Standard front wing
Discussion
Driller said:
Ok so we all know what the problem with overtaking is so no need to go into details but what about having a standard FIA front wing for everyone in the same way that the tyres are provided as standard?
I've said before I'd give them a choice from a range of wings, front and back.The new regs coming in are going to limit front wing development in an attempt to move it more "underfloor" to improve close running. So the "powers that be" are thinking along the same lines, but less restrictive.
Whatever happens, I can't see this helping overtaking. Even if it was made single plane with no aerofoil I can't see it affecting the turbulence at the rear.
It is a move in the right direction I think, but not for the reasons given. Front wings cost a fortune to design and develop. It's not a level playing field given the differences in disposable incomes in the teams.
They also look ugly.
They had a 2016 Merc front wind on display in Mercedes Benz World. The general consensus of those looking at it was that it was rather silly.
It is brilliant engineering though. But that's not enough.
It is a move in the right direction I think, but not for the reasons given. Front wings cost a fortune to design and develop. It's not a level playing field given the differences in disposable incomes in the teams.
They also look ugly.
They had a 2016 Merc front wind on display in Mercedes Benz World. The general consensus of those looking at it was that it was rather silly.
It is brilliant engineering though. But that's not enough.
Sam993 said:
Kraken said:
I'd hate to see spec parts coming in like that. It's not what F1 is about. There are plenty of other spec open wheel series out there that people can follow if they want that sort of thing.
Engines are basically a spec part made by different manufacturers. 
There's a huge difference between a tightly controlled formula and everyone using the same part. I, for one, would have no interest in watching F1 if they went down the standard front-wing route. By all means tighten the formula to simplify the wings, but the whole point of F1 is that it's a competition between engineering groups to find novel solutions within the rules, IMO. The drivers and the actual racing are, and always have been, secondary to that.
Edited by kambites on Thursday 19th July 08:53
kambites said:
Sam993 said:
Kraken said:
I'd hate to see spec parts coming in like that. It's not what F1 is about. There are plenty of other spec open wheel series out there that people can follow if they want that sort of thing.
Engines are basically a spec part made by different manufacturers. If we're talking to what amount to spec parts, I suspect we're limited to Tyres, Halo, Brakes (Brembo or Carbone Industrie, so less options than engines), Wheels, Fuel, err Spark Plugs?.
It's going to be interesting to see what effect the new wing regulations have on front wings, and if they effectively become a spec part through either the 2019 regulation tweaks or later ones.
kambites said:
I'm not sure Redbull would agree with that!
There's a huge difference between a tightly controlled formula and everyone using the same part. I, for one, would have no interest in watching F1 if they went down the standard front-wing route. By all means tighten the formula to simplify the wings, but the whole point of F1 is that it's a competition between engineering groups to find novel solutions within the rules, IMO. The drivers and the actual racing are, and always have been, secondary to that.
I like overtakes that have to be worked for. I like cars overtaking into corners and staying there. I like the following driver being able to change gears on the car in front. I'd be quite happy for a single plank on the front wing if it allowed F1 cars to follow one another closely. I don't know if it would.There's a huge difference between a tightly controlled formula and everyone using the same part. I, for one, would have no interest in watching F1 if they went down the standard front-wing route. By all means tighten the formula to simplify the wings, but the whole point of F1 is that it's a competition between engineering groups to find novel solutions within the rules, IMO. The drivers and the actual racing are, and always have been, secondary to that.
Edited by kambites on Thursday 19th July 08:53
I think the main point of F1 is what goes on on track. I enjoy the engineering, as have gasped in awe when I've examined the cars, but that's only between races. The spectacle is the thing for me. As long as it is not too contrived - the regs are a form of contrivance - then I'm OK about it.
Some poeple seem to want to watch gp2, f3 or formula ford. They're all cack too (compared.to gt)...
Imo max 3 element front wings, max 2 element rear wings, relax underbody aero and somehow bin all these complex "finger" jobs they have on every surface. Next, really really.relax the silly rules like max 4 wheels, most of the dimensional aspects,.and take 150kg off the min weight. Have a driver+seat minimum weight to avoid midget skeleton racing.
Then the most.important thing - any fia approved tyre is legal.
That would mix it. Up.
Imo max 3 element front wings, max 2 element rear wings, relax underbody aero and somehow bin all these complex "finger" jobs they have on every surface. Next, really really.relax the silly rules like max 4 wheels, most of the dimensional aspects,.and take 150kg off the min weight. Have a driver+seat minimum weight to avoid midget skeleton racing.
Then the most.important thing - any fia approved tyre is legal.
That would mix it. Up.
Derek Smith said:
I like overtakes that have to be worked for. I like cars overtaking into corners and staying there. I like the following driver being able to change gears on the car in front. I'd be quite happy for a single plank on the front wing if it allowed F1 cars to follow one another closely. I don't know if it would.
I'd be quite happy with them mandating a single element front wing, but that's far from being the same as a spec wing.I think if they combined it with a smaller working area around the barge boards it probably would help because without the ability without all the little vortex generators they run, it would be impossible to get smooth airflow to the rear wing anyway so they'd have to make the rear wing less succeptable to turbulence, even if it reduced ultimate downforce. I don't think the rear suffers as much from dirty air anyway; the cars tend to under-steer (and consequently eat their front tyres) when following closely not over-steer.
Edited by kambites on Thursday 19th July 09:54
kambites said:
I'd be quite happy with them mandating a single element front wing, but that's far from being the same as a spec wing.
I think if they combined it with a smaller working area around the barge boards it probably would help because without the ability without all the little vortex generators they run, it would be impossible to get smooth airflow to the rear wing anyway so they'd have to make the rear wing less succeptable to turbulence, even if it reduced ultimate downforce. I don't think the rear suffers as much from dirty air anyway; the cars tend to under-steer (and consequently eat their front tyres) when following closely not over-steer.
That is the regs isn't it? Simpler front wing, smaller barge boards. Reduces "over car" aero benefits, encourages "under car" aero development, which isn't affected by dirty air from the car ahead.I think if they combined it with a smaller working area around the barge boards it probably would help because without the ability without all the little vortex generators they run, it would be impossible to get smooth airflow to the rear wing anyway so they'd have to make the rear wing less succeptable to turbulence, even if it reduced ultimate downforce. I don't think the rear suffers as much from dirty air anyway; the cars tend to under-steer (and consequently eat their front tyres) when following closely not over-steer.
Edited by kambites on Thursday 19th July 09:54
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff