[LM24] Pescarolo Sport future plans...?!?!

[Lorenzo S]

Originally Posted by MulsanneMike

Dear flat-eather, when I hear stuff like that all I hear is, "I wish they'd get away from the science of aerodynamics and mechanical engineering." Are race cars designed to be pretty for the spectators or to go around the track fast? Make your choice...

Now, *****ing about regulated aesthetics, now that's allowed. Especially when the solutions are concluded by group-think and as little science and engineering as the ACO will allow.

I don't agree with this logic at all. Motorsport is entertainment which should primarily stimulate the public visually (and aurally), the engineering challenge should be of a lesser concern. The designers are working within a set of regulations which have produced what a large percentage of motorsport fans agree are "ugly" cars. The engineers are not working in a "vacuum" where they may produce whatever their imagination fancies, producing the fastest cars within a boundless set of regulations. Ergo; change the regulations such that the engineers have no choice but to produce cars which at least have the potential for aesthetically pleasing forms. What those forms take are of course open to much discussion!
Signed,
Flat Earther (MEng)

[The Badger]

Yep , I completely agree .

I just find the high nose too high . Give them a new set of regs , and challange the designers some more then , but in a differant way .

[CTD]

Originally Posted by Lorenzo S

I don't agree with this logic at all. Motorsport is entertainment which should primarily stimulate the public visually (and aurally), the engineering challenge should be of a lesser concern. The designers are working within a set of regulations which have produced what a large percentage of motorsport fans agree are "ugly" cars. The engineers are not working in a "vacuum" where they may produce whatever their imagination fancies, producing the fastest cars within a boundless set of regulations. Ergo; change the regulations such that the engineers have no choice but to produce cars which at least have the potential for aesthetically pleasing forms. What those forms take are of course open to much discussion!
Signed,
Flat Earther (MEng)

I disagree.
Motorsport was in the start never an entertainment sport for the spectators, it was a sport for the participant, and in the small national classes it still is.
An ideal way for the regulations to work, would be that it only regulates on safety concerns.
However regulations also regulates on performance to allow more competitiveness for the fans. Makes good races, but sometimes cap the best too much.
Having regulations that also dictates how "pretty" a car should be, is just so far from what sport is!. There isn't any regulations on female tennis players have to have DD cups .
If High Noses gives an aerodynamic advantage, without causing any hazards, well then it should be used .

But all of this is going a bit off topic, we should move it to the Regulations thread

[Dead-Eye]

I think high noses look absolutely fine, back in the 90's when Benetton started doing them in F1 I always thought that was the best looking car too.

[cdsvg]

Originally Posted by Lorenzo S

I don't agree with this logic at all. Motorsport is entertainment which should primarily stimulate the public visually (and aurally), the engineering challenge should be of a lesser concern. The designers are working within a set of regulations which have produced what a large percentage of motorsport fans agree are "ugly" cars. The engineers are not working in a "vacuum" where they may produce whatever their imagination fancies, producing the fastest cars within a boundless set of regulations. Ergo; change the regulations such that the engineers have no choice but to produce cars which at least have the potential for aesthetically pleasing forms. What those forms take are of course open to much discussion!
Signed,
Flat Earther (MEng)

This is your opinion. For me, it is about engineering and variety over aesthetics. The more important point though, is that inevitably, if you introduce more rules purely for aesthetic reasons, the cars all start to look the same (the lack of variety is bad enough as it is already). Because of this I think its a terrible idea to "change the regulations such that the engineers have no choice but to produce cars which at least have the potential for aesthetically pleasing forms". The end product will be boring and homogenized.

[Lorenzo S]

Originally Posted by CTD

Motorsport was in the start never an entertainment sport for the spectators, it was a sport for the participant, and in the small national classes it still is. [...snip...]

Very true, however motorsport has rarely simply been an engineering challenge without restrictions. There has always been some stipulations; whether it was engine capacity or a minimum production number. These have always been the rules that have determined appearance.

[Lorenzo S]

Originally Posted by cdsvg

This is your opinion. For me, it is about engineering and variety over aesthetics. The more important point though, is that inevitably, if you introduce more rules purely for aesthetic reasons, the cars all start to look the same (the lack of variety is bad enough as it is already). Because of this I think its a terrible idea to "change the regulations such that the engineers have no choice but to produce cars which at least have the potential for aesthetically pleasing forms". The end product will be boring and homogenized.

Of course it is my opinion! Just as it is MulsanneMike's. I haven't argued for the introduction of rules purely on aesthetic grounds (how on earth would anyone regulate that!) but if a set of regulations results in engineering solutions which generate negative publicity (F1 stepped chassis anybody?) then the regulations could and should be tweaked to stop that from happening. Also, the current enforced "safety" features (BHF BHH) could become redundant with another design philosophy that was less aero dependant. I disagree entirely that an additional regulation that may preclude UglyFeature_#1 from being copied by all teams would have any effect on the rules producing cars which look alike any more than they already do.

[The Badger]

Originally Posted by Dead-Eye

I think high noses look absolutely fine, back in the 90's when Benetton started doing them in F1 I always thought that was the best looking car too.

Let F1 have them , doesnt mean LMPC has to have them .

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by Lorenzo S

I don't agree with this logic at all. Motorsport is entertainment which should primarily stimulate the public visually (and aurally), the engineering challenge should be of a lesser concern. The designers are working within a set of regulations which have produced what a large percentage of motorsport fans agree are "ugly" cars. The engineers are not working in a "vacuum" where they may produce whatever their imagination fancies, producing the fastest cars within a boundless set of regulations. Ergo; change the regulations such that the engineers have no choice but to produce cars which at least have the potential for aesthetically pleasing forms. What those forms take are of course open to much discussion!
Signed,
Flat Earther (MEng)

Here's the problem with changing, "...the regulations such that the engineers have no choice but to produce cars which at least have the potential for aesthetically pleasing forms." :

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder...

And I don't see changing regulations in order to limit variety. That's all what instilling regulations to control aesthetics do (look at Grand-Am...all the layout architecture is identical, no variety). Much like the mandatory safety rules, it would "homogenize" the cars and then we have boring, boring, boring.

As for racing being entertainment...I give you NASCAR. Doofy looking cars but "great" racing.

Racing is about going fast, pure and simple. If it's "entertaining," as an offshoot, great. If not, well then second place has more homework to do....

Anyhow, really wasn't having a go at The Badger! Sorry if it comes across as that!

And getting back on track, I'm very interested in seeing what Pescarolo's boys have done to make the "AMR-One" competitive...being stuck with the high nose architecture (and exact same crash box--reduced time scales and costs doing it this way. Totally understandable) naturally means some obvious likeness to the Aston. But refining the AMR-one's obviously "immature" aero package will certainly be a plus. Not to mention binning the engine...

[Speed-King]

And I don't see changing regulations in order to limit variety. That's all what instilling regulations to control aesthetics do (look at Grand-Am...all the layout architecture is identical, no variety). Much like the mandatory safety rules, it would "homogenize" the cars and then we have boring, boring, boring.

How about banning all wings?

There isn't really a lot of tech transfer in this area to production cars, so people can't really play the 'relevance' card and it would make for some radical new challenges.

I am really wondering what a non-winged prototype would look like today.

[Fogelhund]

Of course, mandating specific safety items also has the result in homogenizing the look of the cars, as well as uglifying them. Take away the BHH and BHF and I do believe the current rules would allow for fairly attractive cars to be built. I wish there were better solutions than what the FIA/ACO have come up with.

[alexkiller8]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

How about banning all wings?

There isn't really a lot of tech transfer in this area to production cars, so people can't really play the 'relevance' card and it would make for some radical new challenges.

I am really wondering what a non-winged prototype would look like today.

maybe uglier maybe cute but for sure will be really faster in straight, someone will fly if the diffuser is damaged or doesn't work correctly, a lot of spins during heavy braking and fast turns...

[Japanese Samurai]

http://www.servimg.com/image_preview...458&u=12384106

[Pandamasque]

I strongly agree with Badger. If it takes restricting some of the dimensions to keep the sports cars resembling... well, sports cars, then so be it! Using four tires and RWD instead of... field propulsion or witchcraft may not the best solution engineering-wise. But somehow the rules mandate the automobiles to remain automobiles. Might as well mandate something to make sure they remain sports cars, not delta-trikes, hover-crafts or whatever.
/highly technical rant

[nobster]

Originally Posted by Japanese Samurai

http://www.servimg.com/image_preview...458&u=12384106

Looks like a helicopter on wheels with that background.

[lms]

Originally Posted by Japanese Samurai

http://www.servimg.com/image_preview...458&u=12384106

omg :S

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

How about banning all wings?

There isn't really a lot of tech transfer in this area to production cars, so people can't really play the 'relevance' card and it would make for some radical new challenges.

I am really wondering what a non-winged prototype would look like today.

There's no relevance, period. Hasn't been for decades.

[MagVanisher]

Originally Posted by Japanese Samurai

http://www.servimg.com/image_preview...458&u=12384106

Looks beautiful, but does it fly?

[alexkiller8]

is this the definitive bodyshape of the car? a really strange side structure

[The Badger]

Is that it ..... I thought it was a photoshop joke !!!

[Lorenzo S]

Originally Posted by Japanese Samurai

http://www.servimg.com/image_preview...458&u=12384106

Holy crap that is even uglier than the Aston!

That car's appearance could be massively improved if nose height and minimum width was restricted, along with banning the use of rear wheels on the front. I can't see how altering these parts of the regulations can be compared with Nascar or Grand-Am.

[The Badger]

Originally Posted by Lorenzo S

Holy crap that is even uglier than the Aston!

And that was fugly ..... my God , what have they gone and done now !!!

[CTD]

Hey, Ugly is sometimes fast!

[alexkiller8]

to be fast and competitive is the only hope for this car... or will be a fail even worse than the amr-one one...
btw having almost the same front structure and area i don't know how much the pescarolo 03 could generate more downforce and less drag than the ones produced by the amr-one (that was one of serious problem of the car).

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by alexkiller8

to be fast and competitive is the only hope for this car... or will be a fail even worse than the amr-one one...
btw having almost the same front structure and area i don't know how much the pescarolo 03 could generate more downforce and less drag than the ones produced by the amr-one (that was one of serious problem of the car).

That's pretty easy, say you stick a two x four between the front wheels and it'll make much less downforce for more drag than a proper diffuser. On the 03 they're taking advantage of the high nose and blowing air across the trailing edge of the diffuser: much more efficient. On the AMR-One the air stagnated going into the inlets and there were no provisions to utilize the high nose as it was anyway. The AMR-One looked like a very early design study they pulled the trigger on. Airflow exiting the front diffuser was poorly handled, and that's the key to making a diffuser work; you got to allow it to breath!