F1 2014 Car Comparison Thread

A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter do not belong here.
Post Reply
User avatar
Pierce89
60
Joined: 21 Oct 2009, 18:38

Re: F1 2014 Car Comparison Thread

Post

bhall wrote:
Blackout wrote:Take a look at the other early 2009 FW designs, bar the Brawn... the R29 FW wasnt the simplest one.
I was referring to the inwash endplates more than anything else.

Speaking of rough seasons, though, I think it's a bit funny that the teams represented in the OWG that drew up those regulations - Ferrari, McLaren, and Renault - all struggled in 2009. You'd think it would be other way around.
The early Renault FWEPs weren't in wash but every wash. They pushed air in, out, and up.

Image

Edit: Dammit man, I, like bhall, hate when I start a new page. I feel like nobody will know what I'm on about.
“To be able to actually make something is awfully nice”
Bruce McLaren on building his first McLaren racecars, 1970

“I've got to be careful what I say, but possibly to probably Juan would have had a bigger go”
Sir Frank Williams after the 2003 Canadian GP, where Ralf hesitated to pass brother M. Schumacher

User avatar
Juzh
161
Joined: 06 Oct 2012, 08:45

Re: F1 2014 Car Comparison Thread

Post

simpler =/= slower. Not necessarily.

henra
53
Joined: 11 Mar 2012, 19:34

Re: F1 2014 Car Comparison Thread

Post

zioture wrote: Good comparison F1 cars :
Mercedes W05 VS Redbull RB10. Mercedes is small in nose sidepod and airbox
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fi0K93S9rWU
(Partly) disagree. Not a good comparison of the noses. Rather on tabloid level physics.

The wing mounts of the RB are completely behind the appendage. Therefore at the point of the wing mounts the RB has effectively the full x-section. The only thing which will reduce volume flow somewhat is the reduced speed of the air due to turbulences/induced drag caused by the appendage upfront. Due to its Profile (teardrop/airfoil shaped in the vertical axis) the air will converge behind the appendage.
Volume flow through the nose of RB and Merc shouldn't be too different. The F14T on the other hand will be a completely different matter.

SpainFAN
0
Joined: 21 May 2014, 10:26

Re: F1 2014 Car Comparison Thread

Post

henra wrote:
zioture wrote: Good comparison F1 cars :
Mercedes W05 VS Redbull RB10. Mercedes is small in nose sidepod and airbox
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fi0K93S9rWU
(Partly) disagree. Not a good comparison of the noses. Rather on tabloid level physics.

The wing mounts of the RB are completely behind the appendage. Therefore at the point of the wing mounts the RB has effectively the full x-section. The only thing which will reduce volume flow somewhat is the reduced speed of the air due to turbulences/induced drag caused by the appendage upfront. Due to its Profile (teardrop/airfoil shaped in the vertical axis) the air will converge behind the appendage.
Volume flow through the nose of RB and Merc shouldn't be too different. The F14T on the other hand will be a completely different matter.
you know... I was looking at that video, trying to figure out what they where implying... but I like your line of though henra.
I was looking that the RB appendix, and in essence I thought about the venturi that is creates on both sides of at convergence. This negative pressure would suck such more of the air in and around the "mouth opening" of the nose and move greater volume around the sidepod. This air would then energise the sidepod giving greater downforce.

User avatar
Pierce89
60
Joined: 21 Oct 2009, 18:38

Re: F1 2014 Car Comparison Thread

Post

bhall wrote:
Blackout wrote:Take a look at the other early 2009 FW designs, bar the Brawn... the R29 FW wasnt the simplest one.
I was referring to the inwash endplates more than anything else.

Speaking of rough seasons, though, I think it's a bit funny that the teams represented in the OWG that drew up those regulations - Ferrari, McLaren, and Renault - all struggled in 2009. You'd think it would be other way around.
The way I've heard it is thus: The three teams mentioned missed all the loopholes because by writing the regulations, they read them and saw what they meant for them to say rather than recognizing the holes in the wording. The rules they wrote weren't intended to allow a DDD, so they never saw it. They just saw the regs as they originally "intended" them to be. In other words they read the regs and only saw the proverbial "spirit of the regulations".
“To be able to actually make something is awfully nice”
Bruce McLaren on building his first McLaren racecars, 1970

“I've got to be careful what I say, but possibly to probably Juan would have had a bigger go”
Sir Frank Williams after the 2003 Canadian GP, where Ralf hesitated to pass brother M. Schumacher

User avatar
SiLo
130
Joined: 25 Jul 2010, 19:09

Re: F1 2014 Car Comparison Thread

Post

You'd think if they were re-writing the regs for the sport, they might include all the teams in such decisions?
Felipe Baby!

beelsebob
85
Joined: 23 Mar 2011, 15:49
Location: Cupertino, California

Re: F1 2014 Car Comparison Thread

Post

SiLo wrote:You'd think if they were re-writing the regs for the sport, they might include all the teams in such decisions?
Why would you do that? That just leads to arguments, overly long process, and a cluster --- design by committee result. It's almost always better to involve only the key players in decision making processes.

zioture
496
Joined: 12 Feb 2013, 12:46
Location: Italy
Contact:

Re: F1 2014 Car Comparison Thread

Post

Comparison Ferrari F14T, Mercedes W05, Redbull RB10 Montecarlo
Image

Glyn
3
Joined: 09 Sep 2012, 20:25

Re: F1 2014 Car Comparison Thread

Post

zioture wrote:Comparison Ferrari F14T, Mercedes W05, Redbull RB10 Montecarlo
https://scontent-a-mxp.xx.fbcdn.net/hph ... 7271_o.jpg
Does this picture make it abundantly clear that the Mercedes has a "better" FW.... and "more" aerodynamic bits on the car?

beelsebob
85
Joined: 23 Mar 2011, 15:49
Location: Cupertino, California

Re: F1 2014 Car Comparison Thread

Post

Glyn wrote:
zioture wrote:Comparison Ferrari F14T, Mercedes W05, Redbull RB10 Montecarlo
https://scontent-a-mxp.xx.fbcdn.net/hph ... 7271_o.jpg
Does this picture make it abundantly clear that the Mercedes has a "better" FW.... and "more" aerodynamic bits on the car?
:lol:

zioture
496
Joined: 12 Feb 2013, 12:46
Location: Italy
Contact:

Re: F1 2014 Car Comparison Thread

Post

Glyn wrote:
zioture wrote:Comparison Ferrari F14T, Mercedes W05, Redbull RB10 Montecarlo
https://scontent-a-mxp.xx.fbcdn.net/hph ... 7271_o.jpg
Does this picture make it abundantly clear that the Mercedes has a "better" FW.... and "more" aerodynamic bits on the car?
For Front Wing look this pic

Image

beelsebob
85
Joined: 23 Mar 2011, 15:49
Location: Cupertino, California

Re: F1 2014 Car Comparison Thread

Post

What about it... All this picture highlights is that the various teams need their Y250 vortex in a slightly different place.

OO7
OO7
171
Joined: 06 Apr 2010, 17:49

Re: F1 2014 Car Comparison Thread

Post

zioture wrote:For Front Wing look this pic

Image
It's interesting how Red Bull have gone for maximum span on the forward most planes, whereas Mercedes have gone for a design consists of a narrower main plane, with subsequent planes getting progressively wider, to turn the flow outside of the front wheels in a more obvious/pronounced manner.

User avatar
Pierce89
60
Joined: 21 Oct 2009, 18:38

Re: F1 2014 Car Comparison Thread

Post

Blaze1 wrote:
zioture wrote:For Front Wing look this pic

http://www.newsf1.it/wp-content/uploads ... eriore.jpg
It's interesting how Red Bull have gone for maximum span on the forward most planes, whereas Mercedes have gone for a design consists of a narrower main plane, with subsequent planes getting progressively wider, to turn the flow outside of the front wheels in a more obvious/pronounced manner.
That is interesting. It seems to confirm the general consensus that as usual RB have a setup aimed at max df, whereas Merc seems more concerned with aero efficiency overall than pure df. IMHO, the on track performance also confirms this.
“To be able to actually make something is awfully nice”
Bruce McLaren on building his first McLaren racecars, 1970

“I've got to be careful what I say, but possibly to probably Juan would have had a bigger go”
Sir Frank Williams after the 2003 Canadian GP, where Ralf hesitated to pass brother M. Schumacher

User avatar
Juzh
161
Joined: 06 Oct 2012, 08:45

Re: F1 2014 Car Comparison Thread

Post

Pierce89 wrote:
Blaze1 wrote:
zioture wrote:For Front Wing look this pic

http://www.newsf1.it/wp-content/uploads ... eriore.jpg
It's interesting how Red Bull have gone for maximum span on the forward most planes, whereas Mercedes have gone for a design consists of a narrower main plane, with subsequent planes getting progressively wider, to turn the flow outside of the front wheels in a more obvious/pronounced manner.
That is interesting. It seems to confirm the general consensus that as usual RB have a setup aimed at max df, whereas Merc seems more concerned with aero efficiency overall than pure df. IMHO, the on track performance also confirms this.
RB9 was the most efficient car on the grid by far. RB had foregone max DF at no matter the cost back in 2011. RB5 and 6 were bricks indeed but then the situation changed. Merc kinda took over that role in 2013.
There's not enough data and continuity to draw any kind of conclusions for 2014 imo.

Post Reply