will schumachers new chassis be different ?

[ESPImperium]

The difference will probably the fact it will be more rigid, and have a few refinements in relation to the homologation regulations relating to tubs now.

Virgins two new ones will be done with the "Relyability" rules as the car has only lasted one race distance, so i think that Mercedes may try something simmilar, saying that they MGP W01-03 is no longer reelyable and may have a saftey issue attached to it. Meaning that chassis will be dumped for show car status for the rest of its existance.

Personally, there could be new chasis for a good few drivers at Barcelona.

[marcush.]

Marcush

This is still a fast car in Rosbergs hands. Even with these issues Mercedes were 0.4 off Red Bull in Shanghai and nearly evens with Ferrari.
Yes its quali pace, but pace nevertheless.

My feelings is they already know what their problems are. It will be total specualtion until we see exactly what Mercedes have achieved.

Interestingly on another website JAonF1 a poster of some repute has said Mercedes intentionally have not added any big updates on the car so as to concentrate on this "B spec" version. So this again points to Mercedes knowing they were well behind and saving time with developing a dud, they went the whole hog and went B spec.

as always internet babble is too harsh ,so I apologise for talking them down too much.
But still I felt they were not really on top of their problems in the second half of 2009 ...talking about issues and looking into them...bringing up questionmarlks about Jenson etc.. but it was more than obvious that the Brawn was in no way the animal or monster Jenson had at the start of the season.On two or three occations they again hit the sweet spot of the car ,or maybe the track and conditions suited
the basic layout more.
and again we see a perfect continuity there .Last year ,rarely both Brawns were quick at the same time (!) At the seasons start Button was dominating Barrichello
like he wished and come second half of the season the table turned and Jenson struggled to match Barrichello.. coincidence? If I were Brawn I would look deeeply into what happened last year and see what he can unearth...

[marcush.]

The difference will probably the fact it will be more rigid, and have a few refinements in relation to the homologation regulations relating to tubs now.

Virgins two new ones will be done with the "Relyability" rules as the car has only lasted one race distance, so i think that Mercedes may try something simmilar, saying that they MGP W01-03 is no longer reelyable and may have a saftey issue attached to it. Meaning that chassis will be dumped for show car status for the rest of its existance.

Personally, there could be new chasis for a good few drivers at Barcelona.

I don´t see the stiffness issue and i do not see a new tub yet... honestly speaking I cannot see them get a waver for something like this.
Virgin is an entirely different thing with new kids and them not even very competitive but i don´t think even they will be allowed to change anything but the fuel volume.

[lebesset]

I think I am correct in saying that in the schumacher days ferrari always had the longest wheelbase on the grid
clearly that suited him , and from comments here it sounds like there is some possibility of lengthening that with the existing tub
is there any talk of a new tub being homologated if the adjustment possible on the existing one being insufficent ? sounds like they have put €30 million into michael , might as well go a bit more !

as regards to marcush's comments re last year jenson/reubens , I felt it was more jenson playing the percentages to keep getting a few points and be champion , whereas the percentage play for reubens was to go for it ... and they both did what they had to ! at the penultimate race the percentages had changed for jenson and HE went for it , hence his winning with a race to spare

I think people overlook the fact that last year's mercedes was bodged together , and really not a top car once the DD advantage disappeared

[WhiteBlue]

The difference will probably the fact it will be more rigid, and have a few refinements in relation to the homologation regulations relating to tubs now.

Virgins two new ones will be done with the "Relyability" rules as the car has only lasted one race distance, so i think that Mercedes may try something simmilar, saying that they MGP W01-03 is no longer reelyable and may have a saftey issue attached to it. Meaning that chassis will be dumped for show car status for the rest of its existance.

Personally, there could be new chasis for a good few drivers at Barcelona.

I don´t see the stiffness issue and i do not see a new tub yet... honestly speaking I cannot see them get a waver for something like this.
Virgin is an entirely different thing with new kids and them not even very competitive but i don´t think even they will be allowed to change anything but the fuel volume.

I agree, homologation is a pretty serious thing. You have to make a serious reliability or safety point to get around a homologation. Consistently running out of fuel in a race is a safety issue, but having misjudged the stiffness of the front tyres is something that simply takes away some performance potential. If the FiA allows teams to get away with this they would be in big trouble very soon.

[marcush.]

I think I am correct in saying that in the schumacher days ferrari always had the longest wheelbase on the grid
clearly that suited him , and from comments here it sounds like there is some possibility of lengthening that with the existing tub
is there any talk of a new tub being homologated if the adjustment possible on the existing one being insufficent ? sounds like they have put €30 million into michael , might as well go a bit more !

as regards to marcush's comments re last year jenson/reubens , I felt it was more jenson playing the percentages to keep getting a few points and be champion , whereas the percentage play for reubens was to go for it ... and they both did what they had to ! at the penultimate race the percentages had changed for jenson and HE went for it , hence his winning with a race to spare

I think people overlook the fact that last year's mercedes was bodged together , and really not a top car once the DD advantage disappeared

reference 2009,Ruby was not snapping at Jensons heels really consistently at the start of last year...in deed they just had 4 1-2 finishes over the season with what was to be the car of the year and from GP italy they really did not feature in terms of speed or results.. with around 1 second margin in qualy and half a second in race speed at times or Brasil when Ruby was on pole whereas Button was not even in Q3 ..Quite often one of their drivers stranded in Q2...so yes they struggled last yeaar when everybody had mastered the DDD.

[nacho]

I remember they had the tyre test for 2010 sometime last year, was it already in the preseason testing for 2009 and the Brawn car wasn't ready back then?

[F1_eng]

Marcush, Rubens was on pole in Brazil and a 3-4 finish for the team in Abu Dhabi.

Someone mentioned in another Mercedes thread, they didn't know that ballast moved around the car during the season. Who ever this was, really shouldn't be voicing their oppinion too loud as they clearly don't know much about F1 racing. Not only does it move around for different races, it moves regularly between runs during practice.

Tyre stiffness is massive, at the most basic level it changes the frequency and the spring/daming characteristics of the installed system. If you assume initially that you are going to get 'X' ammount of damping from your tyre and you don't, this has to be compensated for but at a slightly different location. You can change the spring/damper settings which only relate to the sprung parts of the car, the damping of the un-sprung sections are as the tyre, which is stiffer than expected.
This is barely touching the surface at the most fundamental level.

There are lots of reasons why teams/cars/drives can struggle and it sad, how some people get a pleasure in talking teams and drivers down. F1 teams and staff don't claim anything except to try and design the best car possible in their situation, sometimes issues arise which need to be sorted as best as possible. I have never heard anyone who is working in F1 have a go so the cause is certainly envy. Not being able to make the grade or not working hard enough in school.

How do you come to the conclusion that the proposed wheel movement moves balance 0.5%? In your views, how do you think this affects the front and rear tyres and in what way will it benefit the set-up?

[lebesset]

http://www.itv-f1.com/News_Article.aspx?id=48283

nico seems to be doing ok though

so the hype about MS being able to drive anything as fast as it would go like jimmy clark could is just that ...hype

I thought it was supposed to be button who had to have the car exactly the way he likes it ? the McLaren clearly isn't , at least not yet , but he seems to be doing ok as well !

note the comments about the short wheelbase

[lebesset]

does this mean a new tub or not ? is ross just playing with words ?

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/83112

[manchild]

will schumachers new chassis be different ?

Yes! It will be a two-seater featuring nose gunner to help MS get rid of rivals.

[raymondu999]

Actually it would be interesting to see if both get the upgrade. I've heard somewhere that it's just for Schumi's car so it has better handling, but I think probably they'd have to give it to Nico as well (is it in the regulations to have both cars the same, not including upgrades?) It'd be interesting if, as someone pointed out earlier MS will outperform Nico in the 2nd half of the year. I wonder if that means they got the chassis to suit Michael better at the expense of Nico.

[bugref]

I read on AMuS that from Barcelona the W01 will have more wheel base due to moving the suspension further forward. I thought that you need to move the fixing points on the chassis and that this wasn't possible with an existing monocoque but some people wrote here on F1technical that it can be done. Probably they change only the geometry of the suspension. So I assume the new chassis will be the same homologation as the old one.

ah come on WB ...it is simple triangles those wishbones..of course you can
move the position of the upright almost infinitly without having to change the tub.
Of course ,moving front wheels backwards is normally not on because of regulation (feet behind front axle),but for the rest?
You will of course have different angularity in toelinks as it seems unlikely that it is possible/feasible to move the steeringrack forward .And of course the forward angularity of the pushrod will change ,as the rocker and springing system will have to remain where they are...so maybe a little redisign on the upright/brackets to accomodate this.
More head scratching with the flowfields changes I guess ...especially with the drooping nose this will now be tantalisingly close to the front wheels in side view and i could imagine that it is already starting to chocke or influence the flow entering between the wheels..causing convergence....on the other hand downstream the flow will be better as the drivers butt is moving away from the front axle..so after all we might see the raised nose in Barca?

That is something I want to see in their B-Specs car I believe that design might work on Schumi. but I cant say as the whole package of the B-spec will it improve for schumi, and the answer will be will be in barcelona. I hope it will work this time and Good Luck Mr. Schumi.

[marcush.]

Marcush, Rubens was on pole in Brazil and a 3-4 finish for the team in Abu Dhabi.

Someone mentioned in another Mercedes thread, they didn't know that ballast moved around the car during the season. Who ever this was, really shouldn't be voicing their oppinion too loud as they clearly don't know much about F1 racing. Not only does it move around for different races, it moves regularly between runs during practice.

Tyre stiffness is massive, at the most basic level it changes the frequency and the spring/daming characteristics of the installed system. If you assume initially that you are going to get 'X' ammount of damping from your tyre and you don't, this has to be compensated for but at a slightly different location. You can change the spring/damper settings which only relate to the sprung parts of the car, the damping of the un-sprung sections are as the tyre, which is stiffer than expected.
This is barely touching the surface at the most fundamental level.

There are lots of reasons why teams/cars/drives can struggle and it sad, how some people get a pleasure in talking teams and drivers down. F1 teams and staff don't claim anything except to try and design the best car possible in their situation, sometimes issues arise which need to be sorted as best as possible. I have never heard anyone who is working in F1 have a go so the cause is certainly envy. Not being able to make the grade or not working hard enough in school.

How do you come to the conclusion that the proposed wheel movement moves balance 0.5%? In your views, how do you think this affects the front and rear tyres and in what way will it benefit the set-up?

well at least i inspired you to respond..
I apologise for being unfair towards Brawns 2009 second half season and giving the
impression of devaluing the efforts of the team per se with my words.
In fact I ´m well aware that things are NOT as simple as I would be able to outline ..of course they are not.But it was Mr.Brawn who basically chose to reduce the problem to a weight distribution issue.
So my thought was : if the 2 inches wheelbase change would be what is going to happen ,then this would represent something like a 1.5% change in wheelbase.From my point of view moving the front wheels could never ever move the CG those 1.5%
so it has to be something in between and so i simply estimated half of a percent.

With reference to the other comments and something DaveW.pointed out somewhere else ,the question is if it really is less static you would need if the fronts have come ot stiffer than Brawn hat wanted them and just why the car would overwork the tyres if there was too much springrate in the fronts..either I´m drawing false conclusions from what has been published - or something does not really add up.
especially if you consider that 620kg/100 x1.5 is not even 5 kilos of weight per wheel we are talking here for the increase of wheelbase ..not a huge number when we consider the downforce playing its part.

[PlatinumZealot]

Suppose it was 4 inches? 100mm is a nice round number. I think the engineers will make it 4 inches for that silly reason. lol