Discussion
Am i missing the point of F1, as i've always thought it was to demonstrate the pinnacle of automotive technologies.
With that in mind why are teams still restricted to tyres with massive sidewalls and piddly dimension wheels? Surely that's a backwards step as there's not many other race series that i can think of that enforce massive sidewalls
With that in mind why are teams still restricted to tyres with massive sidewalls and piddly dimension wheels? Surely that's a backwards step as there's not many other race series that i can think of that enforce massive sidewalls
I suppose this is an example of showcasing the best technology versus having good racing. If the rules allowed bigger wheel sizes and lower profile tyres, no doubt this would offer a speed advantage but I doubt it would make the racing any better, so why add this extra cost for no benefit to the spectator? R&D into tyre construction and compounds is something that goes on regardless of sidewall depth, and I imagine has more relevance to the development of road tyres.
For over 20 years, F1 technology has been deviating away from technology that can easily transfer to more "normal" cars as it becomes more and more specialised and the rules become more and more proscribed.
I think it has less relevance now to motor sport and motoring in general than at any time in its history - apart from its impact as a a marketing and lifestyle device.
I think it has less relevance now to motor sport and motoring in general than at any time in its history - apart from its impact as a a marketing and lifestyle device.
Eric Mc said:
For over 20 years, F1 technology has been deviating away from technology that can easily transfer to more "normal" cars as it becomes more and more specialised and the rules become more and more proscribed.
I think it has less relevance now to motor sport and motoring in general than at any time in its history - apart from its impact as a a marketing and lifestyle device.
In the past 20 years, I think that the transfer of technology has certainly slowed down, but today's road ECUs, traction control systems, electronic damping, paddle gearboxes, electronic diffs, fuels, even spark plugs have all benefitted from the accelerated R & D that F1 demands. Ferraris "Mannetino" certainly resembles one of the switches on an F1 Ferrari's steering wheel - no doubt that is deliberate...but it also performs some of the functions those F1 switches perform.... I think it has less relevance now to motor sport and motoring in general than at any time in its history - apart from its impact as a a marketing and lifestyle device.
Technology transfer between the teams is widely discussed, and normally by way of key staff moving from team to team. Or some CDs in the mail, supported by text messages.
Transfer of innovations from motorsport to the mainstream automotive industry are rather more complicated. As Patrick Head has commented "The direct competitive status of motorsport provokes a development rate which does not occur within the production vehicle environment mostly due to the heavy investment in production tooling, but there is technology transfer to low volume performance vehicles and then across to the higher volume units".
But it's often the impression of technology transfer that's important, for marketing reasons. I'd suggest that fuels fall rather squarely into this category - the FIA has been very forceful in keeping the FIA race fuel regulations ahead of EU road fuel regulations, so as to be seen to be providing a platform for the development and trial of emerging technology.
WilliBetz
Transfer of innovations from motorsport to the mainstream automotive industry are rather more complicated. As Patrick Head has commented "The direct competitive status of motorsport provokes a development rate which does not occur within the production vehicle environment mostly due to the heavy investment in production tooling, but there is technology transfer to low volume performance vehicles and then across to the higher volume units".
But it's often the impression of technology transfer that's important, for marketing reasons. I'd suggest that fuels fall rather squarely into this category - the FIA has been very forceful in keeping the FIA race fuel regulations ahead of EU road fuel regulations, so as to be seen to be providing a platform for the development and trial of emerging technology.
WilliBetz
The teams a while back actually asked to increase the wheel diameter to get bigger (and therefore easier to cool), brakes in there. The rule makers said no, because they wanted to keep the brake performance down for safety and to encourage more overtaking in the brakeing zone.
If if the wheels are small the tyres have big walls to keep the size of the overall package the current size. I dont think any of us would want to see F1 cars on 14" rims and a 25 section tyre wall....
If if the wheels are small the tyres have big walls to keep the size of the overall package the current size. I dont think any of us would want to see F1 cars on 14" rims and a 25 section tyre wall....
Munter said:
The teams a while back actually asked to increase the wheel diameter to get bigger (and therefore easier to cool), brakes in there. The rule makers said no, because they wanted to keep the brake performance down for safety and to encourage more overtaking in the brakeing zone.
If if the wheels are small the tyres have big walls to keep the size of the overall package the current size. I dont think any of us would want to see F1 cars on 14" rims and a 25 section tyre wall....
At present they're 13".If if the wheels are small the tyres have big walls to keep the size of the overall package the current size. I dont think any of us would want to see F1 cars on 14" rims and a 25 section tyre wall....
Perhaps you meant "19", or something like that?
flemke said:
Munter said:
The teams a while back actually asked to increase the wheel diameter to get bigger (and therefore easier to cool), brakes in there. The rule makers said no, because they wanted to keep the brake performance down for safety and to encourage more overtaking in the brakeing zone.
If if the wheels are small the tyres have big walls to keep the size of the overall package the current size. I dont think any of us would want to see F1 cars on 14" rims and a 25 section tyre wall....
At present they're 13".If if the wheels are small the tyres have big walls to keep the size of the overall package the current size. I dont think any of us would want to see F1 cars on 14" rims and a 25 section tyre wall....
Perhaps you meant "19", or something like that?
Munter said:
flemke said:
Munter said:
The teams a while back actually asked to increase the wheel diameter to get bigger (and therefore easier to cool), brakes in there. The rule makers said no, because they wanted to keep the brake performance down for safety and to encourage more overtaking in the brakeing zone.
If if the wheels are small the tyres have big walls to keep the size of the overall package the current size. I dont think any of us would want to see F1 cars on 14" rims and a 25 section tyre wall....
At present they're 13".If if the wheels are small the tyres have big walls to keep the size of the overall package the current size. I dont think any of us would want to see F1 cars on 14" rims and a 25 section tyre wall....
Perhaps you meant "19", or something like that?
Munter said:
...(which is what all the ladies tell me....). My point was though that the wheel rims are being kept small for a number of reasons. Given the small rim running low profile tyres would look rubbish. I'm not sure of the engineering problems it would create with higher speed bearings required etc. But with a total diameter of say 16" it just wouldn't be "right"
Perhaps, although LMP1 and 2 run 18" and 19", and they look pretty good to me.Silent1 said:
skinny said:
Redlake27 said:
18" wheels would mean a much smaller Bridgestone logo.
yep 
The wheel requirements are within the control of the signatories of the CA. It's between them and Bridgestone how big the wheels and tyres can be, and the consequent size of the logos.
The ban on tobacco livery was imposed by the EU, notwithstanding the opposition of most of the signatories of the CA.
The rules for 2009 state a 14" wheel will be used. (between 354mm and
358mm bead diameter to be precise), total tyre diameter will be 26" (670mm) front, 28" (720mm) rear.
The current rules use a 13" wheel, total tyre diameter being the same front/rear at 26" on dry's, 26.3" on Wets.
For 2009 the front tyres will be upto 0.4" wider and the rear tyres can be upto 3.3" wider than currently.
So 2009 will see wider tyres, running lower profile at the front, similar profile but taller sidewall wider rears, just like the good ole days.
358mm bead diameter to be precise), total tyre diameter will be 26" (670mm) front, 28" (720mm) rear.
The current rules use a 13" wheel, total tyre diameter being the same front/rear at 26" on dry's, 26.3" on Wets.
For 2009 the front tyres will be upto 0.4" wider and the rear tyres can be upto 3.3" wider than currently.
So 2009 will see wider tyres, running lower profile at the front, similar profile but taller sidewall wider rears, just like the good ole days.
johnfelstead said:
For 2009 the front tyres will be upto 0.4" wider and the rear tyres can be upto 3.3" wider than currently.
Hmmm. And here we were thinking that they were trying to find ways to increase grip at the front in order to encourage overtaking.Do you know what was the reasoning for this change, John?
flemke said:
Silent1 said:
skinny said:
Redlake27 said:
18" wheels would mean a much smaller Bridgestone logo.
yep The wheel requirements are within the control of the signatories of the CA. It's between them and Bridgestone how big the wheels and tyres can be, and the consequent size of the logos.
The ban on tobacco livery was imposed by the EU, notwithstanding the opposition of most of the signatories of the CA.
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff