- 16 Feb 10, 20:37#185677
You're like a dog chasing a car. You'll never catch it and you just wouldn't know what to do with it if you did
- By hass25About FORUMula1.com
F1 and Motorsport Forums
F1 and Motorsport Forums
Frosty wrote:No, I mean you need to strike a balance in terms of aero. Aerodynamic efficiency to drag ratio. In otherwords, where as the Force India was very aero efficient and went well at Spa and Monza, it lacked downforce for places like Singapore.cap-dude wrote:I'm pretty sure with the engine freeze aerodynamics is the biggest expenditure within F1 development the only exception might of been KERS last year which cost pretty much the same as the new teams budgets. So in my opinion in modern F1 aero efficiency is king to building the best car, just look at the Brawn last year the car was very aero efficient at a lot of circuits so it won the championship. The Red Bull was also very aerodynamically efficient so it won many races on the other hand the MP4-24 at the start of the season was about as aerodynamic as a dustbin so it was s***. Putting down force on a car is easy, putting on down force on a car without causing drag is hard hence why aerodynamic efficiency is so important.scotty wrote:I assumed it meant aerodynamic efficiency was half the battle. Not saying it's not a key element.cap-dude wrote:^^^Not so much from what I read.That quote merely confirms the point that aero efficiency is a key element of a good car...Every circuit has an aerodynamic efficiency to drag ratio. If you beat that ratio you go quicker, if your car falls below that ratio you will struggle. Generally you will design a car to perform on the majority of tracks and ignore high-downforce extremes, like Hungary and Monaco, and low-downforce extremes, like Monza.
Also, I'd mentioned about car wheelbases before. Apparently the the wheelbases don't differ too much. With McLaren and Ferrari having the longest, Red Bull somewhere in the middle and Virgin having the shortest. But details are scarce. But none the less it will make somewhat of the difference between the cars from race to race this year.
Still a while till the first race though. 24 days seems such a long time to wait.
cap-dude wrote:You seem to have some terms slightly mixed up. Aerodynamic efficiency is how much down-force you get for the amount of drag. Aerodynamic efficiency is a ratio of down force against drag. So you don't get a ratio of aerodynamic efficiency against drag.Frosty wrote:No, I mean you need to strike a balance in terms of aero. Aerodynamic efficiency to drag ratio. In otherwords, where as the Force India was very aero efficient and went well at Spa and Monza, it lacked downforce for places like Singapore.cap-dude wrote:I'm pretty sure with the engine freeze aerodynamics is the biggest expenditure within F1 development the only exception might of been KERS last year which cost pretty much the same as the new teams budgets. So in my opinion in modern F1 aero efficiency is king to building the best car, just look at the Brawn last year the car was very aero efficient at a lot of circuits so it won the championship. The Red Bull was also very aerodynamically efficient so it won many races on the other hand the MP4-24 at the start of the season was about as aerodynamic as a dustbin so it was s***. Putting down force on a car is easy, putting on down force on a car without causing drag is hard hence why aerodynamic efficiency is so important.scotty wrote:I assumed it meant aerodynamic efficiency was half the battle. Not saying it's not a key element.cap-dude wrote:^^^Not so much from what I read.That quote merely confirms the point that aero efficiency is a key element of a good car...Every circuit has an aerodynamic efficiency to drag ratio. If you beat that ratio you go quicker, if your car falls below that ratio you will struggle. Generally you will design a car to perform on the majority of tracks and ignore high-downforce extremes, like Hungary and Monaco, and low-downforce extremes, like Monza.
Also, I'd mentioned about car wheelbases before. Apparently the the wheelbases don't differ too much. With McLaren and Ferrari having the longest, Red Bull somewhere in the middle and Virgin having the shortest. But details are scarce. But none the less it will make somewhat of the difference between the cars from race to race this year.
Still a while till the first race though. 24 days seems such a long time to wait.
Cubejam wrote:Slightly boring.. but anyone know why Lotus have blue wheel nuts on the right & red ones on the left?I'm not sure.
Cubejam wrote:Slightly boring.. but anyone know why Lotus have blue wheel nuts on the right & red ones on the left?It's probably just a positioning thing.
Cubejam wrote:Slightly boring.. but anyone know why Lotus have blue wheel nuts on the right & red ones on the left?If they get mixed up they know what side of the car they're meant to go on. The threads must be different for each side of the car so they can't be swapped around.
Cubejam wrote:I can do one better on the photoshop front.thats awesome
ATTENTION The Welsh buy Force India.
Kinda like a Red Bull Force India.... with a dragon instead of a bull
2008 
McLaren Racing opened its new state-of-the-art Rac[…]
Swap-in out addons, use only what you really need!