McLaren Join in Diffuser Row
Discussion
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/74358
It was my understanding that they weren't going to get involved and instead try and develop a similar design?
It was my understanding that they weren't going to get involved and instead try and develop a similar design?
The whole thing looks a little unsavoury when you see that the opportunity to remove ambiguity from the regs was rejected by the teams last year...
autosport said:
Rivals teams rejected an offer from Ross Brawn to tidy up the technical regulations 12 months ago, and head off the possibility of double decker diffuser designs being adopted.
While the row over diffusers continues to overshadow the sport, ahead of a hearing of the FIA's International Court of Appeal in April, Brawn has revealed that at a meeting of technical directors last March, he proposed modifying the rules to ensure that proper limits were introduced on areas teams could exploit.
"In March 2008 that was offered," said Brawn, when asked by AUTOSPORT about the matter.
"If I'm frank I didn't say 'look we are going to do this diffuser if you don't accept this rule' because I'm not going to tell people what we're doing, but I explained that I felt that we should have a different set of rules to simplify what needs to be done.
"I offered them and they were rejected, so my conscience is very clear. And those rules that I put on the table would have stopped a lot of things. It would have stopped the diffuser, it would have stopped all those bargeboards around the front, and it would have cleaned the cars up.
"Because it was clear that when we started to work on the regulations that there were things that you could do, and we needed to perhaps clean them up, but nobody was interested. They are interested now."
While the row over diffusers continues to overshadow the sport, ahead of a hearing of the FIA's International Court of Appeal in April, Brawn has revealed that at a meeting of technical directors last March, he proposed modifying the rules to ensure that proper limits were introduced on areas teams could exploit.
"In March 2008 that was offered," said Brawn, when asked by AUTOSPORT about the matter.
"If I'm frank I didn't say 'look we are going to do this diffuser if you don't accept this rule' because I'm not going to tell people what we're doing, but I explained that I felt that we should have a different set of rules to simplify what needs to be done.
"I offered them and they were rejected, so my conscience is very clear. And those rules that I put on the table would have stopped a lot of things. It would have stopped the diffuser, it would have stopped all those bargeboards around the front, and it would have cleaned the cars up.
"Because it was clear that when we started to work on the regulations that there were things that you could do, and we needed to perhaps clean them up, but nobody was interested. They are interested now."
kevin ritson said:
That should ensure the 'Diffuser Three' win 
Anyone betting Macca pick up all the appeal costs too?
Yep, and being forced to run the rest of the season with a pedal car or something.Anyone betting Macca pick up all the appeal costs too?
Personally I think the "Diffuser 3" have done some very clever engineering and should be applauded for their innovation while keeping it in the rules, as it's been declared legal 3 TIMES before now, so why should it be any different at the ICA? And why haven't Ferrari's turning vane things that they call wing mirror mounts been banned? It was obvious from day 1 why they are really there
Noooo you've got it wrong. McLaren have been called there so that they can be tried and subsrquently punished for developing a double deck diffuser 
And as for the wing mirror mounts/bargeboards by my book thats the same kind of clever engineering as the diffuser (and without more expert knowledge) equally legal.
And as for the wing mirror mounts/bargeboards by my book thats the same kind of clever engineering as the diffuser (and without more expert knowledge) equally legal.
Edited by mcdjl on Thursday 9th April 18:35
dpbird90 said:
kevin ritson said:
That should ensure the 'Diffuser Three' win
Anyone betting Macca pick up all the appeal costs too?
Yep, and being forced to run the rest of the season with a pedal car or something.Anyone betting Macca pick up all the appeal costs too?
Personally I think the "Diffuser 3" have done some very clever engineering and should be applauded for their innovation while keeping it in the rules, as it's been declared legal 3 TIMES before now, so why should it be any different at the ICA? And why haven't Ferrari's turning vane things that they call wing mirror mounts been banned? It was obvious from day 1 why they are really there
timbo48 said:
I thought barge boards were out this year, and yet there they are supporting the mirrors on the Ferrari, and maybe others. Can anybody explain.
The area where the sidepods sit is one of the areas where aero work is allowed (look at the sculpting around the sides of this years cars). However, the box which contains this zone was defined using last years side pod size. This years sidepods are much shorter thereby freeing up space between the front of the box and the start of the sidepods into which some small tuning vanes have been inserted.
"The area where the sidepods sit is one of the areas where aero work is allowed (look at the sculpting around the sides of this years cars). However, the box which contains this zone was defined using last years side pod size. This years sidepods are much shorter thereby freeing up space between the front of the box and the start of the sidepods into which some small tuning vanes have been inserted."
Sorry, AlexS, couldn't find my copy of the FIA Rulebook;-)
Sorry, AlexS, couldn't find my copy of the FIA Rulebook;-)
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/74376
What are McLaren playing at? They aren't going to present an argument to the ICA, so why bother going in the first place?
What are McLaren playing at? They aren't going to present an argument to the ICA, so why bother going in the first place?
My feeling is that the double/triple diffusers will be found legal.
1) It is one in the eye for the OWG, and therefore the constructors, for writing shoddy rules.
2) They do obey the letter of the law. Which is what matters with technical regulations. There again the Ferrari floor met the letter of the law for not deflecting under a given load.
3) The Brawn fairy story is very good for F1. They want to keep this story going.
4) The old established order of Ferrari and McLaren are in the doghouse at the moment, for different reasons. So their view may not hold sway.
5) They advance technology which is a lot of what F1 is about. Soon road cars will have multi layer diffusers
1) It is one in the eye for the OWG, and therefore the constructors, for writing shoddy rules.
2) They do obey the letter of the law. Which is what matters with technical regulations. There again the Ferrari floor met the letter of the law for not deflecting under a given load.
3) The Brawn fairy story is very good for F1. They want to keep this story going.
4) The old established order of Ferrari and McLaren are in the doghouse at the moment, for different reasons. So their view may not hold sway.
5) They advance technology which is a lot of what F1 is about. Soon road cars will have multi layer diffusers
Edited by Duke of Rothesay on Saturday 11th April 14:44
Duke of Rothesay said:
My feeling is that the double/triple diffusers will be found legal.
1) It is one in the eye for the OWG, and therefore the constructors, for writing shoddy rules.
2) They do obey the letter of the law. Which is what matters with technical regulations. There again the Ferrari floor met the letter of the law for not deflecting under a given load.
3) The Brawn fairy story is very good for F1. They want to keep this story going.
4) The old established order of Ferrari and McLaren are in the doghouse at the moment, for different reasons. So their view may not hold sway.
5) They advance technology which is a lot of what F1 is about. Soon road cars will have multi layer diffusers
6) Ross Brawn offered to remove the loopehole in the regulations that allow the trick diffusers over a year ago, and was turned down by the teams that are now complaining.1) It is one in the eye for the OWG, and therefore the constructors, for writing shoddy rules.
2) They do obey the letter of the law. Which is what matters with technical regulations. There again the Ferrari floor met the letter of the law for not deflecting under a given load.
3) The Brawn fairy story is very good for F1. They want to keep this story going.
4) The old established order of Ferrari and McLaren are in the doghouse at the moment, for different reasons. So their view may not hold sway.
5) They advance technology which is a lot of what F1 is about. Soon road cars will have multi layer diffusers
Edited by Duke of Rothesay on Saturday 11th April 14:44
Teppic said:
Duke of Rothesay said:
My feeling is that the double/triple diffusers will be found legal.
1) It is one in the eye for the OWG, and therefore the constructors, for writing shoddy rules.
2) They do obey the letter of the law. Which is what matters with technical regulations. There again the Ferrari floor met the letter of the law for not deflecting under a given load.
3) The Brawn fairy story is very good for F1. They want to keep this story going.
4) The old established order of Ferrari and McLaren are in the doghouse at the moment, for different reasons. So their view may not hold sway.
5) They advance technology which is a lot of what F1 is about. Soon road cars will have multi layer diffusers
6) Ross Brawn offered to remove the loopehole in the regulations that allow the trick diffusers over a year ago, and was turned down by the teams that are now complaining.1) It is one in the eye for the OWG, and therefore the constructors, for writing shoddy rules.
2) They do obey the letter of the law. Which is what matters with technical regulations. There again the Ferrari floor met the letter of the law for not deflecting under a given load.
3) The Brawn fairy story is very good for F1. They want to keep this story going.
4) The old established order of Ferrari and McLaren are in the doghouse at the moment, for different reasons. So their view may not hold sway.
5) They advance technology which is a lot of what F1 is about. Soon road cars will have multi layer diffusers
Edited by Duke of Rothesay on Saturday 11th April 14:44
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/74409
johnfelstead said:
Byrne is the guy who designed Ferrari's illegal flexible floor, so he would have been quite happy to do what Brawn have, had he thought of it.
I don't think Byrne was working full time at that point, so he may not have been involved with the flexible floor. The '06 car was his last, I belive, and the floor didn't go on that car until the end of the season, when it might well have been his successor's idea. (I still contend that it wasn't illegal)There are a few pics & diags if Brawn & Williams versions in http://www.formula1.com/news/technical/ IIRC
Duke of Rothesay said:
5) They advance technology which is a lot of what F1 is about. Soon road cars will have multi layer diffusers
Why would they use multi-level diffusers? Just raise the height of the rear of the diffuser instead. They only have multi-layer diffusers because there is a limit in height of VISIBLE parts of the underbody, when viewed from underneath, so the layers mean that the higher part is merely hidden.Edited by Duke of Rothesay on Saturday 11th April 14:44
This was my understanding from Racecar engineering anyways, it basically gives a higher undertray at the rear whilst still conforming to the regs, on a road car you could just raise the height of the diffuser.
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff