The Testing and How will the cars look in 2009 Thread

Not necessarily. More weight on the rear can also mean more centrifugal force, meaning the car will actually oversteer more, especially in corners which have quick changes of direction.

Centripedal force, Nick, centripedal . (Or centripetal :P)

I don't think the cars will oversteer more, more weight in the back... we'll see what inertia has to say, hehe. Definitely will have to be careful with weight transfer and brake bias to avoid lock-ups and have the rear shoot out. The only way I see your oversteer is by losing the rear, Nick

It looks not too bad !

The major worry about the weight of the KERS, is that it will make movable ballast much less effective.

I think that might have been one of the key reasons Williams chose the flywheel method.. I could be wrong though.

saybe someone will completely change the approach to F1 design and will place KERS in the nose.

---

The teams are aiming to place the KERS behind the driver, so pretty close to the Centre of Mass as to reduce its effects on the car handling.

If the tyres are similar to this year in characteristics, ie prefer alot more weight at the front, then I guess the option to use KERS will be one looked at very closley. But like the article says, all depends on what the teams find this winter.

Those pictures make the nose look way too long. I know its the right size, its just the added effect of the front wing just makes the car look so dis-proportionate. Though I think as someone said on here (??) the OWG have taken what is a very logical approach to the new aero rules. Made the front largest and the rear smallest.

I still wonder what kind of difference the front wing width will make being in such close proximity to the tyres. No idea on the details of the rules but if the teams are allowed vortex inducing elements around the endplate area then we could see some interesting peices attatched, kinda like the endplates of the early 90's.

---

"Trulli was slowing down like he wanted to have a picnic" LOL

I think those two pictures are the best representation of what the 2009 cars will look like, or at least a good example of what a FW30B will probably look like in winter testing.

Personally I don't think look as shocking as the Jerez car did... but that only had part of the new rear end... so it didn't really fit with the whole concept.

One small concern I have is... that it's going to be much easier to lose a front wing on a kerb or during a botched overtaking move. Bad news for Nico!

I love the lack of bardgeboards too

Thanks for correcting me, Gui. I was never really good at physics. And having to translate it to English doesn't make it any better

You're welcome :P.

If there's this weight and balance problem, I can see some teams running heavy/strong nose parts so the wing doesn't break off as easily. At least Williams should look into that

Nice frontwing,it can also clean the road on a snowy day.

Website | Blog | Twitter | CTDP: Site Blog Twitter

frontwing would look good IF the car itself would be wider.. Rearwing looks (still) like bad joke!

Kimi, so, Massa Fernando Sebastian is faster than you. Can you confirm you understood that message?

What they should do then... is just roll out the 1997 cars.

This would actually be awesome because it would mean Williams would have the fastest car again :chee

IMO the rear wing looks awful and makes the whole car look like a cheap toy. For the front wing, it would look good if the cars would be wider (like in 1997), now it looks too big and together with the too small rear wing makes the whole car look strange.

---

I thought I heard the cars were supposed to be 200cm wide again (like 97) instead of the current 180cm.

Is this not going ahead?

---

2013 - Nando must come through..

Nope. Its not been mentioned in any of the regulations. Wonder why it was scrapped?

---

"Trulli was slowing down like he wanted to have a picnic" LOL

GOD! It gets worse and worse. Only good thing about next year is slicks

casabonka Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I thought I heard the cars were supposed to be
> 200cm wide again (like 97) instead of the current
> 180cm.
>
> Is this not going ahead?


Logic is same as with rearwing.. Car was meant to have also wider tires (huge space beetween tires and wing wud be filled), BUT it simply doesnt have! Design is complete as an aeroplane without wings.

Kimi, so, Massa Fernando Sebastian is faster than you. Can you confirm you understood that message?

Can you imagine how fast a wider car with huge fat slicks would go today?

You're all complaining because there's not enough mechanical grip, but if you go for more for aesthetic purposes, you'd lose out completely as the tyres would have to be rock hard to keep speed to an even reasonable level.

Scanned from Autosport.



-----------------------------------------------

"When you begin in this sport you are given a chequebook. Every time you have a big one you must write a check to the angels. The trick is to finish your career before you empty the chequebook".