|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
1 Jun 2010, 22:26 (Ref:2702855) | #26 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,981
|
||
|
1 Jun 2010, 22:39 (Ref:2702858) | #27 | ||
Ten-Tenths Hall of Fame
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,408
|
They'll soon be coming up with a Teflon based red paint which will make the cars very slippery through the air and virtually uncatchable.
|
||
|
1 Jun 2010, 23:22 (Ref:2702872) | #28 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
How about
Comprex superchargers Unbroken low front wing to exploit ground effect -(front wing endplates?) East west engine orientation Brought DeDion suspension back after everyone else went to independent 22" wide Rear slicks Magnesium wheels Seemless shift gearbox Flexible rear wing Seemless shift gearbox would have to be the crowning glory, capable of full power shifts without disengaging the clutch. Feel free to shoot at any of this - not that the members don't anyway, but thats what makes this forum valuable! All based on faulty memory. Who was the first to institute modern high speed tyre stops? Renault? Ferrari? |
|
|
2 Jun 2010, 00:43 (Ref:2702902) | #29 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 11,402
|
|||
|
2 Jun 2010, 08:33 (Ref:2703015) | #30 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,206
|
they've had an innovative relationship with the rulemakers (eg the veto); imagine if Colin Chapman had had that...!
|
|
|
2 Jun 2010, 09:34 (Ref:2703060) | #31 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,981
|
||
|
2 Jun 2010, 11:03 (Ref:2703126) | #32 | |
20KPINAL
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 29,853
|
Ferrari of recent times have not been especially innovative. They were known, during the rather successful Todt/Brawn/Byrne/Martinelli/TGF era to have the most refined, evolved cars whilst others scrabbled about with innovations.
Not that they didn't set trends in car design. The F2002 kick started an era of ultra skinny waisted cars with tiny gearboxes for instance. |
|
|
2 Jun 2010, 11:05 (Ref:2703127) | #33 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,126
|
Comprex superchargers - OK
Unbroken low front wing to exploit ground effect -(front wing endplates?) - Beneton I thought, but probably wrong. East west engine orientation -? Is that an innovation? Brought DeDion suspension back after everyone else went to independent - Not really an innovation - since the technology already existed. 22" wide Rear slicks - fair enough, but again, not really an innovation. Magnesium wheels - Not sure wheel material is a technological innovation either. Seemless shift gearbox - good point. Flexible rear wing - Obviously against the rules! |
||
__________________
Locost #54 Boldly Leaping where no car has gone before. And then being T-boned. Damn. Survivor of the 2008 2CV 24h!! 2 engines, one accident, 76mph and rain. |
2 Jun 2010, 13:04 (Ref:2703204) | #34 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,195
|
Brabham was the first team to have pre-scheduled pit stops for both tyre changes and mid-race refuelling. They didn't introduce it because of the higher fuel consumption, but only because of the strategic advantage.
|
||
__________________
'Aerodynamics are for people who can't build engines.' - Enzo Ferrari |
2 Jun 2010, 13:15 (Ref:2703211) | #35 | |
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
I think that it can be said that most of the stuff that we see on F1 cars is only there to make an F1 car go faster, and not much else.
In the meantime, Ferrari,and others, will be busying themselves in their windtunnels, so that once again we can gasp in awe at the sight of yet another subtle aero change. |
|
|
2 Jun 2010, 13:28 (Ref:2703220) | #36 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 758
|
After reading 'so far', I can only assume Ferrari have not had many, if any truly revolutionary innovations, some good ideas yes, but nothing in the 'this is the way all F1 cars will be built from now on' mode.
Rather they seem to, as has been said already, mostly evolve and develop, adopting other people's ideas or innovations that suit them, along the way. The biggest innovation being sticking M Schumacher in the red car or so it seems. Is this why historically they have in most cases, always fought against drastic change to rules or allowing revolutionary ideas set by other teams etc? P |
||
__________________
Madness is a normal condition interupted only by spells of sanity. |
3 Jun 2010, 00:20 (Ref:2703537) | #37 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
Quote:
Only as interpreted by the FIA it supported the the specified weights withour deflection I think they actually had the first wing by about 10 mins on Ickx's car. |
||
|
3 Jun 2010, 08:34 (Ref:2703686) | #38 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,981
|
I agree that was the reason. I wasn't posting to explain why they did it, just to point out that I believed they were the first to make scheduled tyre stops, not Ferrari (or Renault)
|
|
|
3 Jun 2010, 19:01 (Ref:2704069) | #39 | |
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,114
|
They have more of a tradition for refining concepts, rather than being ahead of the game. And when they are brining updates every few races or so, as opposed to every race like McLaren, that's not enough.
|
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro Ferrari? | kristof14 | Formula One | 19 | 17 Jan 2009 11:57 |
If one is asked to be "innovative" to design a DP, then perhaps... | H16 | Sportscar & GT Racing | 15 | 4 Mar 2003 13:04 |
Would you prefer to view Ferrari domination or a Battling Ferrari? | Valve Bounce | Formula One | 36 | 25 Nov 2002 21:55 |
Ferrari boss theatens Ferrari may quit | Inigo Montoya | Formula One | 58 | 16 Oct 2002 07:58 |
FERRARI INNOVATIVE? | Geva racing | Racing Technology | 2 | 5 Jul 2000 09:28 |