Movable Floors

[race aficionado]

he he!

It didn't take long for this to appear.

In Nascar they complain of "timely" late debris cautions and in F1 of course, how could it be without the cheating allegations.

It's going to be a long three weeks.

http://www.sportnetwork.net/main/s85/st113540.htm?fromrss=1


With the new season, comes new allegations of the Ferrari racecar being outside the rules from other teams. This time there are claims, possibly from McLaren, that the floor of the F2007 is a moveable aerodynamic device.

[Heidfeldrulez]

the main problem is, FIA will not bring in a nice and sensible black and white verdict on it. they will wait to see and if Ferrari dominates too bad, then, they might just bann it. Untill then it will be tolerated because FIA arent that concerned about black and white rules or being fair, they are concerned about TV figures.

Same story as Renault's mass-dampers last year that were equaly legal and illegal depending on how the championship was going.

[jjanicke]

Time will tell.

However from the article it doesn't sound like Ron is calling Ferrari out. To me it sounded like he's stating that at the beginning of a season the FIA often times reels in some of the liberties teams have taken while designing the new car.

[Hawkmoon]

It didn't take long this year. Throw in the customer car issue and it looks like were in for another year of mud slinging. :rolleyes:

[Roamy]

Ferrari cheat - you have to be kidding me - from the land of the Pope how dare one accuse

[DimitraF1]

ron dennis is the bigger idiot in f1.sorry mclaren funs but you all have to admit that he is angry with all people out there,first heidfeld because he uses low fuel to start the race and soft tyres! so what?? is his choice mr dennis!
he wasnt blocking your drivers and nothing he did is against the rules! someone have to make him shut up

[tinchote]

I'll be waiting to see a car whose floor doesn't move ;) :D

[RJL25]

in other words, ferrari's floor moves MORE then everyone elses does ;)

[race aficionado]

Well, the whole F1 car is itself a moveable aerodynamic device, so doesn't that make all of them cheats?


sorry . . . . . it's a slow evening . . . .

[trumperZ06]

;) R/A both NA$CAR and Formula 1 are more concerned with TV ratings (entertainment)... than they are about running auto racing as a Sport !!!

:dozey: Ron's just being Ron... always complaining about one thing or another.

[K-Pu]

FIArrari going against Ferrari? No way...

But I´m not saying Ferrari are worse than others, because every team would take the smallest chance to damage their rivals and "bend" the rules for their purposes. At least for me, it´s becoming more and more obvious...

[tinchote]

it´s becoming more and more obvious...

That's not true. It was always like that :)

[W8&C]

Did Ferrari run over Ron Dennis to often while going full speed :D ? Or how can he know about a movable floor?

Anyway, at the moment its just another conspiracy theory.

[wmcot]

Has anyone ever watched an onboard camera shot? What part on an F1 car ISN'T moving or flexing or bending or vibrating...

Did you ever look at the wings on an airplane? There is no such thing as a rigid structure in aircraft or race cars. Rigid pieces are brittle and snap off. ALL aero designers in any industry design their pieces to flex!

[ioan]

Did Ferrari run over Ron Dennis to often while going full speed :D ? Or how can he know about a movable floor?

They couldn't figure out anything else so they thought it must be something they can't see, the floor!

[fly_ac]

in other words, ferrari's floor moves MORE then everyone elses does ;)

I'll say Ferrari's floor moves FASTER then everyone else :D , thats why Ron is crying. ;)

[janneppi]

I like how to Ferrari person shrugs it off by essentially saying so what, we do it all the time. :D

I noticed that Ferrari use a light upper front wing attachement similar to early last season. Is this one also moving sidaways from the nose cone, or is it fixed? I couldn't tell because i didn't see it filmed in fast sections and the camera quality wasn't the greatest.

[ioan]

I like how to Ferrari person shrugs it off by essentially saying so what, we do it all the time. :D

Where did they say that???

[janneppi]

Actually, now that i read the comment again, i misunderstood the jist of it, i missed a couple of words there. :p :

[savage86]

Ron should have complained, Ferrari are terrible at this kind of thing anyway.

1998 Mclaren and three other teams are using this extra brake pedal. Ferrari protest and it is banned by Brazil.

Renault mass damper, Ferrari cant get them to work that well so they somehow get the damper banned. Even though they were not a moveable aerodynamic device.
Ferrari wheel covers come in (which are) people complain but nothing is done.

Also Ferrari protested about the tyres in 2003 and the FIA made Michelin change them.

They are terrible sports and for you guys to now make fun of Ron for protesting. well I hope this floor of there's does get banned might be some justice.

[SteveA]

Ban their floor? Wouldn't that make the drivers a bit vulnerable?

I guess one advantage they would have would be that if the mechanicals broke, or they ran out of fuel, they could finish the race Flintsone style ;)

[ioan]

Ron should have complained, Ferrari are terrible at this kind of thing anyway.

1998 Mclaren and three other teams are using this extra brake pedal. Ferrari protest and it is banned by Brazil.

Renault mass damper, Ferrari cant get them to work that well so they somehow get the damper banned. Even though they were not a moveable aerodynamic device.
Ferrari wheel covers come in (which are) people complain but nothing is done.

Also Ferrari protested about the tyres in 2003 and the FIA made Michelin change them.

They are terrible sports and for you guys to now make fun of Ron for protesting. well I hope this floor of there's does get banned might be some justice.

You might want to notice that it was McLaren, and implicitly RD, who couldn't make the mass-dampers work in their car and complained about it!
But you may continue barking at Ferrari while not knowing the facts.

[Eki]

he he!

It didn't take long for this to appear.

In Nascar they complain of "timely" late debris cautions and in F1 of course, how could it be without the cheating allegations.

It's going to be a long three weeks.

http://www.sportnetwork.net/main/s85/st113540.htm?fromrss=1
"Movable aerodynamic device"? They were just Kimi's feet:

http://gauss.atmos.colostate.edu/~rozoff/weenie/2005/flinstones_evacuate_florida.gif

[Ian McC]

http://www.speedtv.com/articles/auto/formulaone/36099/

Reading what it says on Speed, Ron doesn't actually mentions Ferrari or floors, so lets leave that for the press to make 2+2 = 12 :rolleyes:

[BeansBeansBeans]

ron dennis is the bigger idiot in f1.sorry mclaren funs but you all have to admit that he is angry with all people out there,first heidfeld because he uses low fuel to start the race and soft tyres! so what?? is his choice mr dennis!
he wasnt blocking your drivers and nothing he did is against the rules! someone have to make him shut up

Have you got a link?

I never heard Ron Dennis criticise BMW or Heifeld, he said that their strategy hindered Hamilton and Alonso (which it plainly did), but never did he criticise them for adopting said strategy.

[Heidfeldrulez]

You might want to notice that it was McLaren, and implicitly RD, who couldn't make the mass-dampers work in their car and complained about it!
But you may continue barking at Ferrari while not knowing the facts.

the "facts" ? :D so now you're reaveling the facts for us , please be kidding :D

as a fact of a matter in a Gazetta Dello Sport interview that Biatore gave at Bologna Motor Show you could read that Renault is a 100% convienced it must have been Ferrari behind the bann. When Bridgestones were fitted on Renault for the first time (in Barcelona that was) it all made sense for them as Bridgestone are just too wide to make the "advanced" version of mass dampers work at all.

mind you, Biatore might just be a tiny bit closer to Formula1 facts than say for instance a rabid rumanian ferrari fan. You're the guy who reads a Brawn interview where Brawn claims he didnt know about any closure in MS' contract (not like Brawn had anything to do with contracts) and you state it as a fact there wasnt any closures...give us a break :D (just for the record I dont think there was that type of closures in MS' contract either, MS was fast enough to beat team-mates. i just think you dont know jack**** about facts of that sort and I tend to go for Biatore's version)

[Mihaici]

the "facts" ? :D so now you're reaveling the facts for us , please be kidding :D

as a fact of a matter in a Gazetta Dello Sport interview that Biatore gave at Bologna Motor Show you could read that Renault is a 100% convienced it must have been Ferrari behind the bann. When Bridgestones were fitted on Renault for the first time (in Barcelona that was) it all made sense for them as Bridgestone are just too wide to make the "advanced" version of mass dampers work at all.

mind you, Biatore might just be a tiny bit closer to Formula1 facts than say for instance a rabid rumanian ferrari fan. You're the guy who reads a Brawn interview where Brawn claims he didnt know about any closure in MS' contract (not like Brawn had anything to do with contracts) and you state it as a fact there wasnt any closures...give us a break :D (just for the record I dont think there was that type of closures in MS' contract either, MS was fast enough to beat team-mates. i just think you dont know jack**** about facts of that sort and I tend to go for Biatore's version)

My friend, first of all it's "romanian", cause the country it's called Romania, you know? And second, to me that sounds like an insult and a little bit racist, don't you think? We, the "rumanians", we'll be happy to accept your apologies.

[janneppi]

Mihaici, you might want to look up the use of words Rumania, rumanian as they are, ot atleast were common words, not just in English, but in many other languages. ;)

[tinchote]

As expected, a thread with this title had to start tumbling down :rolleyes:

[ArrowsFA1]

Oh dear :rolleyes: "New allegations". "Claims". "Possibly from McLaren" :eek: Not exactly a story full of facts is it :p : but one sure to go down a storm on a F1 forum :D

Of course, any team is entitled to question or protest another car if they feel rules may have been broken. If proven the FIA should take the appropriate action; if not the accusations linger like a bad smell. Such is the way of F1.

Ferrari and McLaren don't exactly have a healthy mutual admiration society. Just look at what went on 30yrs ago in the 1976 championship ;)

[Heidfeldrulez]

i call it rumania and my mother language is german, but that couldnt have less to do with mass-dampers could it :D

[pino]

My friend, first of all it's "romanian", cause the country it's called Romania, you know? And second, to me that sounds like an insult and a little bit racist, don't you think? We, the "rumanians", we'll be happy to accept your apologies.

To me that it's just a spelling mistake so let's forget it and go back to the topic...thank You :)

[race aficionado]

As expected, a thread with this title had to start tumbling down :rolleyes:

you are right Tin.
I should start writting for those F1 tabloid news sites. I've got two threads with titles that mirror those same "styles" that those sensationalist places have.
:p I've got myself a new career here.

it is going to be a long three weeks before the next F1 race.

fortunately I've got myself another weekly sport on wheels that I can enjoy every weekend. :) - and beleave me, that one also has it's "dramas". -


:s mokin:

[tinchote]

you are right Tin.
I should start writting for those F1 tabloid news sites. I've got two threads with titles that mirror those same "styles" that those sensationalist places have.
I've got myself a new career here.

it is going to be a long three weeks before the next F1 race.

fortunately I've got myself another weekly sport on wheels that I can enjoy every weekend. - and beleave me, that one also has it's "dramas". -


:s mokin:

:D



Of course, any team is entitled to question or protest another car if they feel rules may have been broken. If proven the FIA should take the appropriate action; if not the accusations linger like a bad smell. Such is the way of F1.

Ferrari and McLaren don't exactly have a healthy mutual admiration society. Just look at what went on 30yrs ago in the 1976 championship ;)

As was mentioned by Willis last year regarding the issues with Ferrari's rear wing, teams have "clarification sessions" with FIA technical delegates almost on a weekly basis. The teams try to push the boundaries of the written rules, and the FIA decides when it is too much. It has worked like that for many years now. But many forumers seem to be unwilling to realise that :s

[ArrowsFA1]

...teams have "clarification sessions" with FIA technical delegates almost on a weekly basis. The teams try to push the boundaries of the written rules, and the FIA decides when it is too much. It has worked like that for many years now. But many forumers seem to be unwilling to realise that :s
Thanks for the reminder :up:

[Sleeper]

You might want to notice that it was McLaren, and implicitly RD, who couldn't make the mass-dampers work in their car and complained about it!
But you may continue barking at Ferrari while not knowing the facts.
Actually, Autosport reported that, though it was McLaren that made the initial protest after questioning whether they were an aerodynamc part or not (admitedly after finding that it made little improvment to their car) it was Ferrari that supported and pushed for the ban of the mass dampers after finding that they gave their car no advantage (like they needed one with those Bridgstones).

[Mihaici]

i call it rumania and my mother language is german, but that couldnt have less to do with mass-dampers could it :D

Well, my mother's language is romanian and I don't write "Anglia" like in romanian, i write "England" cause that's the official name accepted worldwide. And Romania, not Rumania, it's accepted worldwide, you can check that on Google.

[Mihaici]

To me that it's just a spelling mistake so let's forget it and go back to the topic...thank You :)

I agree with on going back to the topic, and I'll stop here.

[SteveA]

And Romania, not Rumania, it's accepted worldwide, you can check that on Google.

Isn't roo-mania is a form of mental illness suffered by marsupials? ;)

[Big Ben]

Well, my mother's language is romanian and I don't write "Anglia" like in romanian, i write "England" cause that's the official name accepted worldwide. And Romania, not Rumania, it's accepted worldwide, you can check that on Google.

Hilarious. That's really interesting. What's the purpose of all this? you are trying to prove what?

The fact that Ferrari might be cheating came to me as a surprise. But cheating in F1 is almost impossible as rules are so much more flexible than a Ferrari floor.

[ArrowsFA1]

Some more information relevant to the topic:

Analysis: movable floor the new buzzword (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/57511)

[ioan]

the "facts" ? :D so now you're reaveling the facts for us , please be kidding :D

as a fact of a matter in a Gazetta Dello Sport interview that Biatore gave at Bologna Motor Show you could read that Renault is a 100% convienced it must have been Ferrari behind the bann. When Bridgestones were fitted on Renault for the first time (in Barcelona that was) it all made sense for them as Bridgestone are just too wide to make the "advanced" version of mass dampers work at all.

mind you, Biatore might just be a tiny bit closer to Formula1 facts than say for instance a rabid rumanian ferrari fan. You're the guy who reads a Brawn interview where Brawn claims he didnt know about any closure in MS' contract (not like Brawn had anything to do with contracts) and you state it as a fact there wasnt any closures...give us a break :D (just for the record I dont think there was that type of closures in MS' contract either, MS was fast enough to beat team-mates. i just think you dont know jack**** about facts of that sort and I tend to go for Biatore's version)

If you want to believe that Briattore was "convinced enough" as you say, than you might go ahead, but there have been reports that it was McLaren because they could not accommodate the mass-dampers to their car, while Ferrari did it and were already beating Renault fair and square at that moment.

BTW I fail to see what has the size of the Bridgestones to do with the mass-dampers, maybe you can enlighten us with some sound technical explanations to prove your high knowledge of facts. Until than I believe what I think it's right and will try to ignore your bullying comments.

[ioan]

To me that it's just a spelling mistake so let's forget it and go back to the topic...thank You :)

Mistake or not this forum and the discussions around here shouldn't be about one's nationality, even if misspelled, and I count on you to keep it that way.

[ArrowsFA1]

We count on members to keep a thread on topic when they have already been requested to :cool:

[jjanicke]

They couldn't figure out anything else so they thought it must be something they can't see, the floor!

No actually say they saw an extremly complex floor mounting structure while the car was sitting exposed in the pits.



http://www.speedtv.com/articles/auto/formulaone/36099/

Reading what it says on Speed, Ron doesn't actually mentions Ferrari or floors, so lets leave that for the press to make 2+2 = 12 :rolleyes:

BINGO!!! (exactly my senstiments, read the 3rd post of this thread)


My friend, first of all it's "romanian", cause the country it's called Romania, you know? And second, to me that sounds like an insult and a little bit racist, don't you think? We, the "rumanians", we'll be happy to accept your apologies.

Going a little overboard aren't we. What happened to freedom of speech, or would you rather give that up?

[Heidfeldrulez]

BTW I fail to see what has the size of the Bridgestones to do with the mass-dampers, maybe you can enlighten us with some sound technical explanations to prove your high knowledge of facts. .

yea, its obviously beacause you dont have the slightest clue of how mass-dampers work :D

but go ahead and educate:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/55982

and once you're done with that, i can give you another article that offers a rather deep, yet easy to understand technical insight as to how mass-dampers work

[Mihaici]

Isn't roo-mania is a form of mental illness suffered by marsupials? ;)

Don't know mate, i'm not interested on that subject.

[Mihaici]

No actually say they saw an extremly complex floor mounting structure while the car was sitting exposed in the pits.




BINGO!!! (exactly my senstiments, read the 3rd post of this thread)



Going a little overboard aren't we. What happened to freedom of speech, or would you rather give that up?

No, man, I like the freedom of speech, but I don't understand the simple association of words ("rabid romanian"); to me it sounds like an insult; I don't think that if Ioan would've been italian or german the guy would've said "rabid italian".

[Mihaici]

Mihaici, you might want to look up the use of words Rumania, rumanian as they are, ot atleast were common words, not just in English, but in many other languages. ;)

I know that fact, but I was under the impression that the language that we all use on this forum is the english language. What would happen if everyone would start to use imported words from their respective language? This is an international forum, right?

[Mihaici]

We count on members to keep a thread on topic when they have already been requested to :cool:

Right. Sorry. Gone overboard again. I just don't stand for unnecesary insults.

[ioan]

We count on members to keep a thread on topic when they have already been requested to :cool:

You've got some bizarre ways to do requests, and to the wrong people. Whatever.

Back to the topic.

[Easy Drifter]

I post on several other forums. This is the only one where I won't use my real name.
Think about that for a minute.

[Big Ben]

I post on several other forums. This is the only one where I won't use my real name.
Think about that for a minute.

what´s that supposed to mean?

[DonJippo]

I post on several other forums. This is the only one where I won't use my real name.
Think about that for a minute.

Then why to bother to post here at all...

[Easy Drifter]

I mean that I have never seen a forum with so many personal insults and nasty comments. Another forum has a young lad on it (mid teens) who is quite plainly dyslexic. He is quite bright and has great posts. Nobody ever says anything about his problems with spelling and fouled up words.
I am afraid here he would be put down constantly.
There is another poster on here that is on another forum I am on. Here he gets insulted and I have even seen him called names. His opinions on the other forum are the same as here but he is disagreed with and that is it.
The reponse I received is about what I expected. I have been in this sport for many years and have worked for F1 ,Indy car and Can Am teams as well as been a senior race official. I also drove professionally.
I will continue to read some of the posts here but you won't see me posting much.

[jjanicke]

No, man, I like the freedom of speech, but I don't understand the simple association of words ("rabid romanian"); to me it sounds like an insult; I don't think that if Ioan would've been italian or german the guy would've said "rabid italian".


I could be completely wrong but I doubt that the "rabid Romanian Ferrari" comment has anything to do with a diseased Romanian and everything to do with a fanatical F1 and Ferrari fan. Maybe it's just me and I'm simply desensitized to this nonsense. Let’s move on.

It also looks like BMW Sauber is using a similar contraption to Ferrari's floor board mounting structure. It passes the current FIA testing regulation, just as the flexing Ferrari wing did last year. So either the FIA further clarify the regulation, or adjust the testing proceedures in this area or we'll see alot more teams with the moveable aero floor pannels, very much like the highly contested 2006 Ferrari 2 material wheel rim that is now seen on many 2007 F1 cars.

[ioan]

yea, its obviously beacause you dont have the slightest clue of how mass-dampers work :D

but go ahead and educate:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/55982

and once you're done with that, i can give you another article that offers a rather deep, yet easy to understand technical insight as to how mass-dampers work

So what FB had to say is:

<<"Now we understand why they banned the mass damper all of a sudden mid-season," Briatore told fans at the Bologna motor show. "This is because it wouldn't work with Ferrari's Bridgestone tyres, as their fronts are too wide.">>

Which is pure bullsh!t from a technical POV.

Could you please give us a link to that "rather deep, yet easy to understand technical" article. I'm really curious to see what has the width of the Bridgestone tires to do with how the mass-dampers work.

[Roamy]

I post on several other forums. This is the only one where I won't use my real name.
Think about that for a minute.

I did now "Drift" on outta here !!

[Hawkmoon]

It also looks like BMW Sauber is using a similar contraption to Ferrari's floor board mounting structure. It passes the current FIA testing regulation, just as the flexing Ferrari wing did last year. So either the FIA further clarify the regulation, or adjust the testing proceedures in this area or we'll see alot more teams with the moveable aero floor pannels, very much like the highly contested 2006 Ferrari 2 material wheel rim that is now seen on many 2007 F1 cars.

I think you've described the issue perfectly jjanicke. Dennis himself basically said the same thing. We can probably expect the FIA to quitely clarify the regulation in the coming weeks.

[ottostreet]

I did now "Drift" on outta here !!

ouch. a bit OTT dont you think? i would question the mentalities of people on this site on occasion. this is supposed to be a friendly forum where opinions are given on issues in F1, whether you agree or disagree with what people are saying etc etc. there does appear to be a lot of tension when it comes to race though for some reason. people appear to get a little heated under the collar and seem to have to resort to personal insults for no obvious reason. there is a difference between being outspoken in your views and being plain rude. i have yet to experience any real hostility here but i have noticed that in particular, its the people who dont speak english as a first language (im assuming based on their country) get most of the stick. however, im going to move on and give my opinion on the topic at hand now, which is whether ferrari are using illegal moving aerodynamic devices. no, i dont think they are, based on the fact i have yet to see any report of this where concrete facts are used. until they do, i believe they are legal. same as every other car.

[Heidfeldrulez]

So what FB had to say is:

<<"Now we understand why they banned the mass damper all of a sudden mid-season," Briatore told fans at the Bologna motor show. "This is because it wouldn't work with Ferrari's Bridgestone tyres, as their fronts are too wide.">>

Which is pure bullsh!t from a technical POV.




LOL, just confirming again, you dont have any clue whatsoever what mass-dampers are, let alone how they work :D

and now you're calling Renault people technicaly untrained? you think they dont know what they are talking about? Seriously, could you possibly BE more ridiculous ? :D Just for the record, Renault's mass-dampers involved a 12kg weight moving up and down ballacing, when they fitted Bridgestone tires for the first time, the device would stuck, simply there wasnt enough room for it to work due to the different size of the new tires. then they realized why Ferrari was so keen on pushing on the ban. If you speak German and want to educte (and obviously, you do seriously need to) log on to f1total.com and search for "Massendämpfers" (sometimes also refered to as "Dämpfer-Urteil" in the German media). Alternatively, think before you talk rubbish (always a good idea)

[tintop]

ouch. there does appear to be a lot of tension when it comes to race though for some reason. people appear to get a little heated under the collar and seem to have to resort to personal insults for no obvious reason. there is a difference between being outspoken in your views and being plain rude.

It's very complicated and has to do with adolescent adoration for drivers and teams rather than an appreciation for the competition itself. There is probably an equal dose of those that attack people that blindly support the character of drivers and teams despite evidence to the contrary. And then there are those that are devoid of the above afflictions and are quite interesting to listen to.

Anybody with any objectivity knows that the competitive environment was shamelessly manipulated by the series last year, whether or not Ferrari is benefiting in '07 has yet to be proven.

[Hawkmoon]

Just a quick question. Why were Renault fitting Bridgestone tyres to a car fitted with a device that had been banned for the best part of half a season?

[Hawkmoon]

Anybody with any objectivity knows that the competitive environment was shamelessly manipulated by the series last year, whether or not Ferrari is benefiting in '07 has yet to be proven.

Of course, the problem is, that you just made a statement that could be considered subjective. ;) :D

[Heidfeldrulez]

I post on several other forums. This is the only one where I won't use my real name.
Think about that for a minute.

Not that it has anything to do with this thread, but whats the connection between the atmosphere of the forum and you not using your real name? Are you ashamed to be a member? Because then there really is no reason to hang around in here.

Besides, its a cool forum, most of the times you can avoid the braindead driver bashing and discuss some real issues. Also, in case you havnt noticed, people in different forums tend to use nicknames and fun-names instead of their real namesm but just for the record, Im Martin Müller, enjoy playing the RC-boats, like Gerrman cars, Italian food and British humour :D nice to meet you :P

[Heidfeldrulez]

Just a quick question. Why were Renault fitting Bridgestone tyres to a car fitted with a device that had been banned for the best part of half a season?

really dunno, ask them. :D the device was banned from races and not tests, during the winter teams really try all sort of things as you would imagine (basicaly thats the reason why they call it testing in the first place)

[tintop]

Of course, the problem is, that you just made a statement that could be considered subjective. ;) :D

Not by anyone with any integrity or objectivity, it's a statement of fact really. Whether or not the manipulation disproportionately affected any certain team is, of course, conjecture. :D :D

[jjanicke]

..., im going to move on and give my opinion on the topic at hand now, which is whether ferrari are using illegal moving aerodynamic devices. no, i dont think they are, based on the fact i have yet to see any report of this where concrete facts are used. until they do, i believe they are legal. same as every other car.


You are right. As of today the Ferrari and BMW Sauber floors are legal, to the way the rule is tested.

The question isn't whether or not they are legal, but whether or not they will remain legal, as the FIA will surely issue public or private opinions and perhaps new rules on the matter.


Just a quick question. Why were Renault fitting Bridgestone tyres to a car fitted with a device that had been banned for the best part of half a season?

Good question. Perhaps they just wanted to see for themselves why Bridgestone shod cars didn't benefit from it as much as they did.

[wmcot]

If it was Flavio that complained it was only because Ferrari's floor was moving more than his drivers!!!!

Let's see, Ferrari are cheaters and his drivers are "rubbish." Anyone else Flav wants to insult or accuse?

If it was RD complaining about the floor, you have to realize that sometime in the season he will complain about Ferrari at least once. He's just starting early this year. Maybe Ron should concentrate less on building enormous buildings, team haircuts, and prohibition of alcohol and just go build a winning car! (Then again, maybe he will convert Paragon into the world's largest dollar barber shop???)

[Roamy]

the have rules to protest - put up your money or STFU simple as that

[W8&amp;C]

LOL, just confirming again, you dont have any clue whatsoever what mass-dampers are, let alone how they work :D

Just for the record, Renault's mass-dampers involved a 12kg weight moving up and down ballacing, when they fitted Bridgestone tires for the first time, the device would stuck, simply there wasnt enough room for it to work due to the different size of the new tires. Still don´t comprehend it. AFAIK the mass damper system was fitted in the Renault´s nose cone. So how could the tyre size interfere with that system to make it stuck?

[XR8]

I can see it now! Ferrarri havnt got a car at all, they are racing a jet plane and they have developed a hologram to make it look like a car but the hologram floor is unstable but hey that isnt their fault now is it. Give them time and they will have us all hipmotized to believing they are the underdogs and deserve to win no matter what!

[ioan]

LOL, just confirming again, you dont have any clue whatsoever what mass-dampers are, let alone how they work :D

and now you're calling Renault people technicaly untrained? you think they dont know what they are talking about? Seriously, could you possibly BE more ridiculous ? :D Just for the record, Renault's mass-dampers involved a 12kg weight moving up and down ballacing, when they fitted Bridgestone tires for the first time, the device would stuck, simply there wasnt enough room for it to work due to the different size of the new tires. then they realized why Ferrari was so keen on pushing on the ban. If you speak German and want to educte (and obviously, you do seriously need to) log on to f1total.com and search for "Massendämpfers" (sometimes also refered to as "Dämpfer-Urteil" in the German media). Alternatively, think before you talk rubbish (always a good idea)

Yep, I have no idea, that's why I asked you to give us the link to that "rather deep, yet easy to understand technical" article you talked about before.

As others pointed out it's bizarre that Renault was testing the Bridgestone tires with the mass-dampers on the car as those are banned, and will not come back, which means that it was only lost track time and money, not to mention that the tires they got to test weren't the same tires Ferrari were using last season but the ones they are using now.

Also someone pointed out that the mass dampers were fitted into the nose cone of the car so it is difficult, even for me, to understand how the width of the tires would make that 12kg mass, as you say, to get stuck in the nose cone, unless they forgot to lubricate it since August last year!

[F1boat]

Ron is awful bitter man. He single-handedly made me to loathe McLaren and severay years back I was crazy fan of them.

[Heidfeldrulez]

Yep, I have no idea, that's why I asked you to give us the link to that "rather deep, yet easy to understand technical" article you talked about before.!

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



As others pointed out it's bizarre that Renault was testing the Bridgestone tires with the mass-dampers on the car as those are banned, and will not come back, which means that it was only lost track time and money

Perhaps they wanted to compare their old device to the new one, learn a thing or two about how they differ and move on with the new device's development in a direction this comparative analysis would draw.

[Heidfeldrulez]

not to mention that the tires they got to test weren't the same tires Ferrari were using last season but the ones they are using now.!

i belive its the compound that is different from last year



Also someone pointed out that the mass dampers were fitted into the nose cone of the car so it is difficult, even for me, to understand how the width of the tires would make that 12kg mass, as you say, to get stuck in the nose cone, unless they forgot to lubricate it since August last year!

The mass-dampers are a part of the front-suspension, they are strongly connected. The tire windth does indeed effect the angle and the extent of how the wishbone enters the chasse, so that might give you an idea of what the problem was. Also it reveals how fine-tuned the device was and how little room teams have to deal with (in any part of the car) to instal devices like that.

[W8&amp;C]

...
The mass-dampers are a part of the front-suspension, they are strongly connected. The tire windth does indeed effect the angle and the extent of how the wishbone enters the chasse, so that might give you an idea of what the problem was.
...Not true: the mass damper system is working independent from the front (or rear) suspension.

Check here: http://www.formula1.com/insight/technical_analysis/race/2006/758/291.html


Or like Wikipedia says:

mass dampers stabilize against violent motion caused by harmonic vibration. The presence of a mass damper allows th inertia of a great mass to be balanced by a comparatively lightweight structural component, placed in such a way that the block moves in one direction as the structure moves in the other, thus damping the structure's oscillation.

[ioan]

The mass-dampers are a part of the front-suspension, they are strongly connected.

I was not aware of that, and as it was pointed out it isn't the case:



Not true: the mass damper system is working independent from the front (or rear) suspension.

Check here: http://www.formula1.com/insight/tech...6/758/291.html


Or like Wikipedia says:

mass dampers stabilize against violent motion caused by harmonic vibration. The presence of a mass damper allows th inertia of a great mass to be balanced by a comparatively lightweight structural component, placed in such a way that the block moves in one direction as the structure moves in the other, thus damping the structure's oscillation.

This is why I asked you about the link, thinking that maybe there is some very subtle technical aspect that I was missing.


Also it reveals how fine-tuned the device was and how little room teams have to deal with (in any part of the car) to instal devices like that.

In fact making the device work has nothing to do with the space available in the car, there is enough as demonstrated by Renault and Ferrari do have a larger nose cone than Renault.
What they needed to do was to calculate the weight of the mass they used as well as the springs they had to use to attach the mass to the car's body.

In fact what might have happened is that the Bridgestone tire's walls, being different from the Michelins, did already stabilize the car and thus the mass damper system was not worth to be developed and used.

[93VTEC]

I was not aware of that, and as it was pointed out it isn't the case:



This is why I asked you about the link, thinking that maybe there is some very subtle technical aspect that I was missing.



In fact making the device work has nothing to do with the space available in the car, there is enough as demonstrated by Renault and Ferrari do have a larger nose cone than Renault.
What they needed to do was to calculate the weight of the mass they used as well as the springs they had to use to attach the mass to the car's body.

In fact what might have happened is that the Bridgestone tire's walls, being different from the Michelins, did already stabilize the car and thus the mass damper system was not worth to be developed and used.


LOL He is a car engineer now. Those Renault guys are idiots. Go tell them how to make a car! LOL

Man will try to tell you that the grass is blue and sky green! LOL

Some here should just be ignored.

[ioan]

Back to movable (only flexible in my opinion, but than I'm no journo!) floors!

The FIA did answer McLaren's questioning of a certain possibility to mount their floor on a device composed of pivots and springs:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/57650

[jjanicke]

...
As others pointed out it's bizarre that Renault was testing the Bridgestone tires with the mass-dampers on the car as those are banned, and will not come back, which means that it was only lost track time and money, not to mention that the tires they got to test weren't the same tires Ferrari were using last season but the ones they are using now.

...

What's so bizarre about bringing last year car, and devices, to testing early in the testing season? I'd assume they were looking to have a comparative base line. Sounds reasonable and very sensible to me.

[ioan]

What's so bizarre about bringing last year car, and devices, to testing early in the testing season? I'd assume they were looking to have a comparative base line. Sounds reasonable and very sensible to me.

It seems to me that they wasted track time doing that, and their current form is a proof to that! :p :

[jjanicke]

It seems to me that they wasted track time doing that, and their current form is a proof to that! :p :

So how do you measure progress if you have nothing to base it on?

Renault hadn't driven on Bridgestone’s yet; they didn't have the R27 available for testing, and needed to start understanding the new tires.

Makes sense to me to test with an existing car, the new tires to develop a baseline to judge the new car against when it hits the tracks.

They either had the option to not test and wait for the R27, or start work on understanding the Bridgestone’s, with their existing R26, and it's devices that they understand very well.

[ArrowsFA1]

The FIA did answer McLaren's questioning of a certain possibility to mount their floor on a device composed of pivots and springs:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/57650
From that story:
"The FIA has modified its bodywork tests to ensure a floor mounting system used primarily by Ferrari does not circumvent the regulations."

In which case McLaren were fully justified in raising the issue with the FIA. As Ron Dennis said "there is a whole range of things that come to light in the first race" after the teams have spent the winter designing and developing new cars.

[93VTEC]

I am wondering. If Ferrari has to remove the device for Sepang race. They clearly had an illegal device in Melbourne, and should therefore be penalized for using it? Should they not?

[jjanicke]

I am wondering. If Ferrari has to remove the device for Sepang race. They clearly had an illegal device in Melbourne, and should therefore be penalized for using it? Should they not?

No, because it was not illegal to the rules as they were defined for Australia. (in actuality is was deemed legal against the testing procedures that were defined and inplace for Australia 2007).

Just like Renault wasn't penalized for using the, subsequently banned, mass-dampers earlier in the 2006 season.

[jjanicke]

From that story:
"The FIA has modified its bodywork tests to ensure a floor mounting system used primarily by Ferrari does not circumvent the regulations."

In which case McLaren were fully justified in raising the issue with the FIA. As Ron Dennis said "there is a whole range of things that come to light in the first race" after the teams have spent the winter designing and developing new cars.

I would argue that RD is fully justified in raising all the issue's he continually gets critized for on our board.

But people need someone to point their fingers at and blame.

[93VTEC]

No, because it was not illegal to the rules as they were defined for Australia.

Just like Renault wasn't penalized for using the, subsequently banned, mass-dampers earlier in the 2006 season.

OK Maybe not stripped of the points, but they can be considered to have cheated ignoring the spirit of the sport and the rules.

[jjanicke]

OK Maybe not stripped of the points, but they can be considered to have cheated ignoring the spirit of the sport and the rules.

Well that's the fine line of F1. Is it cheating or pushing the rules to their limit? Personally I believe this to be an incident related to pushing the rules to and beyond the limit, hence the clarification.

Now if you were asking about tire ovens and the sort, I'd say that's plainly cheating.

[93VTEC]

Fia should come up with a new rule. That would go somehting like. If your car uses a device, or part that is later found to be outside of the rules, you will be penalized by .... and then slap a fine, points whatever. Make it clear that using devices, that are clearly against the spirit of the rules, will be punishable. Perhaps then the teams will shy away from such devices.

Fia should come up with a new rule. That would go somehting like. If your car uses a device, or part that is later found to be outside of the rules, you will be penalized by .... and then slap a fine, points whatever. Make it clear that using devices, that are clearly against the spirit of the rules, will be punishable. Perhaps then the teams will shy away from such devices.

Great idea......if you want to drain F1 of any creativity.

[Crank]

It seems to me that they wasted track time doing that, and their current form is a proof to that! :p :

So in your opinion, Ferrari and all the teams that were using 2006-spec front and rear wings were also wasting time on winter testing? ;)

Let it be clear that mass dampers can also be used to measure the dynamic characteristics of a dynamic system, in this case suspension, chassis and tyres, and since only the last ones have changed (and AFAIK the construction it's the same but the compound is different), the mass-damper could be used to see which structural and aerodynamic characteristics would be required to obtain the same "attitude" of the car under braking and on the curves.

As for the floor, I guess if the floor was flexing under load, under 50 mm from the pavement I guess they were cheating, but unfortunately there's no way to prove that, so the FIA is right to change the measurement rules as they did when the tyre width scandal ran up and down the paddock in 2003. The rules have been clarified and will prevent that the spirit of the rule itself can be upheld.

Furthermore, the rules stand to level the field within a range of creativity, it is that range where engineers work, either taking it to the limit or "flexing" it. If the rules are strict and clear in every aspect of the car, there would be point in holding a Constructor's Championship.

[tinchote]

Fia should come up with a new rule. That would go somehting like. If your car uses a device, or part that is later found to be outside of the rules, you will be penalized by .... and then slap a fine, points whatever. Make it clear that using devices, that are clearly against the spirit of the rules, will be punishable. Perhaps then the teams will shy away from such devices.

That would be interest: the "objetive" determination of "clearly against the spirit of the rules". By definition, the "spirit" of the rules is not written, because otherwise it would be just "the rules". You cannot penalize for breaking "the spirit" of the rules. It just doesn't make sense. If the rules say that something is forbidden, then it is forbidden; otherwise, it is allowed.

[F1boat]

I wonder why "autosport" is the only site, who has written this. And it'll be even more interesting if Ferrari are found not guilthy and their innovation does not break the book of the rules.

[ioan]

I wonder why "autosport" is the only site, who has written this. And it'll be even more interesting if Ferrari are found not guilthy and their innovation does not break the book of the rules.

There was an article on f1live.com stating that McLaren protested 3 different Ferrari parts but the FIA cleared them all, I think I already posted a link in the "whiners" thread!

Here it is: http://www.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/070327100350.shtml

[andreag]

There was an article on f1live.com stating that McLaren protested 3 different Ferrari parts but the FIA cleared them all
Sorry, but I couldn't find where in this article is written your statement about FIA clearing anything.

It's maybe the phrase?: "It is understood that Whiting, the FIA's technical delegate, declared the F2007 legal."

If it's this one, should be referring to an ancient past, as all we (should) know already Whiting has sent a letter to all teams informing them that detailed checks will be carried out on cars' underbodies during scrutineering on the Thursday of the upcoming Malaysian Grand Prix, and this tests will proceed with all devices (springs) removed.

So this phrase can't be the one where is stated "FIA cleared them all".

But I'm still looking for it; I'm sure it has to be written somewhere on this article, as you always back up what you post.

[ioan]

Sorry, but I couldn't find where in this article is written your statement about FIA clearing anything.

It's maybe the phrase?: "It is understood that Whiting, the FIA's technical delegate, declared the F2007 legal."

If it's this one, should be referring to an ancient past, as all we (should) know already Whiting has sent a letter to all teams informing them that detailed checks will be carried out on cars' underbodies during scrutineering on the Thursday of the upcoming Malaysian Grand Prix, and this tests will proceed with all devices (springs) removed.

So this phrase can't be the one where is stated "FIA cleared them all".

Well "declared legal the F2007" = "cleared them all" unless for some reason you don't accept it.

For what it concerns it is about the fact that the FIA declared that bodywork legal for last race. They clearly could not clear it for the next race as they did not check yet the cars for the Malaysian GP.

As for the tests with all devices removed I can see plenty of team having troubles in their way as they all use some kind of device for their floors, not only Ferrari and BMW.


But I'm still looking for it; I'm sure it has to be written somewhere on this article, as you always back up what you post.

And I'm still looking to find what on earth is making you deliver personal attacks on me? Did I offend you in any way?

[raphael123]

The FIA have generally been leniant on Ferrari, so I wouldn't be surprised if they get away with anything. However if it's legal, then Ferrari shouldn't be punished - that goes without saying - they've outsmarted everyone....again! However if it's a 50/50 decision, you can bet your house that the FIA will sway towards Ferrari's 50!

What did Honda have a couple of years back that was bordering illegal? And was later banned? Or McLaren's 3rd pedal. Or Renaults damper system? Or Michelin? Now lets look at decisions which have gone against Ferrari...

The worst was when Ferrari had illegal cars in Malaysia 99. Points were docked from the drivers AND the team. Fair enough. However Ferrari appealed and it was later decided, only the team should have points taken away from them, as the drivers were not responsible, and it was out of their hands! If that was the case, why has every previous illegal car penalised the driver and the team? And since then, whenever the car has been found illegal, the driver too has always been punished, whether he could have prevented it or not. It seems like it was a one off decision in favour of Ferrari. The worst bit is McLaren had the same situation with DC 2 races after (though in a new season), where he was disqualified from 2nd place, even thought the car was legal to start the race, but ended up illegal (the floor board had rubbed off against the bumps). McLaren put in the same arguement as Ferrari, accepting the team should be punished, but not DC - the FIA said no.

As for expecting Ioan to back up everything he says, I think is slightly inaccurate from my experiences. Maybe it's time Ioan changed his sig to something a bit more truthful :)

[ioan]

The worst was when Ferrari had illegal cars in Malaysia 99. Points were docked from the drivers AND the team. Fair enough. However Ferrari appealed and it was later decided, only the team should have points taken away from them, as the drivers were not responsible, and it was out of their hands! If that was the case, why has every previous illegal car penalised the driver and the team? And since then, whenever the car has been found illegal, the driver too has always been punished, whether he could have prevented it or not. It seems like it was a one off decision in favour of Ferrari. The worst bit is McLaren had the same situation with DC 2 races after (though in a new season), where he was disqualified from 2nd place, even thought the car was legal to start the race, but ended up illegal (the floor board had rubbed off against the bumps). McLaren put in the same arguement as Ferrari, accepting the team should be punished, but not DC - the FIA said no.

This isn't true there were other cases when the constructors points were lost but the driver kept his points, I wish I could tell you from the top of my head those occasions, but I remember this happened at least to Hakkinen once (maybe someone has a better memory than I and can clear this).

[SGWilko]

Back to movable (only flexible in my opinion, but than I'm no journo!) floors!

The FIA did answer McLaren's questioning of a certain possibility to mount their floor on a device composed of pivots and springs:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/57650

Glad you put that in Ioan. Thats Mclaren's way of definately getting such a system banned......

[ioan]

Glad you put that in Ioan. Thats Mclaren's way of definately getting such a system banned......

That's clear after all it's easier and cheaper to get something banned than to develop one for yourself too.
Just their way of doing it is, like always, let's say a bit hypocrite.

[tinchote]

This isn't true there were other cases when the constructors points were lost but the driver kept his points, I wish I could tell you from the top of my head those occasions, but I remember this happened at least to Hakkinen once (maybe someone has a better memory than I and can clear this).


Austria 2000. McLaren was stripped of the 10 points but MH kept the win.

[ioan]

Austria 2000. McLaren was stripped of the 10 points but MH kept the win.

I knew I can count on one of the best around here! :up:
My memory isn't the same anymore. :\

[tinchote]

I knew I can count on one of the best around here! :up:
My memory isn't the same anymore. :\


Yeah, my goog... I mean, memory, is really good ;) :p :

[raphael123]

That's clear after all it's easier and cheaper to get something banned than to develop one for yourself too.
Just their way of doing it is, like always, let's say a bit hypocrite.

A Michael Schumacher fan calling McLaren's hypocrites is quite funny.
Is being hypocritical in your view a bad thing concerning F1 matters?

That aside, good work on the McLaren and Mika race. I had completely forgotten! Why was the car illegal, was it a seal or something?

Obviously if the FIA are to make the favouritism equal between McLaren and Ferrari, McLaren will have a rosy future for a good few decades :P

[tinchote]

That aside, good work on the McLaren and Mika race. I had completely forgotten! Why was the car illegal, was it a seal or something?



Yeah, a seal on the ECU was missing.

[jjanicke]

Yeah, a seal on the ECU was missing.

What a riot :D

So a clear aero dynamic rules violation with 10mm wider bargeboards vs. a missing seal. Even after investigating the FIA admitted they thought the seal fell of due to the vibrations of the race car. Quite different to a 10mm wider aerodynamic device.. I would say.

Ioan even though you never claimed so, you aren't comparing apples to apples.

I say raphael123s FIA-Ferrari favouritism claims still stand true!

[raphael123]

If that is the case, did the McLaren car start the race off as legal then?

I know that was the case in Brazil with DC, where he and the team lost their points!

In Malaysia, the cars were illegal from start to finish, they were designed illegal. Still, the drivers kept their points.

You can't blame Ferrari for the FIA favouritising them I guess (unless they paying them money or whatever - HIGHLY UNLIKELY!), but you shouldn't deny it either.

[ioan]

What a riot :D

So a clear aero dynamic rules violation with 10mm wider bargeboards vs. a missing seal.

Well a tweaked ECU might give some serious advantage.


Even after investigating the FIA admitted they thought the seal fell of due to the vibrations of the race car.

Link please!

That's clear after all it's easier and cheaper to get something banned than to develop one for yourself too.


True.

Now, some of us Ferrari fans can remember the Scuderia lobbying the FIA to ban Active Suspension back in 1993.

The Scuderia argued that such systems were in danger of creating a spending war which would harm the overall competitiveness of Formula One.

Of course, the fact that the F93A was an absolute pig of a chassis that handled like a shopping trolley had nothing to do with it*


*I'm a Ferrari fan.....I'm duty bound to say that. OK, I don't believe it, but it's in the small-print of a Tifosi contract that I have to say it.

[Hawkmoon]

True.

Now, some of us Ferrari fans can remember the Scuderia lobbying the FIA to ban Active Suspension back in 1993.

The Scuderia argued that such systems were in danger of creating a spending war which would harm the overall competitiveness of Formula One.

Of course, the fact that the F93A was an absolute pig of a chassis that handled like a shopping trolley had nothing to do with it*


*I'm a Ferrari fan.....I'm duty bound to say that. OK, I don't believe it, but it's in the small-print of a Tifosi contract that I have to say it.

Ah but tamburello my friend, was not the Scuderia ultimately proven to be correct? Active suspension was later banned as a blight on the spirit of the sport.

I believe you are referring to page 3, clause 1.2, paragraph 4 of the Tifosi: Articles of Admission 1947 document which states "Thou shalt not refer to anything from the Marque of Maranello as a tractor, truck, shopping tolley or any other vehicular mode of transport that is either slow, cumbersome or both."

It was of this clause that Alain Prost fell foul in 1991.

[jjanicke]

Well a tweaked ECU might give some serious advantage.

As it turns out this was not the case.



Link please!

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns02597.html

[ioan]

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns02597.html

Thanks! :up:

I liked this part mostly:

<<...and because of exceptional circumstances of this case only deduct the points awarded to the car in the constructors' championship.>>

For what it's worth that the FIA only favors Ferrari! ;)

[Big Ben]

So who things that the movable floors will be banned? I wouldn´t bet on it. It could be possible though... when Ferrari has a confortable lead.

[Big Ben]

So who thinks that the movable floors will be banned? I wouldn´t bet on it. It could be possible though... when Ferrari has a confortable lead.

[DonJippo]

<<...and because of exceptional circumstances of this case only deduct the points awarded to the car in the constructors' championship.>>

For what it's worth that the FIA only favors Ferrari!

Exceptional circumstances in this case being that only one out of two seals was broken...

[ioan]

Exceptional circumstances in this case being that only one out of two seals was broken...

Thus only half of the winning package kept it's points?
Don't make me laugh. FIA and F1 is no kindergarten.
They just wanted MH to keep in touch in the championship.

They just wanted MH to keep in touch in the championship.

Actually, Ioan, I got the feeling that the FIA were looking at a bigger picture than just the 2000 World Championship.

They had been 'understanding' with Ferrari in Sepang the previous year, so anything other than being 'understanding' with Mclaren in Austria would have been tantamount to favouritism.

By acting the way the FIA did, they could show that they favoured no-one.

Of course, there are those who refuse to see it that way, but that's how it looked to me.

[Big Ben]

Actually, Ioan, I got the feeling that the FIA were looking at a bigger picture than just the 2000 World Championship.

They had been 'understanding' with Ferrari in Sepang the previous year, so anything other than being 'understanding' with Mclaren in Austria would have been tantamount to favouritism.

By acting the way the FIA did, they showed that they favoured no-one.

Of course, there are those who refuse to see it that way, but that's how it looked to me.

If only they had had the same scale in Malaysia... then Mclaren would have won the WCC too... maybe.

[ioan]

Actually, Ioan, I got the feeling that the FIA were looking at a bigger picture than just the 2000 World Championship.

They had been 'understanding' with Ferrari in Sepang the previous year, so anything other than being 'understanding' with Mclaren in Austria would have been tantamount to favouritism.

By acting the way the FIA did, they could show that they favoured no-one.

Good point. :up:


Of course, there are those who refuse to see it that way...

You're right:

If only they had had the same scale in Malaysia... then Mclaren would have won the WCC too... maybe.

:D

[ArrowsFA1]

The impact of the FIA clampdown on movable floors in Formula One has been felt by teams beyond those at the centre of the controversy, but is unlikely to make much difference to the fight at the front of the field...although the impact of the new test has been widely felt, Williams technical director Sam Michael believes it will ultimately make little difference to the status quo in F1.
"It is not going to make a big change to be honest," he said. "Our floor is fine, but even those who have had to modify, it is not a big thing. I don't know why it has become such a big issue."
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/57748

[tinchote]

It became such a big issue because journalists need something to report during the three-week hiatus :)

[ioan]

Well it was always as clear as that given that the FIA said that any device connecting will have to be removed when they test the floors. So not only Ferrari and BMW but also the rest of them had to change thing in that area.

Logically if floor + spring are within the flexibility limits when subjected to certain efforts than it's not much more difficult to make a floor that will stand the same efforts.

As for flexing more when subjected to higher efforts, don't worry for that, materials since gave engineers the know how to make almost whatever they want. ;)

[icsunonove]

Well it was always as clear as that given that the FIA said that any device connecting will have to be removed when they test the floors. So not only Ferrari and BMW but also the rest of them had to change thing in that area.

Logically if floor + spring are within the flexibility limits when subjected to certain efforts than it's not much more difficult to make a floor that will stand the same efforts.

As for flexing more when subjected to higher efforts, don't worry for that, materials since gave engineers the know how to make almost whatever they want. ;)

My guess is that those teams using springs were doing so in order to have the front of the floor bend quite considerably under load. IANAMS but I'd be surprised if they can achieve the same flexibility in the floor if it has to be strong enough to pass the test without the aid of springs.

I doubt that it will make much difference to the relative performance between teams but I am surprised that the scrutineers at Australia didn't think it was necessary to ask for clarification when they saw the system for the first time. You know, given all the fuss in the past about diffusers, mass dampers and fuel tanks and stuff.

[ioan]

My guess is that those teams using springs were doing so in order to have the front of the floor bend quite considerably under load. IANAMS but I'd be surprised if they can achieve the same flexibility in the floor if it has to be strong enough to pass the test without the aid of springs.

Flexibility of old Floor + springs= Flexibility of new Floor, the only difference is the difficulty to achieve the same result, but they have the tools to do it.


I doubt that it will make much difference to the relative performance between teams but I am surprised that the scrutineers at Australia didn't think it was necessary to ask for clarification when they saw the system for the first time. You know, given all the fuss in the past about diffusers, mass dampers and fuel tanks and stuff.

Scrutineers only do check if the bodyparts pas the tests, I can hardly remember them questioning anything that passed the tests.

[race aficionado]

OK, stupid question of the day - stupid in the sense that I have lost touch of what has happened with the later developments of the "cheat" accusations.

Here goes:

Will Ferrari have the same floor "characteristics" for this race?

and/or will the others follow suit because Ferrari is allowed to continue to do so?


thanks for the update . . . .

:s mokin:

[jjanicke]

Ferrari and Sauber aren't allowed to continue with their floors. The testing regulations have been altered, as to dis-allow the "pivots and spring" mounting structure. Which by the way was briliantly orchestrated by McLaren IMO. Instead of protesting the flexing floors, they asked for FIA clarification and approval of an identical design. In turn the FIA adjusted the testing regulations to make it impossible for such a system to work. The floor without the "pivots and spring" must be able to sustain the load test, in effect making it impossible for the "pivots and spring" to function.

And rumor has it that Ferrari and Sauber weren't the only ones effected. It's estimated that only 3 or 4 teams didn't have to alter their designs.

[ioan]

Ferrari and Sauber aren't allowed to continue with their floors. The testing regulations have been altered, as to dis-allow the "pivots and spring" mounting structure. Which by the way was briliantly orchestrated by McLaren IMO. Instead of protesting the flexing floors, they asked for FIA clarification and approval of an identical design. In turn the FIA adjusted the testing regulations to make it impossible for such a system to work. The floor without the "pivots and spring" must be able to sustain the load test, in effect making it impossible for the "pivots and spring" to function.

And rumor has it that Ferrari and Sauber weren't the only ones effected. It's estimated that only 3 or 4 teams didn't have to alter their designs.

In fact the "pivot and spring" device isn't allowed to be on when the scrutineering test are done to measure the flexing of the floor, but they can still use them on track.

[race aficionado]

In fact the "pivot and spring" device isn't allowed to be on when the scrutineering test are done to measure the flexing of the floor, but they can still use them on track.

sorry ioan, I don't understand.

:s mokin:

[Juppe]

sorry ioan, I don't understand.

:s mokin:

It is like Ioan says - these devices can be used, but the floor in itself has to be stiff enough to pass the test without the thingie installed.

After the car has past the floor test they can put the thing back, if they want to.

[race aficionado]

thanks Juppe
:)

[rickos]

So the best car is the one without the moveable floor or is it the best driver won? I bet the latter.
:s mokin:

[ArrowsFA1]

It seems as if there are "fears that some teams are still trying to exploit the regulations" regarding moveable floors.

Following detailed examination of car floors by the FIA at the Malaysian and Bahrain Grands Prix, the governing body is still not convinced teams are all operating within the regulations, so it has now radically toughened up its tests.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/58340

[Valve Bounce]

Nest, some teams will want to have movable wings to avoid damage when hitting curbs. :p :

[ioan]

Well given that they went from 500 to 2000 N (4 times more!) I believe that the FIA have some serious troubles trying to police this area of the cars.

The real question is though: "Why, after asking them to remove all devices mounted on the floor when testing it, the FIA now goes to a whole new level of hysteria and dramatically increases the test load?"

What is warranting this change?
I would like to know who complained this time.

Or maybe at the FIA they just realised that 500N = 50.97 kgs not 500kgs! :D

[Breeze]

Ron should have complained, Ferrari are terrible at this kind of thing anyway.

1998 Mclaren and three other teams are using this extra brake pedal. Ferrari protest and it is banned by Brazil.

Renault mass damper, Ferrari cant get them to work that well so they somehow get the damper banned. Even though they were not a moveable aerodynamic device.
Ferrari wheel covers come in (which are) people complain but nothing is done.

Also Ferrari protested about the tyres in 2003 and the FIA made Michelin change them.

They are terrible sports and for you guys to now make fun of Ron for protesting. well I hope this floor of there's does get banned might be some justice.

I smell dead horse. :dozey:

[F1boat]

Well given that they went from 500 to 2000 N (4 times more!) I believe that the FIA have some serious troubles trying to police this area of the cars.

The real question is though: "Why, after asking them to remove all devices mounted on the floor when testing it, the FIA now goes to a whole new level of hysteria and dramatically increases the test load?"

What is warranting this change?
I would like to know who complained this time.

Or maybe at the FIA they just realised that 500N = 50.97 kgs not 500kgs! :D
This is very interesting, I think that it is NOT McLaren this time.

[ioan]

This is very interesting, I think that it is NOT McLaren this time.

Maybe it's Ferrari or BMW who discovered something on the McLarens? :D

[F1boat]

I admit that I hope so.