Mchamilton wrote: ↑
Tue Apr 05, 2022 4:18 pm
yallkok wrote: ↑
Tue Apr 05, 2022 11:51 am
Vanja #66 wrote: ↑
Tue Apr 05, 2022 11:18 am
Why would tyre aerodynamic drag influence tyre degradation?
I believe that greater resistance on the rear wheels (which contribute approximately 20% of total) implies a lower aerodynamic efficiency which usually translates into less traction and on average greater consumption of the wheels and an average greater consumption (SF1000).
https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/energ ... -05183.pdf
Why does a lower aerodynamic efficiency lead to less traction? You can have less efficiency and the same downforce. Which is quite probably the mercedes case as theyre not far behind in the corners, yet miles behind in the straight.. Which points to just being less efficient
I believe that a worse aerodynamic efficiency at the rear with the same load of the competitors means a higher consumption of the rear tires given by an insufficient incidence of the rear wing.
To make up for this inefficiency you need to have more rear wings and a super engine.
Currently the F1-75 generates a high vertical load, but not with the bottom as the RB does.
The RB, in fact, is faster on the forehand, but it has a higher consumption than the SF both for the weight and for a greater Drag which forces it to have a more discharged rear wing.
With the optimization of the bottom of the car and the maximum available power, I believe that the F1-75 is on average 1 second faster than its competitors.
The next GPs will tell if I'm wrong or not