***Official 2010 F1 thread***

JRS said:
Yeah, you can. All the kinetic energy of that exhaust gas gets wasted without a turbo, therefore it is a recovery system.
Click to expand...

wouldnt necessarily call the exhaust kenetic energy - well much less so than KERS recycling of braking anyway imo

More than happy to agree to disagree though, I dont think turbo's will be coming back unfortunately at all - even though WIlliams is trying to force adoption of KERS for next year
 
FrankJH said:
wouldnt necessarily call the exhaust kenetic energy - well much less so than KERS recycling of braking anyway imo
Click to expand...

But there is energy there to be recovered, or they wouldn't work. And it can only be kinetic energy as it's the flow of the gas rather than its temperature that is used by the turbine.

FrankJH said:
More than happy to agree to disagree though
Click to expand...

Okie doke.

FrankJH said:
I dont think turbo's will be coming back unfortunately at all - even though WIlliams is trying to force adoption of KERS for next year
Click to expand...

Williams have been going down the even more blind alley of flywheel KERS - I can't see this ever being made safe enough for use in a racing car. I'm fully prepared to be pleasantly surprised though.

KERS in its current form makes sense for a team like Williams that is currently in the mid-field. After all, rather than being a Push-To-Overtake button it has become a Push-To-Keep-That-Guy-Behind button. And if they can keep cars behind them, then they're in with a shout of some points. It doesn't make much sense for a team like Brawn or RBR - their cars are good enough to hang around at the front without it, and not having the complication certainly allowed them to dominate the championship table this year. McLaren and Ferrari.....well, they'll have had a whole year to decide whether it's worth the compromises or not. If the FOTA agreement is torn up, I expect they'll both retain it simply to compete with each other.

Still....with car manufacturers looking at moving to smaller displacement, forced induction engines now, F1 may decide to get in on the act. And if it does, it'll be great :)
 
JRS said:
Williams have been going down the even more blind alley of flywheel KERS - I can't see this ever being made safe enough for use in a racing car. I'm fully prepared to be pleasantly surprised though.
Click to expand...

I went to a presentation by the guys of Flybrid who created the Williams system.

Tested with impact forces of up to 20g
Predicted to be safe to 80g. However, highest ever g experienced was 180g

Getting a 5kg flywheel rotating at 60'000rpm coming loose would be disastrous.
 
JRS said:
KERS in its current form makes sense for a team like Williams that is currently in the mid-field. After all, rather than being a Push-To-Overtake button it has become a Push-To-Keep-That-Guy-Behind button. And if they can keep cars behind them, then they're in with a shout of some points. It doesn't make much sense for a team like Brawn or RBR - their cars are good enough to hang around at the front without it, and not having the complication certainly allowed them to dominate the championship table this year. McLaren and Ferrari.....well, they'll have had a whole year to decide whether it's worth the compromises or not. If the FOTA agreement is torn up, I expect they'll both retain it simply to compete with each other.
Click to expand...

Or did Brawn just not go for KERS this year because of the late installation necessary for the McLaren engine ( therefore taking up more space than ideally possible, and didnt want complication of KERS - especially after blitzing the first 7 races, even incl when Red Bull won they did pretty well)

If Williams insist on using it - McLaren and Ferrari will also, which could force other leading teams to include it also (after all maybe Brawn and Red Bull dont need it so much in the race, but over quali it could be a huge disadvantage NOT to have it)

Dont know for sure ... and thanks for the correction about turbos, fully accept your point of view ;)
 
They need to reduce the amount of "dirty air" behind the cars, if they want to use a mixture of non-KERS/KERS and improve overtaking.

At the moment you can only get so close before hitting a wall and if you haven't got KERS you are knackered (as shown in Spa).
 
FrankJH said:
even though WIlliams is trying to force adoption of KERS for next year
Click to expand...

I don't reckon they are. I think they are concerned it a gentlemens agreement. They are bluffing about using it so it ends up as concrete that all the teams sign an agreement to ditch it.

The last thing they will want is for it to stay a gentlemens agreement and have a team go against it and leave them struggling even more.
 
dannyjo22 said:
I don't reckon they are. I think they are concerned it a gentlemens agreement. They are bluffing about using it so it ends up as concrete that all the teams sign an agreement to ditch it.

The last thing they will want is for it to stay a gentlemens agreement and have a team go against it and leave them struggling even more.
Click to expand...

The Renault engine seems to be better on average than the Toyota, so they may not struggle as badly (pure guess mind you) ;)
 
Dutch Guy said:
Even less aero/diffusers, fatter slicks and more powerful engines and cars free to use compounds.
Click to expand...

How about *gasp* bringing ground effect back, from what I've read you get lots of downforce for practically no dirty air, the current F2 cars use it to good effect.

edit: and if you were watching FP2 Jackie Stewart's idea of poorer brake compounds is interesting, greater braking distance means more leeway for outbreaking other people - however - you then run the risk of the "pinnacle of motorsport" using worse brakes than its feeder series.
 
philjohn said:
How about *gasp* bringing ground effect back, from what I've read you get lots of downforce for practically no dirty air, the current F2 cars use it to good effect.

edit: and if you were watching FP2 Jackie Stewart's idea of poorer brake compounds is interesting, greater braking distance means more leeway for outbreaking other people - however - you then run the risk of the "pinnacle of motorsport" using worse brakes than its feeder series.
Click to expand...


You could do what JS said, but I think they should bring back manual shift gear box.
 
philjohn said:
How about *gasp* bringing ground effect back, from what I've read you get lots of downforce for practically no dirty air, the current F2 cars use it to good effect.

edit: and if you were watching FP2 Jackie Stewart's idea of poorer brake compounds is interesting, greater braking distance means more leeway for outbreaking other people - however - you then run the risk of the "pinnacle of motorsport" using worse brakes than its feeder series.
Click to expand...

I've mentioned bringing back ground effect a few times to mates.
I'd love it to be back as the main producer of downforce - with wings just used for tweaking (and the fact the modern cars would look very weird without them!) I'd love to see Monza style wings all year around :)

Weaker brakes would also be good, so what if it means it will be slightly below GP2 in terms of pinnacle of technology in brakes. The Engines, aero and drivers will still be pinnacle :p
Anyway you can hardly say F1 is the pinnacle of motorsport excitement with the current lack of overtaking xD
 
JRS said:
No, it [2007] wasn't. Far too many botched stewards decisions, far too much off-track politics, not enough serious action to forgive the first two.
Click to expand...

Sorry JRS, but 2007 was a legendary season. We got to see the reigning World Champion and probably the best driver in F1 (Alonso), move to a new team where he met, arguably, the most talented and exciting driver in F1 (Hamilton), in a car that was super competitive.

Had 2007 not happened, the prospect of Alonso driving alongside Hamilton would, at this moment in time, have most F1 fans salivating.

I would though, like you to give me a few seasons in F1, which you think rank high up.
 
Stormrider said:
Latest new rumour: Renault to quit and the team to be bought out by Prodrive.

http://www.racecar-engineering.com/news/cars/398615/rumour-renault-to-quit-formula-1.html

Wonder whether they would stay in as an engine supplier. If not having cosworth back in is looking like a well timed move.

At any rate, if this does happen then spygate has indirectly had the effect everyones been on about - Renault leaving and being bought out.
Click to expand...

I would like to see Prodrive back in, but to have so many teams with one engine is ridiculous imo - 4 new teams incl Prodrive and Williams all using the same engine, nearly half the grid (are we back to two series in one idea?)

Does that mean Red Bull are going to be allowed McLaren - or might a Ferrari supply become available

( I cant imagine Renault being bought out but still supplying engines - if they do leave then that would be great, but I thought I remembered from ages ago Martin or someone commenting that a top level engine supply without a team doesnt make economic sense......I guess if you can supply three or four teams thats less likely but I dont know the cost of a supply compared to how much it costs to build and tweak year to year etc)
 
FrankJH said:
I would like to see Prodrive back in, but to have so many teams with one engine is ridiculous imo - 4 new teams incl Prodrive and Williams all using the same engine, nearly half the grid (are we back to two series in one idea?)

Does that mean Red Bull are going to be allowed McLaren - or might a Ferrari supply become available
Click to expand...

With the manufacturers slowly leaving and the freeze on engine development it seems like a natural progression. The manufacturers want to use motorsport to develop their tech not produce standard parts.
I guess mercedes are quite happy since they are getting great coverage this year - Brawn's rise from the ashes, first engine to win 3 races, superb KERs system, Force India moving to the front, resurgance of Hamilton.

Really need Ferrari and Toyota to supply 3 teams, assuming Toyota stay in.

FrankJH said:
( I cant imagine Renault being bought out but still supplying engines - if they do leave then that would be great, but I thought I remembered from ages ago Martin or someone commenting that a top level engine supply without a team doesnt make economic sense......I guess if you can supply three or four teams thats less likely but I dont know the cost of a supply compared to how much it costs to build and tweak year to year etc)
Click to expand...

Renault seem to be reassuring that they want to stay in, but they are going to need some sponsership. Campos has already said its difficult since sponsers don't want to be in the position ING were in with the scandal.

As for engine supplies, I think the more teams you supply the cheaper it gets. That was in effect what Cosworth said - they needed minimum 4 teams to take up an engine supply to be able to charge 5 million EU a season.
 
spoonz said:
Teflonso to Ferrari
Click to expand...

Alonso to Ferrari is about the worst kept secret in F1.
Still its good for his move to be announced asap, just so other drivers can sort out their contracts.

Also whats with "Teflonso"? Have I missed something?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom