Williams/Virgin behind EBD off throttle ban.

[beelsebob]

I would have almost expected Merc to be fine... until CW said that he thought Merc were gaining the most from it.

[axle]

From what I've read I could well believe that the FIA are behind the ban.

They are p1ssed at the teams trying to reject their more economical 1.6L Turbo format..whilst they are actively bragging (in Renaults case) about being able to waste fuel in the corners to power a EBD.

Wasting fuel is a real bug bear of the FIA, as Whiting said they've been monitoring the EBD development and it's getting more and more extreme.

It's not clear cut who's ultimately had a word, it could have been the TWG...but yes obviously the teams that don't have it are all potentially the complainents too.

Either way does it matter who's complained? Do we need EBD's to improve the show? No.

[strad]

What does it matter WHO?

[Ferraripilot]

Would mercedes be legit as is? Now we know virgin and Williams were behind this, it will have a very realand unintended benefit on mercedes if that's the case.

MB would undoubtedly benefit from this as I believe they are the quickest team not using an exhaust arrangement as those which are contended at the moment. Their car does not rely so much on off-throttle mapping as others.

That being said, I wouldn't be surprised if teams running the EBD are part of the contenders in this case simply because of how much benefit Red Bull is yielding from the off-throttle mapping compared to their own. All the Mercedes powered teams (namely Mclaren) could certainly have a beef with it considering how unpredictable the exhaust flow is compared to the Renault unit. So they could be viewing it as a necessary setback simply to get Red Bull out of the stratosphere.

[andrew]

Andrew, baseless? Wild assumptions?

Auto motor und Sport.

All we have is a reporters claim. Do they say where they got their information from?

[lebesset]

scanning through all this it seems that charlie thinks this is illegal , movable aero and all that
but it will not be for him as race director to decide , it will be passed along the line ,if , as he is quoted as saying , someone complains

so where would it go next ...the stewards ?
sorry if I have missed anything , but this thread got big quite fast

[Rob01]

Yes, the stewards. A tough and costly rule change when it happens for the teams. Probably due to the teams shooting down the new engine formula.

[ecapox]

let me understand this:

A driver lifting off the pedal which the computer compensates and automatically applies a certain throttle percentage for "blow through" exhaust. Illegal. Moveable aero.

A driver putting the back of his hand against a hole to modify the flow of air and direct it over the rear wing to stall it. Legal. NOT moveable aero.

Makes no sense.

[beelsebob]

let me understand this:

A driver lifting off the pedal which the computer compensates and automatically applies a certain throttle percentage for "blow through" exhaust. Illegal. Moveable aero.

A driver putting the back of his hand against a hole to modify the flow of air and direct it over the rear wing to stall it. Legal. NOT moveable aero.

Makes no sense.

The critical difference in both cases I believe is the primary purpose of the device.

When a driver puts his hand over a hole to block flow, the primary purpose is to modify the aerodynamics.
When an engine map blows air through the exhaust without driving the car forwards, the primary purpose is to modify the aerodynamics.
When a driver pushes the throttle pedal the primary purpose is to move the car forwards.

That's the key distinction.

[Ferraripilot]

Whiting specifically mentioned an exhaust manifold being present to vent exhaust gases. Sure, the gases can be used fine, but there is no sense in creating unecessary exhaust gases all in the name of aero and downforce. He's stating that's not what the manifold is designed for. Makes sense

[ecapox]

The critical difference in both cases I believe is the primary purpose of the device.

When a driver puts his hand over a hole to block flow, the primary purpose is to modify the aerodynamics.

When an engine map blows air through the exhaust without driving the car forwards, the primary purpose is to modify the aerodynamics.

You just said that both are for modifying the aerodynamics, although one is potentially illegal while the other was a-ok.

[beelsebob]

The critical difference in both cases I believe is the primary purpose of the device.

When a driver puts his hand over a hole to block flow, the primary purpose is to modify the aerodynamics.

When an engine map blows air through the exhaust without driving the car forwards, the primary purpose is to modify the aerodynamics.

You just said that both are for modifying the aerodynamics, although one is potentially illegal while the other was a-ok.

On the contrary, both are on the illegal side of the line (at least that's what whiting is saying) – it's just taking a bit of clarifying to convince everyone.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Ted Kravitz has now also confirmed during BBC's FP 3 show it was Williams who sought clarification.

"We learned yesterday evening that it was Williams who wanted clarification, strange as they run an EBD themselves"

I think there is no doubt now.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Adding to that,

It appears Virgin and Hispania are going to revert to FIA approved systems for the race. Whats the common denominator? Cosworth of course.

[Richard]

.... and we've just heard Virgin say that they are using the old exhaust because it works for them and they have no intention to appeal.