F1technical.net

bhallg2k wrote:I saw this in another forum. It was posted before the launch of any 2012 car.

Thank goodness something is being done in this arena. Beyond the safety aspects, to me, the high noses have been an aesthetic abomination and any lowering of them can only improve the looks of the cars.

ask him how that worked out

Lowering the nose tip is what needs to be done (although personally I don't mind the look of the high nose) The new rules have almost no practical effect on nose tip height since most teams had nose tips below the new limit anyway.

gold333 wrote:...
PS It's funny how the Marlboro livery always looks red and white on old camera's where in reality its fluorescent orange and white.

It's not 'funny', the color was chosen for behaving that way. The TV is king.

What needs to be done is a mandated front bulkhead height. if they lower that enough, the cars will just have to be low nosed. The 1st rules they put in for 2012 was that the front bulkhead would be at 550mm. However they then ammended it to the rule we now have, which causes the ugly cars. Their first draft would have worked.

jordangp wrote:What needs to be done is a mandated front bulkhead height. if they lower that enough, the cars will just have to be low nosed. The 1st rules they put in for 2012 was that the front bulkhead would be at 550mm. However they then ammended it to the rule we now have, which causes the ugly cars. Their first draft would have worked.

Wonder if Mclaren got so far along with their car design with the bulkhead at 550 as that's almost spot on where it is on their car now.

bhallg2k wrote:I saw this in another forum. It was posted before the launch of any 2012 car.

Thank goodness something is being done in this arena. Beyond the safety aspects, to me, the high noses have been an aesthetic abomination and any lowering of them can only improve the looks of the cars.

Whoever said that meant if it is done right. I.e. lowering of the entire nose. Not some arbitrary amount at an arbitrary point infront of the axle and nowhere else like we have in 2012.

Honestly I think few people would think the high nose cars look better than something like this.

Just asking this: Wonder how easy/difficult it is to quickly change the nose during a pitstop with these new noses

I know that posting same post in two threads is a no-no, but this will finally sort out confusion over stepped noses, how can Mclaren avoid not to have it, and other similar questions.

People, have mixed min and max height regulations.

FIA wrote:15.4.4

The maximum height of the survival cell between the lines A-A and B-B is 625mm above the reference plane.

The minimum height of the survival cell between the lines B-B and C-C is 550mm.

So, car can have fully horizontal chassis and nose at 550mm and no stepped nose, or B-B at 625 which is max. but dropping towards front with A-A at 550, and again no stepped nose. That is how Mclaren has done it. Their chassis has continuous declination towards front end, and it continues at same angle further down the nose.

Maybe my post is not quite about the nose regulations but in my opinion the rules that are equally harming to the looks of the F1 car are those concerning the minimal dimensions of the engine cover. This year Williams looks stupid with that extremely tight back with the triangle fin protruding from it.

piast9 wrote:Maybe my post is not quite about the nose regulations but in my opinion the rules that are equally harming to the looks of the F1 car are those concerning the minimal dimensions of the engine cover. This year Williams looks stupid with that extremely tight back with the triangle fin protruding from it.

Are you sure? I think the Williams rear end looked great! Certainly better than a sharp 45 degree incline to the bulkhead.

I don't understand why we still have the 'big' front wings. They were introduced to help overtaking with moveable aero, but that experiment failed. We can turn the clock back to pre 2009 front ends, that not only looked a lot better than what we have on the grid now, it would also end the flexi wings we have seen in recent seasons in one go.

Shaddock wrote:I don't understand why we still have the 'big' front wings. They were introduced to help overtaking with moveable aero, but that experiment failed. We can turn the clock back to pre 2009 front ends, that not only looked a lot better than what we have on the grid now, it would also end the flexi wings we have seen in recent seasons in one go.

Agreed. The most powerful aerodynamic device on the car is also the one most sensitive to the wake of the car in front, thus making it harder to overtake. Madness, especially considering the complexity of the darn things.

Massive ground affect and skinny wings please! Wasn't this the plan anyway in the recent rules shake up proposals but the teams backed out because it would mean expensive re-design of practically everything?

they cited that as the reasoning behind it.

the 2009 regulation changes had a significant affect on the aero of the car, and how it was exploited.

In reality teams will spend every penny designing a car they can, be it a total rehash of design, or infinitesimal modifications of a previous car.

=D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D>

(Now that I've seen the Mercedes, I've completely made up my mind on this subject. As such, I offer this hearty applause in honor of a regulation that has accomplished absolutely nothing except to make F1 cars even uglier than they were before. Bravo.)

gold333 wrote: PS It's funny how the Marlboro livery always looks red and white on old camera's where in reality its fluorescent orange and white.

The paint was florescent so it would be the proper red in photos and on TV.