-track racing.

The fascination the FIA has with reducing costs is part of a fundamental shift in what F1 is. With budget caps, standard and restricted engines, and a single tyre manufacturer, among other things, the sport has been moving towards a spec-series for a few years. The argument being that tighter controls are needed for the sport to survive. At least that's how Max wants us to think so he can be seen as the saviour (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7657298.stm) of F1! If you want a spec-series there are plenty to chose from. Max even created his own!

IMHO the FIA should have no say in what money the teams can, and cannot spend. That is beyond their remit. The governing body certainly didn't step in and legislate a reduction in costs when the likes of Lotus, Brabham and Tyrrell were racing around with sponsor-free bodywork, and they shouldn't be doing so now.

[Knock-on]

I like the idea of X sized box and Y amount of fuel. We might start seeing innovation like this then.

http://www.ilmor.co.uk/concept_5-stroke_1.php

[UltimateDanGTR]

only reservation about the box thing: surely we would end up with a load of what would basically be le mans/Group C sort-of-thing prototypes, just well, More EXTREME!

maybe only rule about the box thing: have the wheels open, apart from that, go for it!

[chuck34]

only reservation about the box thing: surely we would end up with a load of what would basically be le mans/Group C sort-of-thing prototypes, just well, More EXTREME!

maybe only rule about the box thing: have the wheels open, apart from that, go for it!

I can agree with that.

[gloomyDAY]

But then the FIA will blow it by saying; All boxes are created equal, but some are more equal than others ;) Thanks George Orwell.