???? Sorry, zac, I don't really understand your response...To use your own words, YOU "haven't given any evidence to prove" otherwise. I haven't either, but I'm just defending 'jwielage.' Technical Directors have said that the 2009 cars will look a lot different, and there are SO many changes for next year. zac, do you deny that the 2009 cars will be revolutions instead of evolutions? Personally, I think that the changes in regs in and of themselves are a revolution--not an evolution. I'm sorry zac, but your response is utterly useless--it serves no purpose. And if you're going to dish it out, are you ready to take it? In other words, have you never, ever, posted something that was not backed by factual information? C'mon. Nothin against ya dude, but it just seemed a little uncalled for...Perhaps ogami can shed some light--he seems to be very good with the 2009 regs.
Yeah sorry I didn't mean it to sound like a personal attack, sorry jwielage.
But what I am trying to say is that while downforce is decreased (and indications are that the 50% value is quite optimistic) we should look for evidence from team designers or anything that the core values of the car are going to need to be revolutionalised.
The kind of thing I am talking about would be for example the change of track width and change of tyres in 1998 (http://www.grandprix.com/ft/ft00289.html
). This caused the balance of the car to be changed by disrupting the accepted track:wheelbase ratios and that affected aerodynamics too. Teams that went evolutionary that year made a mistake.
Originally the big slick rear tyres for 2009 might have caused a bit of a balance chaneg in grip, weight distribution and aero drag but they seem to have abandoned that so all 4 tyres will be the same size as they are now. The track width change for 2009 has, to my knowledge, been abandoned too. That would have stuffed everything up like in 1998. The new diffuser changes might upset the aerodynamic balance a bit but probably not as much as the other two rules I mentioned. So no surprises why those rules were dropped first!
KERS is looking shaky.
See what I'm getting at? None of the tech directors are making noises about fundamental changes to the balance of the car, then putting the rule changes in historical context we see there's not yet any real evidence that everyone's design will need to be revolutionary. At the moment we've just got some less downforce and a bit more grip from tyres the same size.
I'm still open to seeing some evidence though. In the meantime I think f1t is more intelligent than to just have idle speculation.
Perhaps Honda need some revolution as their chassis of the last two years have been poor but that's nothing to do with the rule changes!
No good turn goes unpunished.