Gordon Murray on F1

[entropy]

Anybody read the latest Motorsport magazine?

Besides cutting bodywork downforce and bigger wheels there was a couple of controversial ideas:

1. Back to steel suspension components

2. Narrower tyres and hard compound for higher slip angle

[Adrian W]

That'll be formula ford then!

[Fire99]

Adrian W said:

That'll be formula ford then!

A trifle extreme!

[Fire99]

entropy said:

Anybody read the latest Motorsport magazine?

Besides cutting bodywork downforce and bigger wheels there was a couple of controversial ideas:

1. Back to steel suspension components

2. Narrower tyres and hard compound for higher slip angle

He has good points. Clearly he wants to see the aero / grip effect balanced against engine output, rather than at present where aero and physical grip far outweigh power.

[mattikake]

Not read it.

Steel suspension? To what end?

Steel brakes, less overcar aero, no access to telemetry. That's all F1 needs.

[Fire99]

mattikake said:

Not read it.

Steel suspension? To what end?

Steel brakes, less overcar aero, no access to telemetry. That's all F1 needs.

Hang on a mo. 'To what end' is the important part. We seem to be like flippin' yo-yo's. Too much technology? That means we need a wooden go-kart with pram wheels.

Gordon Murray is speaking specifics. Certain specific attributes that reduce grip / aero effect. Has he mentioned no access to telemetry?

[anonymous-user]

Steel suspension, I imagine, will stop the cars being quite so fragile...although more contact risks more chance of "doing a Webber"

[Fire99]

Inertiatic said:

Steel suspension, I imagine, will stop the cars being quite so fragile...although more contact risks more chance of "doing a Webber"

I doubt that. Suspension failure is very uncommon. The only fragile part of the car is the front wing, that sticks out like some form of Dyson!

[entropy]

Fire99 said:

Hang on a mo. 'To what end' is the important part. We seem to be like flippin' yo-yo's. Too much technology? That means we need a wooden go-kart with pram wheels.

Gordon Murray is speaking specifics. Certain specific attributes that reduce grip / aero effect. Has he mentioned no access to telemetry?

More undercar downforce, steel wishbones, no telemetry.

Innovation would come from grounds effect.

He reckons technology is a misnomer/fallacy - which I agree with.

[350Matt]

Steel wishbones woudl help with the running costs a great deal, as the carbon parts have to be inspected and load tested post every event and so each part builds up its own photo libary of little defects so you can check if they've gotten worse or not

[hiccy]

I would imagine steel wishbones would greatly increase the unsprung weight and possibly be less aerodynamic?

[zac510]

So NASCAR, basically.

[Fire99]

350Matt said:

Steel wishbones woudl help with the running costs a great deal, as the carbon parts have to be inspected and load tested post every event and so each part builds up its own photo libary of little defects so you can check if they've gotten worse or not

Ditch the carbon wishbones then.

[CanAm]

Fire99 said:

I doubt that. Suspension failure is very uncommon. The only fragile part of the car is the front wing, that sticks out like some form of Dyson!

You must be joking; the slightest tap from the wrong direction and front suspensions collapse. His suggestion also includes restricting the width of the front wing to the inner edge of the front wheels.

[EDLT]

CanAm said:

Fire99 said:

I doubt that. Suspension failure is very uncommon. The only fragile part of the car is the front wing, that sticks out like some form of Dyson!

You must be joking; the slightest tap from the wrong direction and front suspensions collapse. His suggestion also includes restricting the width of the front wing to the inner edge of the front wheels.

But they made the front wing so wide to allow the cars to follow closer to each other

EDIT: Steel components still fail, especially when you are trying to make them as light as possible.