Button Driving WITHOUT front Spoiler.... Legal?
Discussion
So, he has an accident, and carries on, slowing other drivers around him.
But, is it legal to drive without the spoiler? Had he have been fuelled to the finish, could he have finished without it Legally? Surely, these things must be on the car.
I would assume he could have been underweight if he had finished, therefore not legal.
Thoughts?
But, is it legal to drive without the spoiler? Had he have been fuelled to the finish, could he have finished without it Legally? Surely, these things must be on the car.
I would assume he could have been underweight if he had finished, therefore not legal.
Thoughts?
Nothing illegal, unless there are parts hanging off the car which might fly off and cause injury. I don't think there would be an issue with being underweight, either. The wing isn't designed to fly off and gain advantage, it was smashed off. I imagine being underweight by the same weight as the accidentally lost part would be acceptable.
No reason why not, same as Alonso could have continued to the finish with his damaged sidepod / flaps. Weight might have been an issue but from what I understand there are grounds for mitigating circumstances in weight checks to allow for bodywork damage etc, and a front wing will weigh very little so could well be within the car's weight tolerence above 600kgs anyway.
It wasnt as if he was actually holding people up much anyway though, IIRC he did two laps without the front wing the first a 1:34, and the second was a 1:32.8 which is within ~1s of those around him on the following lap (after he pitted), and within a second of his best lap all afternoon!
It wasnt as if he was actually holding people up much anyway though, IIRC he did two laps without the front wing the first a 1:34, and the second was a 1:32.8 which is within ~1s of those around him on the following lap (after he pitted), and within a second of his best lap all afternoon!
Edited by LocoBlade on Monday 1st October 13:52
Ahonen said:
Perfectly legal.
well....remeber Coultard got a result stripped from him because his 'damaged' wing was outside of the regs... (Interlagos GP http://atlasf1.autosport.com/2000/bra/horton.html )
Edited by Scuffers on Monday 1st October 14:01
Piglet said:
I imagine what may have been interesting for Honda was the lack of difference between his speed with and without the wing....perhaps that's given them an idea on where to start to make the car faster!
Yep that was a comment I made in the race thread at the time, I expect a Honda "Shanghai development package" to consist of no front wing at all 
Scuffers said:
Ahonen said:
Perfectly legal.
well....remeber Coultard got a result stripped from him because his 'damaged' wing was outside of the regs... (Interlagos GP)
I think the general consensus from the stewards would be that if there was certainly no gain to be made then it wouldnt be a problem. Whether they could say for certainty that JB gained no benefit from being without a front is a moot point
Not that some teams would ever dream of telling their drivers to 'damage' their front wing towards the end of qualifying so they had to pit to fit a new one, which happened to be stuffed with lead because up til then the car had been underweight and they didn't want to get caught out on the weighbridge. Not that this used to happen a few years ago (cough)2000(cough) and that the Hypno-Toad has actually held said wing in his hands.
Oh no, that would never have happened....
Oh no, that would never have happened....
My favourite cheat stories aren't in F1 they are in NASCAR.
Like Smokey Yunick the King of the loophole:- Perhaps his most famous exploit was his number 13 1966 Chevrolet Chevelle, driven by Curtis Turner. The car was so much faster than the competition during testing that they were certain that cheating was involved. Some sort of aerodynamic enhancement was strongly suspected, but the car's profile seemed to be entirely stock, as the rules required. It was eventually discovered that what Yunick had built was an exact 7/8ths scale replica of the production car. Since then, NASCAR required each race car's roof, bonnet and boot to fit templates representing the production car's exact profile.
Another wheeze he had was getting around the regulations specifying a maximum size for the fuel tank, by using eleven foot coils of 2-inch diameter tubing for the fuel line to add about 5 gallons to the car's fuel capacity. Once, NASCAR officials came up with a list of nine items for Yunick to fix before the car would be allowed on the track. The suspicious NASCAR officials had removed the tank for inspection. Yunick started the car with no gas tank and said "Better make it ten" and drove it back to the pits. They then made a new rule to cover that. He also used a basketball in the fuel tank which could be inflated when the car's fuel capacity was checked and deflated for the race.
Like Smokey Yunick the King of the loophole:- Perhaps his most famous exploit was his number 13 1966 Chevrolet Chevelle, driven by Curtis Turner. The car was so much faster than the competition during testing that they were certain that cheating was involved. Some sort of aerodynamic enhancement was strongly suspected, but the car's profile seemed to be entirely stock, as the rules required. It was eventually discovered that what Yunick had built was an exact 7/8ths scale replica of the production car. Since then, NASCAR required each race car's roof, bonnet and boot to fit templates representing the production car's exact profile.
Another wheeze he had was getting around the regulations specifying a maximum size for the fuel tank, by using eleven foot coils of 2-inch diameter tubing for the fuel line to add about 5 gallons to the car's fuel capacity. Once, NASCAR officials came up with a list of nine items for Yunick to fix before the car would be allowed on the track. The suspicious NASCAR officials had removed the tank for inspection. Yunick started the car with no gas tank and said "Better make it ten" and drove it back to the pits. They then made a new rule to cover that. He also used a basketball in the fuel tank which could be inflated when the car's fuel capacity was checked and deflated for the race.
that said I took a good while convincing a scrute not to throw me out of a race last year for being under weight, My radiator boiled over and the huge puddle under my car was still in evidence. " no no no" he says
eventualy I said, if I can refill the rad and be on weight will that be satisfactory? he begrudgingly agreed and of course I was legal, but my golly gosh I had to work for it, so ref button, if he was under weight, i would not swear that he would defo have no problems, but common sence should prevail.
ref the yanks, who was the nascar bloke they were convinced was running with NOS, they searched and searched, and couldn't find it. it was only when they threatened to cut his roll cage that he fessed up to prevent an explosion!!
eventualy I said, if I can refill the rad and be on weight will that be satisfactory? he begrudgingly agreed and of course I was legal, but my golly gosh I had to work for it, so ref button, if he was under weight, i would not swear that he would defo have no problems, but common sence should prevail.
ref the yanks, who was the nascar bloke they were convinced was running with NOS, they searched and searched, and couldn't find it. it was only when they threatened to cut his roll cage that he fessed up to prevent an explosion!!
10 Pence Short said:
Nothing illegal, unless there are parts hanging off the car which might fly off and cause injury. I don't think there would be an issue with being underweight, either. The wing isn't designed to fly off and gain advantage, it was smashed off. I imagine being underweight by the same weight as the accidentally lost part would be acceptable.
Correct.See 79c:
http://www.fia.com/resources/documents/548514743__...
FourWheelDrift said:
My favourite cheat stories aren't in F1 they are in NASCAR.
There have been a few in rallying too-Toyota's turbo restrictors which just happened to expand and let significantly more air through when they got nice and hot. (Hence the Celica GT4's getting banned)
The 'auxiliary fire extinguisher' allegedly plumbed into the engine bay by Lancia. Except it just happened to be full of N20 rather than CO2
GravelBen said:
FourWheelDrift said:
My favourite cheat stories aren't in F1 they are in NASCAR.
There have been a few in rallying too-Toyota's turbo restrictors which just happened to expand and let significantly more air through when they got nice and hot. (Hence the Celica GT4's getting banned)
The 'auxiliary fire extinguisher' allegedly plumbed into the engine bay by Lancia. Except it just happened to be full of N20 rather than CO2
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff