Welcome to the era of the ugliest F1 cars in history.
Discussion
patmahe said:
Tres_Bien said:
Don't forget the Macca Mp4/10
Beaten with ugly stick so hard it makes my eyes bleed...
Compared with the pic of the new Mclaren this looks simple and elegant, but then this never won races. Beaten with ugly stick so hard it makes my eyes bleed...
Edited by Tres_Bien on Friday 11th January 10:44
stephen300o said:
Menacing? it looks like a kids go cart with a shelf
I'm scared of shelving 
Naah, I think it looks cool, with an aggressive stance. Each to their own.
Like I say I don't mind the current crop of cars really, function over form.
That MP4/10 was neither. Or the williams.
stephen300o said:
patmahe said:
Tres_Bien said:
Don't forget the Macca Mp4/10
Beaten with ugly stick so hard it makes my eyes bleed...
Compared with the pic of the new Mclaren this looks simple and elegant, but then this never won races. Beaten with ugly stick so hard it makes my eyes bleed...
Edited by Tres_Bien on Friday 11th January 10:44
On the face of it, the new Ferrari and Mclaren do look like a mass of strange shaped fridge magnets stuck wherever they'll fit on the car. If you look closer though, you begin to appreciate the intricate nature of the design, and the attention to detail put in.
It may appear odd or even ugly, but for the first time in a few years, the latest, cutting edge technology is on display to the whole wide world, whereas before, most of the closed season development took place under some bodywork...
It may appear odd or even ugly, but for the first time in a few years, the latest, cutting edge technology is on display to the whole wide world, whereas before, most of the closed season development took place under some bodywork...
I am the Walruss 
F1 cars go through phases of prettiness and uglines - depending on the best knowledge available to the designers.
To my eyes, the last 7 or 8 years has produced the most generically ugly cars for a long time - and they all tend to look much the same. At least in the 70s there may have been some ugly cars but there were also some pretty ones too.
The 1950s produced some aesthetically pleasing shapes - the Maserati 250F and the Vanwall for example.
The 1960s produced the gorgeous Lotus 25/33 and later the original unwinged Lotus 49.
There is no doubt that the 1972 version of the Lotus 72 was a stunner too.
I also think that the F1 cars of 1990/91 were neat and aesthetic - but once Benetton produced the full span front wing suspended under a raised nose design in 1992, I knew F1 car aesthetics was on a slippery slope.
To my eyes, the last 7 or 8 years has produced the most generically ugly cars for a long time - and they all tend to look much the same. At least in the 70s there may have been some ugly cars but there were also some pretty ones too.
The 1950s produced some aesthetically pleasing shapes - the Maserati 250F and the Vanwall for example.
The 1960s produced the gorgeous Lotus 25/33 and later the original unwinged Lotus 49.
There is no doubt that the 1972 version of the Lotus 72 was a stunner too.
I also think that the F1 cars of 1990/91 were neat and aesthetic - but once Benetton produced the full span front wing suspended under a raised nose design in 1992, I knew F1 car aesthetics was on a slippery slope.
Another thing is the fact that the very second a car pulls up at the garage to be pushed back in during test/practice/qualy, a team of monkeys holding air blowers have to come out & force feed the brakes with cold air.
The FIA should be looking at things like this, and the fact that they need to be kept plugged into hot water * oil to keep the tolerances correct before turning over etc.
The FIA should be looking at things like this, and the fact that they need to be kept plugged into hot water * oil to keep the tolerances correct before turning over etc.
Having them plumbed into pre-heat systems is just common sense when you have to make the engines and gearboxes last and be reliable, even if the tolerences were larger they would still do it, especially now they have 4 race gearboxes and two race engines to manage. I do the same thing on a 1970 CanAm car for that very reason. It's hardly rocket science, difficult to do or expensive, it actually saves a chunk of money over a season.
The cooling fans are a requirement when you have a format in qualifying where you have the cars going from very hot on track to a break, then very hot, to a break then very hot again, it's done for a few reasons mainly for safety to limit the chance of fire, plus it stops the components like wheel bearings and brakes being damaged due to heat soak. They dont have a proper oportunity to cool the cars down during qualifying like they do at the end of a race.
The cooling fans are a requirement when you have a format in qualifying where you have the cars going from very hot on track to a break, then very hot, to a break then very hot again, it's done for a few reasons mainly for safety to limit the chance of fire, plus it stops the components like wheel bearings and brakes being damaged due to heat soak. They dont have a proper oportunity to cool the cars down during qualifying like they do at the end of a race.
johnfelstead said:
Having them plumbed into pre-heat systems is just common sense when you have to make the engines and gearboxes last and be reliable, even if the tolerences were larger they would still do it, especially now they have 4 race gearboxes and two race engines to manage. I do the same thing on a 1970 CanAm car for that very reason. It's hardly rocket science, difficult to do or expensive, it actually saves a chunk of money over a season.
The cooling fans are a requirement when you have a format in qualifying where you have the cars going from very hot on track to a break, then very hot, to a break then very hot again, it's done for a few reasons mainly for safety to limit the chance of fire, plus it stops the components like wheel bearings and brakes being damaged due to heat soak. They dont have a proper oportunity to cool the cars down during qualifying like they do at the end of a race.
Having spent 6 years in a top F1 team I kind of realise all the abouve to be honest.The cooling fans are a requirement when you have a format in qualifying where you have the cars going from very hot on track to a break, then very hot, to a break then very hot again, it's done for a few reasons mainly for safety to limit the chance of fire, plus it stops the components like wheel bearings and brakes being damaged due to heat soak. They dont have a proper oportunity to cool the cars down during qualifying like they do at the end of a race.
Ive never seen an ugly F1 car. For some reason, Im incapable of finding them ugly.
My impression is that there is nothing on them that doesnt need to be there (except maybe the driver ) so each one represents the pinnacle of that team/era's thinking, technology and budget. And to me thats a beautiful thing. Its as close as engineering will ever get to being sexy.
ETA: The gheyness of that post has only just occurred to me, but Im going to stand by it.
My impression is that there is nothing on them that doesnt need to be there (except maybe the driver
) so each one represents the pinnacle of that team/era's thinking, technology and budget. And to me thats a beautiful thing. Its as close as engineering will ever get to being sexy.ETA: The gheyness of that post has only just occurred to me, but Im going to stand by it.
Edited by 308mate on Saturday 12th January 10:11
Perhaps I'm a bit too young, but I find modern F1 cars better-looking than the toothpaste tubes of the 60s, or the lego-cars of the late-80s and early-90s.
In fact, I just don't find F1 cars to be "good looking" in any sense of the word. They are function over form, nothing more or less.
LMP1 cars have got the looks.
In fact, I just don't find F1 cars to be "good looking" in any sense of the word. They are function over form, nothing more or less.
LMP1 cars have got the looks.
There is a difference between "good looking" and "interesting". F1 cars are always "interesting" to look at as they do tend to represent the most advanced thinking on car aerodynamics - and that is pretty much true for most of the history of motor racing (although not always, as in the mid 1960s sports cars were more advanced in this area).
However, "aesthtics" are more a matter of purity of design and "flow" of form and modern F1 cars just don't have that. They look fussy, busy, messy and angular.
In some ways it's a bit like comparing a V2 rocket and the Apollo Lunar Module. The LM was "interesting" but the V2 was more "aesthetic".
However, "aesthtics" are more a matter of purity of design and "flow" of form and modern F1 cars just don't have that. They look fussy, busy, messy and angular.
In some ways it's a bit like comparing a V2 rocket and the Apollo Lunar Module. The LM was "interesting" but the V2 was more "aesthetic".
R 500 POP said:
johnfelstead said:
Having them plumbed into pre-heat systems is just common sense when you have to make the engines and gearboxes last and be reliable, even if the tolerences were larger they would still do it, especially now they have 4 race gearboxes and two race engines to manage. I do the same thing on a 1970 CanAm car for that very reason. It's hardly rocket science, difficult to do or expensive, it actually saves a chunk of money over a season.
The cooling fans are a requirement when you have a format in qualifying where you have the cars going from very hot on track to a break, then very hot, to a break then very hot again, it's done for a few reasons mainly for safety to limit the chance of fire, plus it stops the components like wheel bearings and brakes being damaged due to heat soak. They dont have a proper oportunity to cool the cars down during qualifying like they do at the end of a race.
Having spent 6 years in a top F1 team I kind of realise all the abouve to be honest.The cooling fans are a requirement when you have a format in qualifying where you have the cars going from very hot on track to a break, then very hot, to a break then very hot again, it's done for a few reasons mainly for safety to limit the chance of fire, plus it stops the components like wheel bearings and brakes being damaged due to heat soak. They dont have a proper oportunity to cool the cars down during qualifying like they do at the end of a race.
Then why do you want to increase the costs and reduce reliability?308mate said:
Ive never seen an ugly F1 car. For some reason, Im incapable of finding them ugly.
My impression is that there is nothing on them that doesnt need to be there (except maybe the driver ) so each one represents the pinnacle of that team/era's thinking, technology and budget. And to me thats a beautiful thing. Its as close as engineering will ever get to being sexy.
ETA: The gheyness of that post has only just occurred to me, but Im going to stand by it.
I'd agree with that My impression is that there is nothing on them that doesnt need to be there (except maybe the driver
) so each one represents the pinnacle of that team/era's thinking, technology and budget. And to me thats a beautiful thing. Its as close as engineering will ever get to being sexy.ETA: The gheyness of that post has only just occurred to me, but Im going to stand by it.
Edited by 308mate on Saturday 12th January 10:11
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff