Revolutionary FW25?

[Jordi]

Originally posted by Gt_R
Just look at how long it took Williams to exit the exhaust from the covers, how the Williams 2002 car look almost as square as yesterday's bricks compared to the handsome Mclaren and stylish Ferrari...how the nose is still as high as and as straight as the nearest flagpole. You would wonder how Williams, with one of the better resourced technical team could actually not do a better job.

Cars do not have to be handsome to be competitive.
What's the problem with the nose... look at the Arrows' nose, high as hell but very aerodynamic

[RaceCarFanatic]

Was it or was it not Ralf who spun his car during the race at Spa ?[QUOTE]originally posted by Ralf's gal: Ah, so they're turning it into an off-road vehicle then? Who finished in front of Ralf at Spa? David Coulthard and Juan Pablo Montoya . Ralf doesn't have what it takes to be a World Champion. His brother does and Juan Pablo does but Ralf doesn't. Ferrari are on top because they take risks un-like the Williams team. The BMW engine is the best competive engine on the grid but the chasis slows the car down with the ****ed up aero package.:beer

[Mr V]

Originally posted by Red
Among others things Mr v! If I were Michelin boss I would chose a team that offers more perspectives and makes less gaffes! Right now what Williams has to offer is only an extremely powerful engine that gets poles but seldom transform them into podium finishes.

Thanx Red, you've added more weight to my arguement in favour of Williams! You said that what Williams has to offer is only an extremely powerful engine that gets poles but seldom transform them into podium finishes , well, consider this

JPM Four 2nds Three 3rds (Total 7 podiums)
Rafe One win One 2nd Four 3rds (Total 6 podiums)

Williams 13 podiums

DC One win One 2nd Three 3rds (Total 5 podiums)
Kimi One 2nd Two 3rds (Total 3 podiums)

McLaren 8 podiums

As far as i can see, Williams also offers Michelin more oppertunities for podiums, as well as the poles and total points i earlier highlighted.

[Gt_R]

Nope..Jordi.. don't take me wrong there.

BMW is actually one manufacturer i love. Hence, when they decide to join back to F1, i really looked forward to them performing well (kind of a problem to have BMW/Ferrari up there...but it's easier when Ferrari is a full works team). Besides, i always had high regards for Frank Williams for his ability in bringing his team where they are and admire his preference for racers. Williams BMW is a cooperation i would love to see succeed. Hence, you can understand my disappointment that with such a very brilliant engine, and one exciting driver, the team is actually struggling to get competitive with Ferrari.

My saying that Mclaren is handsome or Ferrari is stylish isn't THE thing. The thing is that when i compare the top 3 cars, Williams seems to be a couple of years behind in design. I always thought that innovation is part of F1, and to bag a new idea and open a gap, is what top teams do to jump ahead... in this field, Williams seem to have lagged a bit in recent years. What's worse is their inabilities to incorporate good ideas people start as quickly as their rivals...that said, you wonder if this erases the advantage their engine and driver actually have over rivals.

Mclaren...i'm not a fan of Ron.('nuff said) But i'm actually quite impressed with the efficiency and way Ron does stuffs.(ie the way he poached very good people to work for him) Mclaren at the start of the year seems to be struggling so bad, even Renault claim they are going to take 3rd cause they are better. Now? Wheel to wheel with Williams...and giving Williams a real run for money... I don't really like Ron(hence Mclaren), nor Mercedes (due to BMW), but i can't deny that they seem to have done a better job over the races than Williams getting the car to improve.

[Jukebox]

Originally posted by Valve Bounce


Juke, you are difficult to follow - are you suggesting that BMW should ditch Williams, pay $45mill deposit, and build their own chassis for next year?
OK, I think you go on to say that it is bad that Williams won't copy the better ideas from Sauber, still using rear coil springs instead of the torsion bars used by the VW Beetle, and the exhausts of the Ferrari (although the latter innovation is surely up to BMW to adopt and not williams). The funny thing is that despite not adopting all the better designs and setups from the other cars they end up with a car that is only bettered by Ferrari. I suppose Ferrari can count themselves lucky that Frank Williams has been going about it the wrong way in his design.

Valve

I'm not saying next year, but if im not mistaken the partnership deal ends in 2004 and if in these two years...Williams don't perform then it's better to go on their own and i'm very sure the Macs and the Mercedez will be better in the near future. What's $45mill deposit compared to a long term image?

I remembered in an interview in M'sia, Michael mentioned that in terms of power the BMW and Ferrari are at par...but what will separate both of them will be the aerodynamic package and knowing that Michael is as excellent at driving and at technical aspect, i kinda get of what he's trying to relate.

GT_R mentioned in one of his replies that the exhaust exit of the Williams are a bit at the back....i totally agree with his comment as if an engine revs at a very high rpm, the exhaust length had to be shortened and in BMW's case...they had to lengthened the exhaust to go in harmony with the William's chassis.

Williams are able to get better poles result and that is a testimony of the power BMW has as in qualifying as the revs setup are different to raceday because they need the reliability as to not destroy the engine pushing it to the limits. On raceday the chassis and aero package plays the important factor so as the selection of tyres. Michelin can be at fault too but why on tracks that should favour MIchelin tyres the Ferrari kept on dominating????

[Valve Bounce]

Juke - I take it that your technical explanations are backed by sound data and not suppositions that you and Gt_R made up.
Try to see things from a different perspective: Ferrari have the better gearbox and clutch mechanism, better computer guru that they knocked off from Ron Dennis two years ago, the only team with a sole tyre partnership, the best engine on the grid, and as you have been telling us all year, the best driver in F1, not to mention the best set of team orders. Now I need you to give me a technical reference on how Williams had to

"lengthened the exhaust to go in harmony with the William's chassis"

.
In my view, the only reason Williams were able to get pole was solely because of extremely great laps from JPM, but one cannot compare a tyre's performance over one qualifying lap after which the tyres are buggered with setting a car up to run for at least one third race distance on the same set of tyres. One must remember that cars must race on the same tyre compound that is used for quals.
You will note that on most tracks where Ferrari have dominated, the next Bridgestone car is seldom directly behind the Ferraris. Could it be that Ferrari's dominance is a direct result of the reasons I give above?

Valve

[Jukebox]

To support claims that i have made the Williams are having problems with their aero package and positioning of their exhaust...i'll paste some pictures taken at Nurburging and Hockenheim of the FW24.

[Jukebox]

Picture 1 at Nurburging....the rear end chassis and exhaust position.

[Red]

Originally posted by mr v
Thanx Red, you've added more weight to my arguement in favour of Williams!

Au contraire Mr V. You are right, right now Williams offer more podiums, however that's not exactly what Michelin are looking for. They want to win! Given the potential of Williams I believe that they've heavily underperformed...

As I said, it is my personal opinion, but I do believe that McLaren will prevail next year (for the second that is ). Anyway, apparently the Michelins suit McLaren chassis more, even this year...

[Jukebox]

picture2 at Hungagoring........redesigned rear aero and exhaust positions. I was wrong that Williams are not willing to copy Ferrari. Maybe they have realised

[Jukebox]

picture 3 before Williams copied the shortened the exhaust length and changes made at the rear end of the chassis

[Jukebox]

picture 4....the copy began after they finally have realised
but it's too late

[Jukebox]

Originally posted by Valve Bounce

In my view, the only reason Williams were able to get pole was solely because of extremely great laps from JPM, but one cannot compare a tyre's performance over one qualifying lap after which the tyres are buggered with setting a car up to run for at least one third race distance on the same set of tyres. One must remember that cars must race on the same tyre compound that is used for quals.
You will note that on most tracks where Ferrari have dominated, the next Bridgestone car is seldom directly behind the Ferraris. Could it be that Ferrari's dominance is a direct result of the reasons I give above?

Valve

I do hope those pictures justifies what myself and GT_R were trying to point out Valve...

To the second part of your arguement....that's where you are wrong my friend. Setups for qualifying and raceday are totally different. Engines are tuned to perform to the max capabilities, extra aero winglets and flaps are added and ride heights-dampers-springs settings are different.

No doubt Montoya is an excellent driver but i do beleive it's mainly because of the engine that had helped the Williams to set pole positions.

Ever wondered why Montoya couldn't hang on to his pole on raceday?

All of the setups were different for raceday, that's why....they couldn't use the same engine setups and ride height package altogether. If they do it will wear off the engine and underboard plank. True Ferrari's F2002 was superior but Williams should have been closely behind them...not 30 secs off.

[Valve Bounce]

Originally posted by Jukebox


I do hope those pictures justifies what myself and GT_R were trying to point out Valve...

To the second part of your arguement....that's where you are wrong my friend. Setups for qualifying and raceday are totally different. Engines are tuned to perform to the max capabilities, extra aero winglets and flaps are added and ride heights-dampers-springs settings are different.

No doubt Montoya is an excellent driver but i do beleive it's mainly because of the engine that had helped the Williams to set pole positions.

Ever wondered why Montoya couldn't hang on to his pole on raceday?

All of the setups were different for raceday, that's why....they couldn't use the same engine setups and ride height package altogether. If they do it will wear off the engine and underboard plank. True Ferrari's F2002 was superior but Williams should have been closely behind them...not 30 secs off.

OK so your pictures show different exhaust setups - but where is the justification that this was done so that they were in harmony with the chassis?
And where do you get this information that "all the setups were different for race day from quals?
I take it that you believe my explanation about the tyres for quals vis a vis the race are incorrect then.
Whichever way you look at it, at the start of the race, the Ferrari was around 2 secs per lap faster.
Jukes, I honestly don't comprehend the technical aspects of your arguments. :confused:

Valve

[Jukebox]

Originally posted by Valve Bounce
OK so your pictures show different exhaust setups - but where is the justification that this was done so that they were in harmony with the chassis?
And where do you get this information that "all the setups were different for race day from quals?
I take it that you believe my explanation about the tyres for quals vis a vis the race are incorrect then.
Whichever way you look at it, at the start of the race, the Ferrari was around 2 secs per lap faster.
Jukes, I honestly don't comprehend the technical aspects of your arguments. :confused:

Valve

One question i need you to ask yourself....why can't any car on the grid on raceday achieve or beat the time recorded during qualifying?

About the ride height differences i have explained in the racing technology column of the forum...View Here

To the question why Ferrari was 2 secs faster at the start of the race...one of the reasons can be, amazingly Ferrari have found a way to use the same or about the setup (engine) for qualifying. Maybe like what you've pointed out earlier....the integration of clutch/gearbox/engine working as a unit.

Tyres do play an important role, but not 2 secs a lap...don't you think?

[Champ69]

I agree with Jukebox on the setup changes.

In qual the cars only have to acheive the best lap time possible. So the change suspension settings, aero setup, fuel loads, ride hights it does not matter how much they wear out their tires (as long as they save some for the race).

In the race they have to be the first accross the line, they would normally detune the engine or put in the race engine, increase the fuel load and increaseing ride hight, the list goes on.

[Valve Bounce]

Well, the way I see it, driving a car around where the tyres only has to last one and a quarter hot laps is quite different from driving it around for the tyres to last a third of the race. As for the change in all the car's set up, do you have a technical reference that you can quote from an F1 car manufacturer, mechanic or team boss rather than your own posts? Jackie Stewart will do. It's not that I don't trust you Juke........OK, well it is really.
{I wish there is a chuckle smilie that I can use here}

Valve

[Jukebox]

Originally posted by Valve Bounce
Well, the way I see it, driving a car around where the tyres only has to last one and a quarter hot laps is quite different from driving it around for the tyres to last a third of the race. As for the change in all the car's set up, do you have a technical reference that you can quote from an F1 car manufacturer, mechanic or team boss rather than your own posts? Jackie Stewart will do. It's not that I don't trust you Juke........OK, well it is really.
{I wish there is a chuckle smilie that I can use here}

Valve

Ah well....still about tyres are we

Below are the reg on tyres usage from the FIA site

The regulations stipulate that each driver may use a maximum of 40 dry-weather tyres (12 of which may not be used after the first day of practice) and 28 wet-weather tyres throughout the duration of the event. Moreover, each driver may use a maximum of two rubber specifications for his dry-weather tyres during free practice, but he must then choose the rubber specification he wishes to use for the rest of the event before the start of qualifying practice. Every single tyre used at a Grand Prix incorporates an FIA-supplied bar-code so that the scrutineers can check that no driver exceeds the maximum number of tyres allowed.

If you still beleive that tyres are still the main factor for those qualifying lap times.....then every team would have choosed soft compound for qual and on raceday then, to achieve those laptimes

Would a brandnew hard compound tyres be able to get good laptimes?

For those technical setups....i'm sure if you dig deep enough on any technical mags or site, you'll see if i'm BS or not anyway....i ask a lot of questions and sorry can't tell or reveal who my friend is that is directly involved with the circus....i have already promised to him.

[Valve Bounce]

Oh!! For God's sake - it's not Dancing Machine, is it?
As for the tyres, I am fully aware of the rules, and if a driver selects a soft compound to get faster quals times, it simply means he is stuck with those tyres for the race, and they might wear out or blister long before he is due to pit. Jukes - it's not that I don't believe you...............well it is really, but I didn't want to hurt your feelings. { Can somebody please tell me where I can get a chuckle smilie, please? }

Valve

[Mr V]

Originally posted by Jukebox


One question i need you to ask yourself....why can't any car on the grid on raceday achieve or beat the time recorded during qualifying?

Worn tyres, fuel load and set up to accomadate fuel load?

[Jukebox]

It's difficult to continue this with the both of ya....mr v and valve.....so continue to believe in what both of you want and i'll just do the same

[Valve Bounce]

OK.

Valve

[Gt_R]

Somehow, i find the arguments on this post getting a little complicated and hard to follow.

The set up a car uses for race day and for qualifying are different. NOT 100% different, but they are to quite an extent different. In qualifyings, they don't need to worry about tire wears, engine reliability and consistency of the car's behavoir, hence, set up for qualifying can have a much harder suspension setting, a qualifying engine, lower ride height, and due to the lighter weight, different level of downforce and balance of the cars. Even the brake balance and gear ratios can be different..compared to the race setup. All this is worked in the constraints that the tyres used for both sessions are essentially the same, hence, teams often have to choose the tires that best compromise, and plan strategies over that...and teams such as Ferrari more often than not opt for the better tires for the race...

The Michelins were widely believed to be softer than Bridgestone. It is even believed in the paddock that Michelin's harder compounds were as soft, if not softer than Bridgestone's soft. And remember the streak of times when Montoya claimed his poles? But how his race is screwed when the tires just wear too inconsistently and too fast? Michelin boss admitted they went too far in trying to get the softest compound, and kind of went the wrong way...Now, look at how the Michelins wear out during Spa? Pretty competitive...it still looks good after many laps.

And in Hungary, Ralf lost alot of time to the Ferraris in the opening lap...but after some time, he actually matched his brother in terms of lap times...

I'm not saying that Williams had a bad chassis... but the thing is i believe that they took too conservative a route...that they merely produced a good chassis but not a class-act like that of Ferrari. Which i thought should be corrected.

[Gt_R]

To further elaborate..there is no absolute thing that explains Ferrari's advantage. It's simple algebric A+B+C=D. And whoever gets the biggest value for D is the leader.

Sure, the Bridgestones play a role, but the Ferrari and the drivers are great too. Williams may be better in some areas, poorer in some, and equal in some...but not quite..

[Mr V]

Originally posted by Jukebox
It's difficult to continue this with the both of ya....mr v and valve

I'm confused? I thought i gave a perfectly reasonable answer to your question!

Originally posted by Jukebox


One question i need you to ask yourself....why can't any car on the grid on raceday achieve or beat the time recorded during qualifying?

Originally posted by mr v


Worn tyres, fuel load and set up to accomadate fuel load?

Is there any other reason why a car on a race set up not go faster than a car in qualifying set up?