New A1 GP car for 2008!

[Kiwi3]

well done jackschmidt - love it! That is my laptop wallpaper from now on!

[kerrmanningjarv]

Originally Posted by Sev

Wow, nice addition of a livery. That must have taken you a while.

I think it would look better without an orange reflection though

Thanks... it did take me a while (a few hours)...

As for the reflection, I had a feeling that I'd forgotten something

[jackschmidt]

A few folks know I did a Ferrari pic manipulation back then on the German car. I thought I'd revisit the task with better technique application.

[MagnetON]

Originally Posted by ss_collins

I know its bigger than the F2004 so bigger drivers like me can fit in it

Now we know the answer to Who ate all the pies?

[diabloA1]

Originally Posted by Hepatic

A picture says a thousand words - no imagination what so ever :/

Other than the front wing, i really don't see anything different. Less front aero will mean it needs more mechanical grip, so in theory that should be easier to race close behind another car, but where's the WOW factor of that car?

Gutted.

The 'WOW' factor will come on race day when the cars dice it out like they always do in A1GP. The car is not the star. It's the racing.
Also this is not an unveiling by a team. This is by the series promoter. The detials of the car will be 'lost when 23-24 cars line up on the grid in very different liveries. As the season starts viewers will be focused on the national liveries and the racing, rather than the cars that power them. A1GP will adhere to their philosophies so less rear wake turbulence, power boost, mecahnical grip. The concept WILL be maintained.

[Paddockman]

Originally Posted by jackschmidt

Boy, those cars sure look more modern that those A1GP cars back in '73.

Quite Brilliant!

I do tend to agree with many of the posts on here about what was wrong with the old chassis!

But if they can adhere to the origional concept with the new car then all is well.

I do worry that making the car faster will run into trobule with regard to the Old Classic circuits not being used.

Someone on here said FIA Grade 2 hope there right and we can keep the British Round at Brands without any changes to fences/spectator areas/run off etc etc etc!! , because yes Brands is narrow but it deserves to have big Single Seaters there weather theres much overtaking or not, where else in the UK can you get as close to the action of a Major Single seater race as the GP Loop.?

Anyway does anyone know exactely where the Car will be testing?

[Pete Fenelon]

Originally Posted by dave not neil

I like the look of the new car, it harks back to when F1 cars used to be good looking

No, it'd be a Lotus 25/33/49/72, an Eagle, or a Maserati 250F if that was the case.

[RichardRenes]

Originally Posted by jackschmidt

Boy, those cars sure look more modern that those A1GP cars back in '73.

good one Jack.

[jackschmidt]

Originally Posted by Paddockman

Quite Brilliant!

I do tend to agree with many of the posts on here about what was wrong with the old chassis!

I read that the aero on the old chassis was insensitive. They were hard to setup because the wing adjustments didn't give a whole deal of effect to the car behaviour. I think I read that they were also quite weak.

I hope the new car will be a driver's car. Easier to setup, easier to diagnose the problems and fix, and bring together close racing where the drivers race at the absolute maximum of the package.

[diabloA1]

The problem wasn't so much aero on the Lola-Zytek. It was setting up the suspension to get the tyres to work that was very difficult. It was truly difficult to get that right. The tyres themselves were not that consistent sometimes. In season 2 one of the teams had used 2 wet sets. They were competitive and in the feature were starting from 4th. It started to rain for the Feature and on their wets their car seemed to be going backwards. The engineers were clueless and thought their pressures were not right. Second set on wets and all of a sudden they were flying again and posted one of the Fastest Laps. They used the same wet sets for Sentul and same thing happened but in reverse. First stint quick, second stint slow.

Hopefully the new car with Michelins will give more consistent feedback

[Hepatic]

Originally Posted by jackschmidt

I read that the aero on the old chassis was insensitive. They were hard to setup because the wing adjustments didn't give a whole deal of effect to the car behaviour. I think I read that they were also quite weak.

But that was the whole point of the chassis and what the organisers wanted!

To allow close racing you have to have a car that is as close as possible aero neutral, especially at the front. If a car is heavily reliant upon front wing aero to ensure it can turn effectively (which ALL F1 cars for at least the last 20 years have been) then as soon as it gets near to another car it'll loose its grip. That means drivers wont be able to follow close enough thru a turn to get a run on another car, and that's even worse in single make series as you don't have much else to help you past.

Had it been based off any other F1 car i'd still be concerned we'll be loosing the close racing, and no amount of tweaking is really going to help what is well regarded as a "can't overtake other cars" formula 1 car. If you watch legends, caterhams, formula ford or renault clios (all single make formula) you'll notice 2 things. Very close racing and aero neutral cars. Its a fact of life - aero makes cars quick but also hard to overtake when running close.

I was amazed by how well Zytek and Lola had come up with a car that was so raceable in that context, and we already know what the F2004 is like, so i really can't see how they'll have close racing with it.

As for weak, if you mean in repect of crash damage then i beg to differ. I've seen up close serveral big incidents at the last 2 rounds at Brands and i think they did pretty damn well in those cases, and i'm sure the drivers feel the same!

[diabloA1]

I seriously won't be overly worried about the lack of overtaking just because the car is based on the F2004/2005.

A1GP and Ferrari have made modifications to the car to ensure close racing is preserved. The new car is less aero aggressive compared to the car it is based on. Powerboost IS retained. Slicks are used. So will carbon brakes.

Though the new car may still produce more turbulence behind it compared to the Lola, I do not think it will be significant enough to actually affect the quality of racing in a negative way.

From what I have been hearing the pros will outweigh the cons significantly. Engine sounds much better, 'sexier' car, significantly quicker car. I think once the race gets underway all these uncertainties will disappear.

For me at least, this is a good car to start off the new A1GP era. However along the way they will need to evolve the design away from F1 to establish their own identity, preferably from season 7.

[jackschmidt]

Originally Posted by Hepatic

But that was the whole point of the chassis and what the organisers wanted!

To allow close racing you have to have a car that is as close as possible aero neutral, especially at the front. If a car is heavily reliant upon front wing aero to ensure it can turn effectively (which ALL F1 cars for at least the last 20 years have been) then as soon as it gets near to another car it'll loose its grip. That means drivers wont be able to follow close enough thru a turn to get a run on another car, and that's even worse in single make series as you don't have much else to help you past.

Had it been based off any other F1 car i'd still be concerned we'll be loosing the close racing, and no amount of tweaking is really going to help what is well regarded as a "can't overtake other cars" formula 1 car. If you watch legends, caterhams, formula ford or renault clios (all single make formula) you'll notice 2 things. Very close racing and aero neutral cars. Its a fact of life - aero makes cars quick but also hard to overtake when running close.

I was amazed by how well Zytek and Lola had come up with a car that was so raceable in that context, and we already know what the F2004 is like, so i really can't see how they'll have close racing with it.

As for weak, if you mean in repect of crash damage then i beg to differ. I've seen up close serveral big incidents at the last 2 rounds at Brands and i think they did pretty damn well in those cases, and i'm sure the drivers feel the same!

I really disagree about the "can't overtake" because of aero thing. True that you lose your front wing advantage by driving too closely, but this hasn't deprived F1 before of great overtaking maneuvers in the past. And for A1GP, I believe that in the league where all cars are the same, close racing action is really car and driver. The best drivers will be able to do it. And what else should a championship aspire to have? The best drivers.

As much as you can argue that aero neutral cars produce close racing actions, I have, for many instances in A1GP races, found myself falling asleep.

I'm not concerned over loss of racing action. Not at all.

I also agree about the tyre remarks. I've seen the inconsistencies of those tyres causing team performance to drop face first on the floor. Most recent one is Congfu Cheng on Brands Hatch Qualifying.

I do remember reading remarks on the aero though. I think it was Lebanon before. Either way, it's a moot point at this time. We will have new cars, and I'm delighted about it.

[Hepatic]

Originally Posted by diabloA1

A1GP and Ferrari have made modifications to the car to ensure close racing is preserved. The new car is less aero aggressive compared to the car it is based on. Powerboost IS retained. Slicks are used. So will carbon brakes.

I love this debate, its great to see people care so much about A1GP to want to discuss the effect of such things

I don't agree that the additions listed above will help tho, infact i think the opposite will happen. To enhance driver influence over the result, you actually need longer braking distances, not shorter ones. The differential between drivers that can brake with 50m to go opposted to 200m to go is massive, and drivers can have more influence over the speed on the lap if the braking distance is longer (bravery, tyre management etc). Powerboost is a good thing tho and i'm happy they are retaining that, it adds to the strategy at the drivers disposal.

I will be over the moon to be proven wrong, but a wolf dressed as a sheep is still a wolf. This IS an F1 car, albeit modified, but the original design will put constraints on the design team as to what they can acheive with it. And as for being prettier, pah! I think the Lola A1GP chassis is the prettiest single seater since the 7UP sponsored Jordan ('91 i think?), the recent F1 cars do nothing for me asthetically, and i have been bored more times by F1 races in the last 3 years than i have A1 races, including ones i've marshalled at!

[Sev]

Originally Posted by Hepatic

And as for being prettier, pah! I think the Lola A1GP chassis is the prettiest single seater since the 7UP sponsored Jordan ('91 i think?), the recent F1 cars do nothing for me asthetically, and i have been bored more times by F1 races in the last 3 years than i have A1 races, including ones i've marshalled at!

That however, is entirely a matter of opinion. I refused to watch the first season of A1GP because I couldn't get over how butt-ugly the cars were, I thought (and still think) they look ridiculous.

Now, true, the spectacle was good, and I particularly like the way it gives opportunities to drivers who don't have enourmous sums of money.

Personally, I'm all for the new Ferrari. I think it looks really good (although I would have kept the angled front wing-supports, just as a distinction), the speed advantage will definately be an attraction, and if the tyre's are up to it, the racing should be close as well.

I find it strange so much of the talk here is focused on the aero; the switch in tyres will probably have at least as much of an effect on racing. For starters, its the aero vs mechanical grip ratio that turbulence effects, so if the tyres are proportionally grippier next year than this year...

Also, the wear rates of the tyres should have an effect. Different set-up's and driving styles causing different amounts of wear/grip leads to changable races, leading to overtaking.

[nkfan]

cant wait for the unveiling ......Have the new engine specs been released ?

[spider]

well, it's going to run for the first time today, are the spies in position!!?

[MagnetON]

Originally Posted by spider

well, it's going to run for the first time today, are the spies in position!!?

Yes, we have spies in low places!

[jackschmidt]

Where are the tifosis when you need them?

[spider]

all we need is one with a wireless internet connection and a digital camera and we're laughing, upload upload upload Curious to see what it looks like running...

[Ogami musashi]

Originally Posted by Hepatic

I love this debate, its great to see people care so much about A1GP to want to discuss the effect of such things

I don't agree that the additions listed above will help tho, infact i think the opposite will happen. To enhance driver influence over the result, you actually need longer braking distances, not shorter ones. The differential between drivers that can brake with 50m to go opposted to 200m to go is massive, and drivers can have more influence over the speed on the lap if the braking distance is longer (bravery, tyre management etc). Powerboost is a good thing tho and i'm happy they are retaining that, it adds to the strategy at the drivers disposal.

I will be over the moon to be proven wrong, but a wolf dressed as a sheep is still a wolf. This IS an F1 car, albeit modified, but the original design will put constraints on the design team as to what they can acheive with it. And as for being prettier, pah! I think the Lola A1GP chassis is the prettiest single seater since the 7UP sponsored Jordan ('91 i think?), the recent F1 cars do nothing for me asthetically, and i have been bored more times by F1 races in the last 3 years than i have A1 races, including ones i've marshalled at!

I just use your post to write here some informations.


the F2004 was chosen because the turbulence created by the car were all due wings and diffuser. The bodywork in itself was very efficient.
So to control turbulence you just need to work on wings and diffuser.
If you look at the new A1GP car you'll notice that front wing is simpler and lower, and that rear wing is higher which means the coupling with the diffuser will be less, i'm also pretty sure the geometry of the diffuser is changed.


Once this is treated (the design), the fact that downforce will be nowhere near actual F1 cars and that tyres are slicks will make the rest:
Not only you'll lose not so much as a proportion of downforce following someone but because the ratio of mechinical grip vs downforce is balanced you'll lose little total grip.

Things are as simple as that.

in F1 the modifications are far more difficult for two points: you need far faster lap times (so far more grip) and you need to take into account that there's engineering going on so that the cars are always enhanced.

The F2004 was also used as tested to design the new F1 2009 aerodynamics regs, howver in contrary to what many people think the 2009 cars won't look like F2004 at all.
Bodywork shape will be very different to account for the total ban of appendice (including barge board and chimney) and a minimum cross section is applied to sidepods all the way down to the rear wheels.

To end up, what is a general debate (not specifically A1), "what is needed" to bring overtaking is a complex question.

Let me just say that steel brakes are not meaning longer braking zone.
You can have steel brakes with the same friction performance than cabron one, and in racing car, braking is tyre limited.

Also longer braking zone don't bring necessarily more overtaking. It is true that in some short braking corner, the shortening of braking distance prevent it but that's not the case on many heavy brakings (were most overtakings while braking take place) were distance is sufficient AND reduced braking distance allow for more slipstream time before braking (thus more time to get side by side), more time to recover in case of deep braking, and faster overtaking (the speed differential between the guy braking sooner than you is higher so you're faster ahead of him).

Thus one can say there's a certain distance region were overtaking is easy and in either extremes of this region the overtaking possibilities are reduced:

Too short and you don't have the place to move your car, too long and you don't have the time to accelerate to get along the guy.

One thing also often forgotten is that the longer the braking distance the more DIFFICULT it is to brake later. Longer distance=any delay (for a given time) brings you farther.


Actually even F1 cars on heavy braking need to brake between 80 to 120 meters, considering a car is 4-5 meters long..you have more than the space to do so.

[spider]

V.interesting points Ogami...

[dave not neil]

Originally Posted by spider

well, it's going to run for the first time today, are the spies in position!!?

I've heard it may be sunday instead...

[spider]

given the weather that wouldn't be a huge surprise...

[Hepatic]

Originally Posted by Ogami musashi

Let me just say that steel brakes are not meaning longer braking zone.
You can have steel brakes with the same friction performance than cabron one, and in racing car, braking is tyre limited.

Yep, it works both ways but i'm still gutted it'll look like an F1 car, even if they do manage to keep the overtaking as good as it has been. I know Lotus tested steel brakes on an F1 car some years ago, and they found what you have described, it didn't really make that much difference in power, the main reason for carbon is weight.

As i said before, i hope i'm wrong...