Technology originated from F-1

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.

Post Sun Feb 26, 2012 8:00 am

inerters are only beneficial on light cars with very stiff suspension and relatively tall sidewalls.
Joined: 16 Oct 2010

Post Sun Feb 26, 2012 8:17 am

Just_a_fan wrote:
Pierce89 wrote:I think its fair to say F1's advances in electronic micro manipulation of every aspect of performance has greatly benefitted road cars.

It would be nice to say that, yes. But is there any evidence that it has happened? Need to remember that F1 works to a set of rules that are extremely limiting where electronic control systems are concerned. This is likely to mean that the resultant systems are not as advanced as their roadcar cousins.

whoah there. Up until 2008 f1 had extremely advanced traction control. The top teams went so far as to develop their own TC algorithms. The current best road TC(Ferrari) is based off of f1 TC algorithms(at least that was the propaganda for Ferrari's F1-trac).
But anyways, also their gearboxes require extremely complicated computer control to shift as fast as they do without spitting gears through the driver's torso.
“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
Joined: 21 Oct 2009

Post Sun Feb 26, 2012 11:31 am

But they are still refinements of existing non-F1 technology.

Although carbon fibre itself was developed outside of F1, I wonder if we might argue that carbon tub chassis ate F1 'tech' that moved to road cars? The F1 road car had a full carbon chassis. There was a Lambo prototype road car before that. Both post-date the MP4-1 I think.

The use of carbon is increasing in road cars although really only in supercars (and the occasional marketing / style thing like the M3's carbon roof (sold as a way of lowering CoG but probably does very little in reality)).

Even carbon tub use is tenuous IMO.
Joined: 31 Jan 2010

Post Fri Aug 17, 2012 2:04 pm

Mod edit - post moved from Merc 2012 thread.

bhallg2k wrote:
SeijaKessen wrote:F1 has nothing in common with road cars, and never will.


Don't be so hasty.


I have to get one of these.
Joined: 8 Jan 2012
Location: USA

Post Fri Aug 17, 2012 2:11 pm

wunderkind wrote:
Wow! And I once saw a drawing by Leonardo da Vinci that resembled a helicopter from a few centuries ago.

Now wunderkind, just because you weren't aware of the Buick MaxTrac system, doesn't mean my point is any less valid.

Your analogy is of no real value since it didn't take centuries for it to show up in F1.

Keep in mind, just because the Buick traction control was rudimentary, does not take away from the fact that it existed first.

Why after all, even though active suspension would be perfected by the Williams FW14, it doesn't change the fact that Lotus did it first, no matter how much improvement was needed.

Sorry to have pointed out something that is true.
Joined: 8 Jan 2012
Location: USA

Post Fri Aug 17, 2012 4:19 pm

I understood that the Williams suspension system wasn't truly active whereas the Lotus system was. But the Williams system was definitely the one that brought results.
Joined: 31 Jan 2010


Return to General chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bauc, Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 20 guests