Tech Issue Low noses set to be 'Ugly'

Marbot · 12 Nov 2013, 16:15 (Ref:3330436)

In the great tradition of 'no one saw that one coming' F1 innovations, here is a new one.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/111262

Ouch!

Why can't F1 teams deal with these relatively minor things before having them rubber stamped?

**bella** · 12 Nov 2013, 16:18 (Ref:3330439)

this paragraph absolutely cracked me up!

Quote:

AUTOSPORT understands that some senior Formula 1 technical personnel have already called for changes to improve aesthetics, but this was not successful due to a lack of agreement on the need to do something.

ahh, democracy. you're a harsh mistress.

pureadrenalin · 12 Nov 2013, 16:19 (Ref:3330441)

What is wrong with this??? Improve cockpit head protection and you are good to go. Including aero...

Marbot · 12 Nov 2013, 16:28 (Ref:3330449)

What's wrong with that is we have moved on from very basic aero designs (look at the front wing) to very complex aero designs, and the aero boffins can't unlearn what they have learned.

Knowlesy · 12 Nov 2013, 17:11 (Ref:3330466)

Reminds me of the 'anteater' McLarens of 2004.

Paradise City · 12 Nov 2013, 17:50 (Ref:3330497)

'Forcing them into ugly designs?' We passed that particular post in 2009 guys, wake up!

The rule makers should stop this stupidity and mandate strict dimensions for the nose using the '95 Ferrari as a template. Very simple.

**Aysedasi** · 12 Nov 2013, 17:56 (Ref:3330501)

Quote:

Originally Posted by pureadrenalin

What is wrong with this??? Improve cockpit head protection and you are good to go. Including aero...

It's awful.

You can't possibly justify designing a beautiful looking F1 car these days.......

Marbot · 12 Nov 2013, 18:04 (Ref:3330504)

I really do think that F1 teams couldn't organise the proverbial ------- in a brewery! Which is a shame, because there might be some really interesting F1 car designs being drawn on the backs of some beer mats.

Marbot · 12 Nov 2013, 18:10 (Ref:3330509)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paradise City

The rule makers should stop this stupidity and mandate strict dimensions for the nose using the '95 Ferrari as a template. Very simple.

But now you're forcing teams to use what would effectively be spec parts, and that's just such a big 'no-no' in some folks opinions. And it's only your opinion + 1, that currently wants the '95 Ferrari nose as a template. Big problems already.

**Aysedasi** · 12 Nov 2013, 18:13 (Ref:3330510)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marbot

But now you're forcing teams to use what would effectively be spec parts, and that's just such a big 'no-no' in some folks opinions. And it's only your opinion + 1, that currently wants the '95 Ferrari nose as a template. Big problems already.

No, no problem at all. You just have to accept that PC and I are correct. Simples. Where's the problem?

GolddustMini · 12 Nov 2013, 18:26 (Ref:3330516)

there appears to be an air of "make the design regulations and not consider the outcomes" about recent regulations

that line drawing on autosport at the moment is quite frankly horrible and i hope no one actually produces that in reality, the stepped nose scenario of last year and the "vanity panel" solution was a prime example.

i do feel that the ferrari posted doesnt really fit the bill, the whole car just looks "fat" in my opinion

Marbot · 12 Nov 2013, 18:28 (Ref:3330517)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

No, no problem at all. You just have to accept that PC and I are correct. Simples. Where's the problem?

Well, that's not very democratic, is it. And we all know that democracy works with 100% effectiveness, everywhere, and at all times.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GolddustMini

i do feel that the ferrari posted doesnt really fit the bill, the whole car just looks "fat" in my opinion

Now there's our first problem.

Knowlesy · 12 Nov 2013, 18:44 (Ref:3330521)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marbot

But now you're forcing teams to use what would effectively be spec parts, and that's just such a big 'no-no' in some folks opinions. And it's only your opinion + 1, that currently wants the '95 Ferrari nose as a template. Big problems already.

That is the '94 Ferrari.

The '95 was even prettier.

**Aysedasi** · 12 Nov 2013, 18:46 (Ref:3330523)

Democracy? Now there's a novel concept.......

GolddustMini · 12 Nov 2013, 18:49 (Ref:3330525)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marbot

Well, that's not very democratic, is it. And we all know that democracy works with 100% effectiveness, everywhere, and at all times.

Now there's our first problem.

just in general ive been refered to as "a problem" quite alot!

i think all the cars should look like this, they have dealt very well with the issue of a tapered nose....

Marbot · 12 Nov 2013, 19:00 (Ref:3330527)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

That is the '94 Ferrari.

The '95 was even prettier.

Very true, on both counts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GolddustMini

just in general ive been refered to as "a problem" quite alot!

i think all the cars should look like this, they have dealt very well with the issue of a tapered nose....

Oh, I so agree.

**Aysedasi** · 12 Nov 2013, 19:08 (Ref:3330532)

Oh come on people, we can't allow discussion of proper looking racing cars into this thread now.......!!!

That Eagle was such a stunner.

We'll have chunder in here soon telling us how much he still loves driving it in GPL........

Paradise City · 12 Nov 2013, 19:55 (Ref:3330550)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marbot

But now you're forcing teams to use what would effectively be spec parts, and that's just such a big 'no-no' in some folks opinions.

Don't care.

chillibowl · 12 Nov 2013, 20:26 (Ref:3330568)

why the reg change for next year? was it aimed at creating more passing or just for a more stringent crash test?

anyways not sure what to think.

i dont like the idea of going back to a previous year's model and then having all the cars look the same and then looking the same for each following year.

wolfhound · 12 Nov 2013, 20:33 (Ref:3330573)

Quote:

Originally Posted by chillibowl

why the reg change for next year? was it aimed at creating more passing or just for a more stringent crash test?

anyways not sure what to think.

i dont like the idea of going back to a previous year's model and then having all the cars look the same and then looking the same for each following year.

It's to help reduce the possibility of cars tahing of like Webber at Valencia a few years back. The idea is that the nose will be below the wheel centre line and less likely to lift the car.

However if that low anteater bit is not part of the crash structure it could break off easily.........

chillibowl · 12 Nov 2013, 21:02 (Ref:3330581)

thanks wolfhound

wolfhound · 12 Nov 2013, 21:58 (Ref:3330598)

As the low nose will reduce the airflow into the front of the car and it were to break off in contact with another car thereby improving the airflow under the nose.......

Will there be a lot of cars in front to rear contact at the first corner next year?

Not much use to finger boy though!!!!!

Marbot · 12 Nov 2013, 22:57 (Ref:3330623)

Another case of 'unforeseen consequences' all too ready to bite F1 in the butt.

Another unbiased opinion: "Actually, I think it looks quite nice".

davyboy · 13 Nov 2013, 09:33 (Ref:3330751)

It doesn't take a brain surgeon to work out what part of the human anatomy the new front end looks like... and having seen the drawings, I think the marketing depts. of the teams are aware of the ridicule and negative PR that F1 will be subjected to if they see the light of day. Can you imagine any sponsor wanting to put their name on the end of droop (!)

Peat · 13 Nov 2013, 10:08 (Ref:3330760)

If RBR don't paint theirs like this, they are idiots.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Low budget = Low performance?	XW GT	Australasian Touring Cars.	8	6 Jun 2006 10:37
F1 to get new noses?	Marbot	Formula One	24	4 May 2006 17:05
Noses	Adam43	Sportscar & GT Racing	12	5 Jun 2004 12:11
Who knows noses	Carousel	IRL Indycar Series	34	22 Feb 2004 20:10