[2theMax]

Originally Posted by anachronix

The major rule change happened in 2009 & 2010. The teams that benefited from this, those who had the brain to get around the rules rather than bringing anything worth to be called innovative!

That limping horse was the only horse that went to the last race of the season with the lead fighting the bulls!

I agree Ferrari has lot of work to do, but they are not whiners. Mclaren is still whining about the flexi wings and now after all the new tests introduced by FIA, the Redbull wing is found to be the less flexing wing (with a limit of allowed 20mm flex, the RB's front wing dint flex beyond 16mm while the other cars were really on the mark). Now Mclaren has started whining about a different engine mapping the RB could use for qualifying. May be you should look at a different garage for whiners!

Difficult period, but we can fight back - Tombazis - F1technical.net

Now they blame the WT data.This is not what is expected from a team that's been in business for 80 years +.Anyway as an eternal Tifosi, sincerely hope they buck up.

OT: Spygate Mike joins Williams .

[bhagathgowda]

Originally Posted by anachronix

I agree Ferrari has lot of work to do, but they are not whiners. Mclaren is still whining about the flexi wings and now after all the new tests introduced by FIA, the Redbull wing is found to be the less flexing wing (with a limit of allowed 20mm flex, the RB's front wing dint flex beyond 16mm while the other cars were really on the mark). Now Mclaren has started whining about a different engine mapping the RB could use for qualifying. May be you should look at a different garage for whiners!

We all can see that being a Ferrari fan you are desperately trying to defend them, but please don’t quote wrong things here.

Formula 1 team’s last year began research with engine modes that pump more exhaust gases out - to help increase the airflow through a blown diffuser. This also included having gases flowing through the exhausts when drivers were off-throttle. Red Bull Racing could be using a more extreme version of such engine mapping to dramatically increase exhaust flow in qualifying - but this would likely put a strain on its Renault power unit which could threaten reliability in the races

We are aiming to improve the performance of our car right the way through the range, in qualifying and in the race

I think tyre optimisation may be one area, and the use of elaborate engine modes may be another - with the generation of downforce being quite highly influenced with the exhaust flows

This is what Vodafone McLaren Mercedes principal race engineer Phil Prew thinks and his last statement are the things which McLaren are trying to incorporate in order to close the gap to RB.

They are not going around crying that RB is using this or that to gain advantage.

Ferrari are not happy because they are not able to match the engineering levels of other teams on the grid, Period.

[anachronix]

Originally Posted by bhagathgowda

We all can see that being a Ferrari fan you are desperately trying to defend them, but please don’t quote wrong things here.

Desperately trying to defend what dude?

This is what Vodafone McLaren Mercedes principal race engineer Phil Prew thinks and his last statement are the things which McLaren are trying to incorporate in order to close the gap to RB.

Wonderful quote! BTW, the teams are not supposed to make any changes after qualifying. If he is saying that, he simply means to say that Redbull are doing something illegal with the mapping to gain performance in qualifying. Now that the wing flex claims by Mclaren are only making them look stupid, they are finding new reasons to breakdown Redbull's performance.

They are not going around crying that RB is using this or that to gain advantage.

Yeah, they are not crying!

Originally Posted by Mclaren Drivers

Button said he had spoken with “a few people who say it flexes more than what they expect is correct” while Hamilton said you could stand three men on his car’s front wing and it would not bend. “When I asked what the rules are about how much the wing is allowed to flex they said 20mm,” he said. “If I you show you a picture [of the RB6] that is probably not what is happening.”

Source: Malaysian Grand Prix: Red Bull pour scorn on McLaren's complaints over legality of front wing - Telegraph

Finally, Horner had this to say this to shut Mclaren up!

autosport.com - F1 News: Horner: Front wing complaints must stop

Originally Posted by Christian Horner

"They [McLaren] have developed a car that is effectively a different philosophy to ours and so the benefit that we see from the front wing is different to the one that they would see from the front wing. That is the basis behind it fundamentally."

Ferrari are not happy because they are not able to match the engineering levels of other teams on the grid, Period.

It was back in 1998 that Mclaren built a car to win them a constructor championship. Its been 13 years of head scratching at Mclaren to build a championship winning car! I agree, Its tough for Ferrari to come down to engineering levels of Mclaren. Lol!

[mayankk]

^^
If so,lately they have mastered the art of coming down, even surpassing the lowness of mclaren engineering it seems.
next stop will be hispania and lotus.

[bhagathgowda]

Hi anachronix

It’s funny to see how well you read statements.

When I said "We all can see that being a Ferrari fan you are desperately trying to defend them"

You read it as "Desperately trying to defend." Does your browser truncate the statements for you?

When you read Phil Prew's statement which by the way says "Red Bull Racing could be using a more extreme version of such engine mapping to dramatically increase exhaust flow in qualifying - but this would likely put a strain on its Renault power unit which could threaten reliability in the races"

You read it, as if he is saying that RB is using different setups for Qualifying and the Race.

Just to clarify the statement for you what he meant was that, the setup used by RB would be beneficial in Qualifying but may cause reliability issues during the length of the course.

And regarding the front wings:

As per the link provided by you,
McLaren had raised concerns because pictures taken of the RB6 at the first race this season in Australia, where Vettel won at a canter, showed the tips of the front wing once more practically scraping the ground

For which Honers explanation was this. “We run quite a high rake angle in our car so when the rear of the car is higher; the front of the car is going to be lower to the ground. It is simple mathematics. “

See the details of weather a team is running its cars with a rear suspension raised by say 5mm or 10mm, compared to the rest of the field would not be know by just looking at the outside when the cars are being driven.

Sorry I do not have the time now to search for the photos being referred to here

And everyone probably would agree when I say that, statistics tell you only as much as it hides.

Yes McLaren have not won the WCC after 1998, But how many times did they have a better car but missed out of wining championships as McLaren always had the policy to let both there drivers fight it out on track rather than deciding on who will be the winner on the pit wall.

During 2003, Kimi lost WDC to Michael by just 2 points where as DC could not even score half the points that Kimi did, WCC are won if both drivers score points,

In 2005, Kimi was so close but the rivalry between Montoya and Kimi killed McLarens chances of winning the WCC.

In 2008, Even though Hamilton won the WDC, Kovalainen was only able to score half of what Hamilton did score

Like wise, Alonso came second in WDC in 2010, but Ferrari could not clinch the second spot in WCC from McLaren as Massa was unable to match the performance of Alonso.

All, I am pointing out is that WCC can only be won if both drivers can score and the team uses a strategy which helps them score more points overall.

This is what I am referring to, Ferrari have won the Championships when they had better cars than the rest and also when they did not because of the strategy used by them, but now they are unable to get the cars to perform at their expected levels, when they do they lose out on strategy.

Hope you get it right this time.

[anachronix]

Originally Posted by bhagathgowda

When I said "We all can see that being a Ferrari fan you are desperately trying to defend them"

You read it as "Desperately trying to defend." Does your browser truncate the statements for you?

I am a Ferrari fan is understood as you said, I wanted to know what I was defending against!

When you read Phil Prew's statement which by the way says "Red Bull Racing could be using a more extreme version of such engine mapping to dramatically increase exhaust flow in qualifying - but this would likely put a strain on its Renault power unit which could threaten reliability in the races"

You read it, as if he is saying that RB is using different setups for Qualifying and the Race.

Just to clarify the statement for you what he meant was that, the setup used by RB would be beneficial in Qualifying but may cause reliability issues during the length of the course.

Phil Prew is actually talking about modes and he is quoting it quite vaguely. Most teams have the map/mode to blow the exhaust gases more aggressively even when the driver is off the throttle. I seriously dont understand what Phil is trying to say that as a differentiator in Redbull's performance in 2011.

And regarding the front wings:

As per the link provided by you,
McLaren had raised concerns because pictures taken of the RB6 at the first race this season in Australia, where Vettel won at a canter, showed the tips of the front wing once more practically scraping the ground

For which Honers explanation was this. “We run quite a high rake angle in our car so when the rear of the car is higher; the front of the car is going to be lower to the ground. It is simple mathematics. “

See the details of weather a team is running its cars with a rear suspension raised by say 5mm or 10mm, compared to the rest of the field would not be know by just looking at the outside when the cars are being driven.

Sorry I do not have the time now to search for the photos being referred to here

This picture should explain your doubt. Mclaren cannot implement this because the MP4-26 runs an already lower front end. They wanted to solve this through the different route of getting it banned through the FIA.

And everyone probably would agree when I say that, statistics tell you only as much as it hides.

Yes McLaren have not won the WCC after 1998, But how many times did they have a better car but missed out of wining championships as McLaren always had the policy to let both there drivers fight it out on track rather than deciding on who will be the winner on the pit wall.

During 2003, Kimi lost WDC to Michael by just 2 points where as DC could not even score half the points that Kimi did, WCC are won if both drivers score points,

What was special with DC that Mclaren wanted to keep him forever when he was not helping their WCC chances? Ron couldn't find a better No.2 for his team?

In 2005, Kimi was so close but the rivalry between Montoya and Kimi killed McLarens chances of winning the WCC.

How many times did they crash out on Sunday? It was the car that was breaking down all the time and got Kimi the name as 'car breaker'.

In 2008, Even though Hamilton won the WDC, Kovalainen was only able to score half of what Hamilton did score

Another case of No.2 driver in the making. It was always Hamilton who got the prime strategy for the race. Thats what Heikki had to say about his Mclaren days.

Like wise, Alonso came second in WDC in 2010, but Ferrari could not clinch the second spot in WCC from McLaren as Massa was unable to match the performance of Alonso.

All, I am pointing out is that WCC can only be won if both drivers can score and the team uses a strategy which helps them score more points overall.

This is what I am referring to, Ferrari have won the Championships when they had better cars than the rest and also when they did not because of the strategy used by them, but now they are unable to get the cars to perform at their expected levels, when they do they lose out on strategy.

I agree! But...

What are your thoughts about Ferrari winning the WCC from 1999 to 2004?

Hope you get it right this time.

I am trying dude, as long as we dont make this thread look like an ad campaign for wrigley's new gum

[bhagathgowda]

Hi anachronix,

I believe both of us here are not experts in aerodynamics (at least not to a level of a F1 race engineer), to see how the performance is gained by teams by using the engine mode which blows the exhaust gases more aggressively. All we can do is try to understand what they say. I just wanted to say that whatever you had posted here about engine mapping, was wrong that all.

And with no disrespect to you, Can you please explain the lines drawn on the images, for me the images actually negate what Honer says of having the higher rear end and a lower front end, for his cars.

About Ferrari winning the WCC from 1999 to 2004, this is what I am trying to tell, I am not underestimating what they have done or what they can do (if everything falls in place). Winning from 1999 to 2004 have raised a bar for themselves (especially 2002 and 2004). They are finding it hard to be in that position again with all the limitation on budget, testing etc... (post 2004).

I think there inability to get back to that position is the reason for a team which supported FIA during the Ferrari era (early 2000), against the idea of a rival series as proposed by other teams is now looking forward for a rival series.

[ACM]

Sometimes it is not all about who wins.

Am a Mclaren Fan upfront, (since the Senna days and would probably support Williams next) and though DC did not win much have always been his fan.

Yep Mclaren did have this one ugly row in the recent past due to a major question of ethics and payed the penalty for it. But that was it, for me it has besides that been the cleanest team with no team orders to the extent that they have even lost championships due this strict guideline that they follow. Ferrari on the other hand has always had team guidelines and hence their last many no 2 drivers have been disappointed with the team.

Its finally all about which team apeals to an individual for the traits it exhibits overall.

Getting back to the ferrari not being happy with F1, it needs to realize that some of the halo around Ferrari has been due to F1 and F1 would not always suite them. Today F1 is trying more and more to level the playing field between teams and to get more of the usable technology on display such that in few years time these can be incorporated in road cars.
Infact the Ferrari approach of larger engines and expensive technology would be at one level more suitable for the Indi racing format in the US.

[mayankk]

Originally Posted by anachronix

Attachment 542128

This picture should explain your doubt. Mclaren cannot implement this because the MP4-26 runs an already lower front end. They wanted to solve this through the different route of getting it banned through the FIA.

eh, not the mclaren.....

[anachronix]

This picture should answer your question!




@Mayank, Is it the Mclaren thats in the 2nd picture

[mayankk]

Out of context, and not necessary.
was it the mclaren in what i responded to?

Anyway, making these angular comparisons by drawing lines on pictures taken at different locations, of different scales , doesnt make sense.

Driving dynamics effect the flex.
which is why all such measurements so far in formula1 have been made on stationary cars.

[anachronix]

Originally Posted by mayankk

Out of context, and not necessary.
was it the mclaren in what i responded to?

That was the comparison of the RB with other cars until I could find a better picture to compare that I posted earlier.

Anyway, making these angular comparisons by drawing lines on pictures taken at different locations, of different scales , doesnt make sense.

Driving dynamics effect the flex.
which is why all such measurements so far in formula1 have been made on stationary cars.

So you think FIA is missing the obvious here?

[mayankk]

Originally Posted by anachronix

So you think FIA is missing the obvious here?

unsure about your point here, but 2011 guidelines state:

ARTICLE 2 : GENERAL PRINCIPLES
-
-

2.6 Measurements :

All measurements must be made while the car is stationary on a flat horizontal surface

[Addy]

Ferrari boss Luca not being happy with F1 with the rules changing and insufficient income to the teams, is a known fact. One more known fact is that he is MIGHTY pleased with Alonso. This contract renewal proves it BIG time. Alonso with Ferrari till the end of 2016. WOW.

Alonso extends his Ferrari deal | Planet F1 | Formula One News

[azeemhafiz]

It is no surprise that Ferrari is quite annoyed with the new regulation coming into effect from 2013.

1.6L Turbo engines? Personally, I prefer the naturally aspirated to the turbos. But more so Ferrari's hatred towards turbo is evident as they made a commitment to stay away from them (on road cars) since the F40. They were adamant that they will not consider turbo in the future till the time the technology progresses.

Its been over 20 years since Ferrari had turbo on their road cars. Formula 1 used to be the 'pinnacle' of motorsport, but with the amount of restrictions into play in the sport today i pray for a break away series.