Motorsports Thread

[Deleted member 1258]

A whole day of testing up in smoke.
They only did 12 laps.

A brake fire that melted part of the suspension.

 

[Beebo]

Presumably testing is within the price cap

I presume the driver’s allocation of engines and gearboxes isn’t included in testing

 

[icowden]

I presume the driver’s allocation of engines and gearboxes isn’t included in testing

Testing is testing - I think they can use whatever parts they want, but because of the cost cap, they will only have so many engines / gearboxes / DRS units etc built that they can use. They can only use 3 engines and gearboxes per car across the season, so it will be about their cost and what else can be afforded under the budget.

 

[icowden]

So testing over...

How much do we thing Mercedes are sandbagging and Red Bull boasting...
Are Ferrari making a comeback?

 

[Bonefish Blues]

Merc are looking like it's a boom or bust design. Interesting to see which one it is!

 

[FishFright]

So testing over...

How much do we thing Mercedes are sandbagging and Red Bull boasting...
Are Ferrari making a comeback?

For the first time for ages I think Mercedes aren't sandbagging. It doesn't look aero stable , not just the porpoising, plus the front end looks erratic at low speed. Usually they just run a conservative programme at the pre season tests so look a little slower than others.

I have no doubt they will sort it out very quickly but will that cost them dear at the tail end of the season with too few resources available?

 

[figbat]

Maybe they’ll bring their more conventional car to the season opener? The final RBB run with significantly updated aero seemed to be a big statement. Nothing like a massive concept change to shake the field up a bit!

 

[Deleted member 1258]

So testing over...

How much do we thing Mercedes are sandbagging and Red Bull boasting...
Are Ferrari making a comeback?

We'll know the answer at the first race weekend.

 

[icowden]

We'll know the answer at the first race weekend.

Well that's no fun. Don't you know that the "in" thing is to speculate without any discernible evidence?

 

[Deleted member 1258]

Well that's no fun. Don't you know that the "in" thing is to speculate without any discernible evidence?

I stopped doing that about twenty years ago.

 

[Deleted member 26715]

Well that's no fun. Don't you know that the "in" thing is to speculate without any discernible evidence?

In the spirit of this, the drivers will be demanding changes if the techies can't dial out the porpoising, no way they can race if that continues.

 

[Reynard]

In the spirit of this, the drivers will be demanding changes if the techies can't dial out the porpoising, no way they can race if that continues.

Maybe we should stick the poor little cherubs in some turbo-era (early / mid 1980s) cars and see how they cope...

 

[icowden]

That I think is one of the issues with the current F1, why there are only 4 engine manufacturers on the grid, the relevance of F1 to the road going cars is tenuous. Look what happened in the 80/90's when techs were allowed to dream, we go active suspension, anti-lock brakes, all now standard on many cars.

I think that's covered in the F1 technical roadmap which is looking much more electrical for the 2026 regs. Lets face it, I can't see Renault sticking around much longer, and even Mercedes must be starting to think ICE is at the end of the road as they invest in their EVs.

Maybe we'll get F1 Tesla at some point... (although presumably no driver... )

 

[Reynard]

That I think is one of the issues with the current F1, why there are only 4 engine manufacturers on the grid, the relevance of F1 to the road going cars is tenuous. Look what happened in the 80/90's when techs were allowed to dream, we go active suspension, anti-lock brakes, all now standard on many cars.

Don't forget the flappy paddle gearshift... You can thank John Barnard for that one - courtesy of the late 80s trend for narrow noses.

Funny you should mention engines. Even with the current regs, there's been big steps forward on efficiency and eco / synthetic fuels - which will filter down. EV have their own separate issues in terms of how green and practical they actually are, but this isn't the place to discuss them.

I had an interesting discussion with my historian friend the other night about F1 engines. More specifically about the ones that haven't actually won an F1 race. When you flip that debate through 180 degrees, there are actually very few really successful engines, but those that are truly successful do require a lot of time and investment.

Yamaha, Porsche, Peugeot and Lamborghini amongst others have all slunk off with egg on their faces after attempting limited-budget programmes. And never mind the attempt at building a W12...

 

[matticus]

Here's some reading:

F1 statement on sustainability
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/...ro-carbon-by-2030.5IaX2AZHyy7jqxl6wra6CZ.html

<SNIP...>

Yes, F1 is making a lot of green statements. That is why I mentioned the introduction of new chemicals upthread; it seems contrary to the message they are promoting. (I know not how much this is just greenwash!)

And yes, some fans will travel around the world to see Grands Prix. Those *tend* to be the very wealthy ones, and in the minority. I've been to Silverstone three times because it is in the UK. I think that's probably a fairly representative scenario.

This is an interesting area:
I haven't seen a proper analysis*, but 100,000s of fans drive to most races (generally from just a 150-mile radius, at a rough guess. But lots drive from Finland to Hungary, or UK to Monaco ...)
How does their carbon footprint compare to the racing cars? Or the planes carrying those cars around the world? I don't know, but I suspect the driving fans are not insignificant!


*This is my bible on similar matters:
https://g.co/kgs/z4NyT4