USF1 -- F1's All-American Challenger

[donskar]

I much rather roll myself in the misery of the US auto industry. You know the feeling don, when you've got a cold and meet someone with the flu, you feel so much better!

But seriously, I have never ever criticized "USF1" for being American. But crap is crap, no matter where from.

=D> =D> =D>
Well said! Good to see we can all express opinions -- however sharp -- and still maintain a sense of humor!

Let's all hope the 2010 season will see LOTS of competitive new cars, colorful ersonalities, and different winners. I'll even be OK if Ferrari does not win EVERY race.

[Pandamasque]

Some members here don't seem to realize that 'the-USF1-haters', or whatever we've been called here, wouldn't have any problems with the lack of effort from USF1 to provide info/updates from USF1. What we find quite comic is the efforts they actually put into creating news out of nothing, the staged interviews, driver gossip (you know Danica Patrick, Dale Earnhardt jr., Phil Hill and other possible candidates) and things like that. There's way too much talk from them with seemingly very little behind it.

However I understand that it takes quite a bit more sense of humour to laugh at something close to your heart.

[xpensive]

Seriously, I got most of my initial MSc training from UW and a design-enginering office in Bellevue, Wa, in the mid 80s.
I spent two years as Director of development for a machine-building company in Penna in the 90s, I still drive a Ford
Thunderbird and one of my favourite mistresses is American. I love Americans!

Australians on the other hand...

[djos]

Firstly, I find a nationalistic approach to F1 completely out of today's context, I thought Prost GP was the last of that.

Secondly, I find absolutely nothing technical to be xcited about in this USF1, a "Technical director" who worked briefly with two minnows in F1 twenty years ago, a "generic" tub without even the cut-outs for a proper DDD that scarbs mentioned,
a 6000-series Aluminium suspensionbracket, H-section wishbones with ball-joints and a pathetically small autoclave?

Mate, they are having a crack at it, they know they have a virtually impossible mountain to climb but they are putting their nose to the grindstone and having a serious go anyway despite that fact they will be back-markers - what's not to like about that?

Btw, When did Windsor ever say he was designing the car? Show me a quote, I bet you cant and yet you continue to hang crap on him for trying to be technical!

[Richard]

....

Thanks Scarbs. Some good pointers to the design development for the chassis. Seems they are looking for solid simple construction, ie the Al bulkhead for the suspension mounts. I guess that sort of thing wouldn't hamper performance other than a little more weight, but saves a lot on time/cost???

[madtown77]

Mate, they are having a crack at it, they know they have a virtually impossible mountain to climb but they are putting their nose to the grindstone and having a serious go anyway despite that fact they will be back-markers - what's not to like about that?

Here here. I certainly have a lot more respect for teams like Virgin and USF1 than Campos, who are getting their chassis from Dallara. At least they are making a ground up effort all on their own, which should pay big dividends in the long run. I'm sure the first year they will be able to compete with all the other rookies and hopefully take 9th place in the championship.

The site is a bit amateurish (Virgin Racing is MUCH cooler!) but I think that it will become more developed over time with the more youtube content that they produce. You doubters wanted something well here is a chassis and components being made. Think they are real yet?

It looks like they will have a rolling car fairly soon and would (unlike Lotus for example) be able to show their car at the end of January; where and when we will see.

All that being said, as much as I dislike xpensive's comments in general, I don't think he has been very anti-American. He is anti-Anderson/Windsor and is letting that get the better of his opinions on the TEAM and THEIR work. Maybe Windsor is a moron technically but he isn't working to design and manufacture the car. In any case I'm sure he is learning a lot.

As far as Anderson goes, just because he hasn't been the technical director at Ferrari or Mclaren doesn't mean the man doesn't know his cars. Look at the rest of his resume for that. Everyone starts somewhere and at least he has the guts to put his reputation on the line in what some think is a foolish effort.

[madtown77]

Just as a quick note about the name "US F1 Team".

On the F1 website under teams it shows only "US". Could it be that the way the team circumvented The Troll was simply to not use "F1" in their official entry name?

[xpensive]

After that video, I kinda hoped they had not been for real, when I hate to see people making fools of themselves.

This have all the ingredients to become another 1997 MasterCard-Lola effort, I'm afraid.

[marcush.]

the question is :will a unsophistic car in terms of ideas be any cheaper in build or
maintainance or getting up to speed ?
Definitely not at least not necessarily.
Will it make sense for a bunch of newbies putting their toes into the sharkbassin first time to look for the tenth or hundreth of a second? definitevely no as well.
They will be good advised to have a simple effective proven design ,easy to understand and maximise performance.It may lack in terms of ultimate pace put seriously none of the newcomers can expect to even dig deep into a 2 seconds per lap
minus compared to the top 4 teams ;if they quickly get on top of their gun it might prove useful when others run up blind alleys...
Still I think for a new /low budget team it would really make sense to build the car
to suit 2 or 3 events perfectly and set highlights there -so possibly make a big compromise in tank volume but be upo there to grab points in rain situations + montecarlo and other low fuel consumption races for example.
Or duplicate the Force india trick and go for low drag low downforce layout and learn how to make the most of it to harvest points in Monza and SPA..

[JoeE]

Ok I was giving usgp a chance but am losing that by every second. I don t get what there trying to achive other than put a bad name on yet another us team.

I want these new teams to be on the grid and at least on the pace. I don't want to see a 2 tier race where te top teams are 3/4 secs faster over a race. I want everyone in there scrapping for points but I am starting to think usgp isnt even going to make the grid

best off luck if they do but it's not lookin good

[WhiteBlue]

I don't want to see a 2 tier race where te top teams are 3/4 secs faster over a race.

Do you have any idea what kind of lap differences were common when we had full grids? Last year McLaren started the season with more than a second down on Brawn. If the new teams are 3 or 4 s behind it isn't anything to be concerned with.

They are there to learn the ropes and prepare for the next year when the resources are going to be more equalised.

[xpensive]

*

In the early 90s, teams like USF1 were common, why the FIA had to introduce the "107% rule" in 1996, every car had to be within 107% of the pole-time, to avoid embarassment. Quote;
FIA President Max Mosley said that "any small team which is properly organised will be able to get within the the 107 per cent margin".[4] The sport's commercial rights holder, Bernie Ecclestone, agreed with this sentiment, saying in an interview that "Formula 1 is the best. And we don't need anything in it that isn't the best."

This rule was abolished in 2002, but I'm afraid MrT will have reasons to re-introduce it next year.

[Jersey Tom]

In the early 90s, teams like USF1 were common, why the FIA had to introduce the "107% rule" in 1996, every car had to be within 107% of the pole-time, to avoid embarassment. Quote;
FIA President Max Mosley said that "any small team which is properly organised will be able to get within the the 107 per cent margin".[4] The sport's commercial rights holder, Bernie Ecclestone, agreed with this sentiment, saying in an interview that "Formula 1 is the best. And we don't need anything in it that isn't the best."

This rule was abolished in 2002, but I'm afraid MrT will have reasons to re-introduce it next year.

When none of the other teams can come close to 107% of USGPE's blazing fast times...

o snap

[Pandamasque]

Don't forget this is one of the teams that were supposed to run with AWD, KERS and active front and rear aero under budget caps.

[xpensive]

*