The FOZ wrote:
Oh Ringo...you and your bendy logic.
1. Value as a concept is irrelevant in exercises of practicality. Something that works only some of the time is by it's very nature unbalancing, as it produces more varied situations for the driver to anticipate and adapt to. There's a reason off-throttle blowing is so popular...it produces consistent effect! The team that figures out how to smooth out KERS harvesting to not mess with brake balance is going to have an advantage, too!
You are talking philosophy here. I am talking science. It's not about driver adaptation at all. The thing simply doesn't work as low speeds.
2. Ahead of it's time, inadequacy of LRGP engineers, say what you want...front and side exit exhausts didn't perform, and there was a simpler solution out there that worked globally.
Yes there were limitations on the design. It's like a helicopter, while the rear blown diffuser is a baloon. 2 different concpets, one more complicated, but they were intended to do the same thing. Which one is harder to manipulate, a balloon or helicopter?
3. Your talk about direction relative to the car's direction is sensible...but coming to the conclusion that it's a shortcoming of engineering that they can't manipulate exhaust flow direction through a fixed aperture of fixed dimension in fixed position while airflow around it changes...is bunk. This is fundamental fluid behavior, I don't think that can be changed.
What do you mean by bunk?
You don't think it can, but you don't know. I am sure i mentioned technological limitation. It can't be done now, but you can't rule it out.
It's a simple fact that the system has a shortcoming. It was an oversight, regardless of the effort the engineers put in.