[Team] 2017 Car Launch Thread

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

I still think the new cars are hideous. But then again so were the recent ones. I guess this is a meltdown.

Nah, just a letdown.

[BertMk2]

Well the new Sauber has broken cover - and it's err... hideous? Total lack of sponsors as well - so the money still isn't there.

http://www.sauberf1team.com/

[Biscuits In A Red Bull]

Looks to me like the 1994-97 Williams F1 cars, I quite like it. Of course, it is only Sauber...

[F1Guy]

Sauber F1 C36.






Shark fin is back!! Loving the new look.
That colour scheme should look good on TV screens.

[bjohnsonsmith]

[BertMk2]

Originally Posted by F1Guy

Shark fin is back!! Loving the new look.
That colour scheme should look good on TV screens.

Apart from the gold - that doesn't work on tv (hence the Jordan switch to yellow all those years ago). Actually looking at those photos the gold doesn't work in photos either - it's a bit brown.

[Mr Pink]

It looks a bit clumsy to me.

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by Mr Pink

It looks a bit clumsy to me.

+1 on that

As for the colour scheme, reminds me of the 96 Ligier

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by BertMk2

Apart from the gold - that doesn't work on tv (hence the Jordan switch to yellow all those years ago). Actually looking at those photos the gold doesn't work in photos either - it's a bit brown.

Do you think the gold will remain for the season - or is it just temporary to mark 25yrs?

[Kempi]

Unfortunately the return of the fin. And I do not mean a driver from Scandinavia. Those fins really are hideous.

[BSchneiderFan]

The lack of sponsor decals is worrying. And why gold? 25 years is a silver anniversary.

[Akrapovic]

So what happened to this radical new look for this year? It still has a hideous low nose, still has a nub on the end. All they've done is add more winglets and make the rear wing slightly wider.

[JeremySmith]

I have never cared for the shark fin it's extremely ugly.. as I mentioned before the front wing is totally out of control overall and looks ridiculous.

Overall the body work is way to complex .. I am not usually this critical but this year I am going to be, Let's see what the other cars look like ..

Thank God Ross Brawn is back in the game ...

[chillibowl]

Kind of like the blue and gold parts...has a cigarette era flavour to it.

that's about the nicest thing I can say about this Sauber.

[JeremySmith]

555 maybe 😊

[chillibowl]

totally...also, as Biscuits suggested, reminiscent of the Rothmans Williams of 94-97. just flipped the white to the bottom half.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

So what happened to this radical new look for this year? It still has a hideous low nose, still has a nub on the end. All they've done is add more winglets and make the rear wing slightly wider.

I am mystified as to why some fans felt that cars would look radically different?

Richard

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

I am mystified as to why some fans felt that cars would look radically different?

Richard

Richard some us were thinking that the cars would look 👀 a little more retro ..

[bjohnsonsmith]

Not exactly to do with the new cars per se but have the front tyres got bigger?

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

I am mystified as to why some fans felt that cars would look radically different?

Richard

for me it is few reasons.

because development for 2017 started very early gave hope that the new rules would yield a different look/greater advancement/more elegant solutions along the current developmental path type thing.

also expecting more convergence towards Merc's solution but more so was anticipating more creative solutions like that of Force India's 2016 nose.

obviously its too soon for the new owners to have an effect on things but i must also admit to falling into the belief that a new era would come with a new look.

early days still and we have yet to see what solutions teams with significant budgets will bring to bear so still holding out hope.

so long story short its because i had high hopes. expectations, even those not grounded in reality, are a powerful thing.

[ScotsBrutesFan]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Not exactly to do with the new cars per se but have the front tyres got bigger?

Yes, wider

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

I am mystified as to why some fans felt that cars would look radically different?

Richard

I don't tend to follow F1, so I was going by what news reports and forum posts were saying. People said to expect a very different looking car, so I did.

What we have is the same ugly shape with more ugly bits taped to it, and wings that about a decade later, still look completely out of proportion.

Have they improved the sound yet? Or do they still sound like hair dryers? The new cars killed my interest on F1 and this isn't helping.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

Richard some us were thinking that the cars would look 👀 a little more retro ..

Originally Posted by chillibowl

so long story short its because i had high hopes. expectations, even those not grounded in reality, are a powerful thing.

So I haven't done an extensive review of what changed in the regulations around the cars, but I think a summary of the 2017 technical changes (excluding power units at the moment as they generally don't impact the look much). It seems to be...

1. Wider front wing
2. Lower rear wing
3. Wider tires
4. Various dimension changes to the underbody, but generally still a flat bottom.
5. Swept leading edges for sidepods and front wings.
6. Larger barge boards

To be honest, while that is a relative large number of changes if you look at at the past handful of years, it is also not particularly large in the sense of what define the body of an F1 car. I suspect what drives the shape of today's car more than anything is the relatively flat bottom and the need to move air in specific ways to generate downforce. Those have not changed.

I think chillibowl hits the nail on the head IMHO. If I was to summarize, I would say... High hope that were never grounded in reality. To Jeremy's comment... I expect if we put ten F1 fans together and asked them to define "retro F1", we would get ten different answers. Pick one solution and nine of the ten would be disappointed.

The cars do look different if you compare them side by side with 2016, but in my opinion there is really no reason to expect them to be radically different.
I do like the look of the wider tires and wider car. That is the "retro" part for me at least. But much of what teams have learned over the recent past is not going to change how the nose looks, or aero tricks for the front wing. The same goes with airflow under and around the sidepods. I also think that crash test requirements (including relatively new ones for the nose) have driven some design elements (including the knobby noses). The cars have generally gravitated to a set design with minor differences between them. There still remains the potential for the changes this year to shake up the order because the devil is in the details with these cars and generally not something that jumps out at you visually.

Richard

[S griffin]

I'm not too sure on the fin, looked alright to begin with when it was first introduced, then they extended it to the back wing and it looked hideous. We'll get our revenge when Ross Brawn sorts it all out

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

So I haven't done an extensive review of what changed in the regulations around the cars, but I think a summary of the 2017 technical changes (excluding power units at the moment as they generally don't impact the look much). It seems to be...

1. Wider front wing
2. Lower rear wing
3. Wider tires
4. Various dimension changes to the underbody, but generally still a flat bottom.
5. Swept leading edges for sidepods and front wings.
6. Larger barge boards

To be honest, while that is a relative large number of changes if you look at at the past handful of years, it is also not particularly large in the sense of what define the body of an F1 car. I suspect what drives the shape of today's car more than anything is the relatively flat bottom and the need to move air in specific ways to generate downforce. Those have not changed.

I think chillibowl hits the nail on the head IMHO. If I was to summarize, I would say... High hope that were never grounded in reality. To Jeremy's comment... I expect if we put ten F1 fans together and asked them to define "retro F1", we would get ten different answers. Pick one solution and nine of the ten would be disappointed.

The cars do look different if you compare them side by side with 2016, but in my opinion there is really no reason to expect them to be radically different.
I do like the look of the wider tires and wider car. That is the "retro" part for me at least. But much of what teams have learned over the recent past is not going to change how the nose looks, or aero tricks for the front wing. The same goes with airflow under and around the sidepods. I also think that crash test requirements (including relatively new ones for the nose) have driven some design elements (including the knobby noses). The cars have generally gravitated to a set design with minor differences between them. There still remains the potential for the changes this year to shake up the order because the devil is in the details with these cars and generally not something that jumps out at you visually.

Richard

Richard my definition, and its only my opinion the McLaren MP4-7A is the most well proportioned and best looking car that has ever excisted, sounded pretty good as well..