Lotus E22

[ajprice]

Walrus nose. Scarbs isn't sure how it's legal so far -
Craig Scarborough ‏@ScarbsF1
Not sure how Lotus make the twin tusk arrangement meet the reg "a single external cross section of more than 9000mm² "

It might be a weird perspective, but one tusk looks longer than the other, one for crash structure and one for show?

[FW18]

Looks like Burn have departed Lotus, a sponsor they were shouting about getting last year.

[designndrive62]

If the two protruding sections have a join between them that we cannot see from this view then that could make them meet the regs?

[paulrockliffe]

The longer one could be the nose that the reg is applied to, (both tips are 9000mm2) the shorter one is there for symmetry. Interesting solution.

[Megaflow]

I thought they were keeping this underwraps until after the first test so nobody could nick their ideas?

Nothing to do with them being broke and couldn't afford to go, no not at all...

[Teppic]

FW18 said:

Looks like Burn have departed Lotus, a sponsor they were shouting about getting last year.

It's still there, on the leading edge of the top of the sidepods. The logo is tiny though - it's a bit of a "Where's Wally" effort needed to find it.

[HarryFlatters]

It has a camel toe.

[FW18]

Megaflow said:

I thought they were keeping this underwraps until after the first test so nobody could nick their ideas?

Nothing to do with them being broke and couldn't afford to go, no not at all...

And trying to bury bad news with their TP going.

[Flying Toilet]

FW18 said:

Looks like Burn have departed Lotus, a sponsor they were shouting about getting last year.

I was told that Burn was being renamed, it has always been called Relentless here, Full Throttle in the States etc.

[Flying Toilet]

FW18 said:

Looks like Burn have departed Lotus, a sponsor they were shouting about getting last year.

I was told that Burn was being renamed, it has always been called Relentless here, Full Throttle in the States etc.

[ajprice]

New pic on the Lotus twitter

[NISaxoVTR]

Must be a wind up surely..

[anonymous-user]

paulrockliffe said:

The longer one could be the nose that the reg is applied to, (both tips are 9000mm2) the shorter one is there for symmetry. Interesting solution.

The plan view backs that up...clever

[Woody]

NISaxoVTR said:

Must be a wind up surely..

Must be!

[NRS]

I wonder if they will swap the unequal length of nose to the other side depending on the bias of the track for turning left or right?

[anonymous-user]

NRS said:

I wonder if they will swap the unequal length of nose to the other side depending on the bias of the track for turning left or right?

I imagine it makes negligible difference, or they can shape them to cancel out any difference

or its a placeholder front end :-)

[MiniMan64]

These cars are looking really bizarre this year!

Would this explain why some teams had issue with the crash regs?

[dr_gn]

Why not show an image of the real car, why do the teams (with the exception of McLaren) appear to want to just show CAD renders? I guess becasue they can easily be changed.

[anonymous-user]

I think it's brilliant that they've interpreted the regulations that way.

This is what Scarbs said.

"Here's how the tusks work. The long one counts as the nose tip. Both mount the FW and form turning vanes."



He said in an earlier tweet that the other is crash structure.

[dr_gn]

Almost like they've thought of a novel rule interpretation, then tried to think of why they'd want to use it.

Chances of it being on the real car?