Home  
Site Partners: SpotterGuides Veloce Books  
Related Sites: Your Link Here  

Go Back   TenTenths Motorsport Forum > Single Seater Racing > Formula One

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11 Feb 2022, 15:19 (Ref:4098270)   #51
Taxi645
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Netherlands
Posts: 979
Taxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridTaxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Casto View Post
Image pulled from discussion elsewhere. Are they identical? No. Are they very close? Close enough to support my opinion? In my opinion absolutely. The position is slightly different all over, but the larger difference is leg/feet height and not eye height.



The reduction in visibility is real. The slightly taller tires and the aero bit that goes over it does reduce the sightlines from before. But... In the grand scheme of things your argument that this means (or is a strong argument for) moving to either narrower or shorter tires is empty because other top level series all the way up to saloon cars have it much much worse and drivers deal with it. And yes, there are accidents in prototype racing which can be attributed to visibility challenges.

Just extend your argument to Karts vs most every thing else. You clearly see over the wheels. You have excellent visibility. How are drivers able to make anything other than Karts work today? I am not sure if I can drive safely to the grocery store later today. I can't begin to see the corners on anything?

I think what you are seeing in that quote. Is the same comments you see when open wheel drivers move to closed cockpits. They commonly call out that they just can't do what they did previously (and probably privately wonder how anyone drives those cars quickly). But they just have to adjust their style. It is more challenging, but no so unsafe that all racing should be open wheeled with tiny wheels (i.e. Karts)

If you want a F1 visibility issues to try to solve, how about the challenges they face in seeing who is beside/behind them?

Richard

I don't think you can draw any meaningful conclusion based on that image. The difference in head height could be anything from 0 to 10 cm's from those two images.

It surprises me that you signal out a single item in the argument out of the five I listed when any significant advantage of going to that big a tire diameter has yet to be communicated at all.
Taxi645 is offline  
__________________
Constructive discussion: A conversion where participants are maximally open to yet critical of each others (and their own) arguments, with the intend of enhancing the knowledge, understanding and/or handling of it's subject.
Quote
Old 11 Feb 2022, 15:27 (Ref:4098272)   #52
chillibowl
Veteran
 
chillibowl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Canada
winnipeg, canada
Posts: 9,719
chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!
the drivers seemed more then capable of managing the larger front wings that they couldn't properly see the end plates of...any reason to think they wont be able to manage their cars dimensions with the larger tires with the aero bit over them?
chillibowl is offline  
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there
I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place
Quote
Old 11 Feb 2022, 16:36 (Ref:4098277)   #53
crmalcolm
Subscriber
Veteran
 
crmalcolm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Nepal
Exactly where I need to be.
Posts: 12,292
crmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Fame
Why are these five factors important?
- Visibility.
- Weight.
- Lower centre of gravity.
- Less drag.
- Less aero distrubance.
crmalcolm is offline  
Quote
Old 11 Feb 2022, 18:26 (Ref:4098294)   #54
Anyopenroad
Veteran
 
Anyopenroad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
England
London
Posts: 1,442
Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
It surprises me that you signal out a single item in the argument out of the five I listed when any significant advantage of going to that big a tire diameter has yet to be communicated at all.
IMHO the bigger/wider tyres look awesome and the smaller/narrower ones look lame and that is a significant (indeed, to me, decisive) advantage.
Anyopenroad is offline  
__________________
I like taking pictures of cars going round tracks, through forests and up hills.
Quote
Old 11 Feb 2022, 21:39 (Ref:4098307)   #55
Richard C
Veteran
 
Richard C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,803
Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
I don't think you can draw any meaningful conclusion based on that image. The difference in head height could be anything from 0 to 10 cm's from those two images.
I unfortunately don't have access to either of the cars. So I can't measure them. But you can choose to see whatever you want in those images (which I think are accurate enough for this conversation). In the end, I was just responding to your comment which implied the two were not similar enough to compare. How about you provide the evidence to support your assertions. It's not up to me to prove your points.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
It surprises me that you signal out a single item in the argument out of the five I listed when any significant advantage of going to that big a tire diameter has yet to be communicated at all.
If you look back at my older posts I have provides more details on other points. But your most recent post was about drivers complaining about sightlines over the taller tires. So that is what I responded to. There is no point in going over this point by point again because nothing has changed.

I know you are passionate about this topic. You have worked to make this a true and calm discussion. And I think it has been. And please understand that I disagree with the idea and this is not about you. Of course there is both and upper and lower limit on how wide or tall the tires should be. But I don't believe radically changing them (particularly to make the diameter much smaller or to reduce the width to reduce spray and increase traction in the wet) are good ideas at all. Or any of the other points you make. At least enough to support a change.

The topic has been dead for months and I really just don't see anyone who supports this idea either here or in F1 in general. When you posted earlier this week, I saw it and thought... "Nope, not gonna engage on this again!" even when I was thinking all of the comments I posted above. Sadly, V8 Fireworks post sucked me back in. I should have just not posted. I think I will go back into hibernation on this topic until I think there is something I can add beyond what I have already said. This is basically the same conclusion I had back in Oct. when we had a number of back and forth on this.

Richard
Richard C is offline  
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one."
Quote
Old 12 Feb 2022, 01:00 (Ref:4098323)   #56
V8 Fireworks
Veteran
 
V8 Fireworks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,923
V8 Fireworks should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridV8 Fireworks should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridV8 Fireworks should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Casto View Post
Sadly, V8 Fireworks post sucked me back in. I should have just not posted.

Richard
I do apologise. Pirelli already make the narrow 18" tyres for Formula 2, so it would be trivial to use them in F1 as well if F1 teams or the FIA wanted to do this.

I think the width is the same as before, so F2 uses 245mm/725mm R18" front and 325mm/725mm R18" rear, i.e., 20% narrower than what F1 will use.

Like I said those cars are 1.9m wide, which doesn't look too bad. F1 could use the same car width and tyre sizes as F2 if they wanted, it wouldn't be a big deal... The cars would have ~20% less mechanical grip (and therefore total, as aero grip is just a multiplier) of course. They would corner slower, but go faster on the straights with the lower air resistance of the narrower tyres.

The car concept of the 2022 F1 car isn't that different than the F2 car apart from having that 10cm of extra width and the F1 car being much, much longer.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Anyopenroad View Post
IMHO the bigger/wider tyres look awesome and the smaller/narrower ones look lame
I like the rears, but feel the fronts in F1 are too wide and look kinda silly.

Last edited by V8 Fireworks; 12 Feb 2022 at 01:12.
V8 Fireworks is offline  
Quote
Old 12 Feb 2022, 07:39 (Ref:4098361)   #57
Taxi645
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Netherlands
Posts: 979
Taxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridTaxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by chillibowl View Post
the drivers seemed more then capable of managing the larger front wings that they couldn't properly see the end plates of...any reason to think they wont be able to manage their cars dimensions with the larger tires with the aero bit over them?
I'm not saying they are not capable of handling it. I'm saying it is one of the many drawbacks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by crmalcolm View Post
Why are these five factors important?
- Visibility.
- Weight.
- Lower centre of gravity.
- Less drag.
- Less aero distrubance.
To ask this question, fundamentally, is to ask oneself, why am I interested in F1 in the first place?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anyopenroad View Post
IMHO the bigger/wider tyres look awesome and the smaller/narrower ones look lame and that is a significant (indeed, to me, decisive) advantage.
Well perhaps I should accept we live in a world that prioritizes the look of a car over the ability of a racing driver being able to look out of his cockpit and see the damn parts of the track he is being well paid to navigate around...

If these F1 cars weren't such enormous barges, smaller wheels would look perfectly proportionate. I didn't hear anyone complain about the small wheels and tires on the 2021 cars though. As V8 Fireworks already said, the teams didn't want the further reduction in wheelbase the FIA had proposed. Maybe with the drop of the MGU-H in 2026, we will see another effort to decrease the size (and weight) of the cars.
Taxi645 is offline  
__________________
Constructive discussion: A conversion where participants are maximally open to yet critical of each others (and their own) arguments, with the intend of enhancing the knowledge, understanding and/or handling of it's subject.
Quote
Old 12 Feb 2022, 08:00 (Ref:4098362)   #58
Taxi645
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Netherlands
Posts: 979
Taxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridTaxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Casto View Post
I unfortunately don't have access to either of the cars. So I can't measure them. But you can choose to see whatever you want in those images (which I think are accurate enough for this conversation). In the end, I was just responding to your comment which implied the two were not similar enough to compare. How about you provide the evidence to support your assertions. It's not up to me to prove your points.
Hold on, you introduced the comparison with prototype cars. For that comparison to be valid the head height needs to be equal in both cars. So it is on you to prove that they are equal.

But I'll be a good sport. Based on the helmet size (awfully blunt way of doing it but okay) compared to the vertical distance from the top of the visor to the bottom of the floor. If the LMP top of the visor is 90cm above the car floor than based on the above two image the one in the F1 car is 82cm, so 8cm lower. This also still leaves the variable of the ride height of the car.

If we assume equal ride height for the 2022 cars compared to an LMP than a LMP's drivers eyes are 8cm higher than in an F1 car. Assuming the difference between the height of the wake deflector on the F1 car and the fenders on an LMP is smaller than 8cm and the tire wall is equally high (which I suspect on a F1 car is actually higher, with a total front diameter 710mm vs 690mm on the LMP), the conclusion would be that purely based on height it will be easier to see the apex in a LMP. Of course, as you said, in the LMP you have the A-pillars and cleanness of the windscreen to consider.

But I agree, I think we are taking this part of the discussion a bit too far...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Casto View Post
If you look back at my older posts I have provides more details on other points. But your most recent post was about drivers complaining about sightlines over the taller tires. So that is what I responded to. There is no point in going over this point by point again because nothing has changed.

I know you are passionate about this topic. You have worked to make this a true and calm discussion. And I think it has been. And please understand that I disagree with the idea and this is not about you. Of course there is both and upper and lower limit on how wide or tall the tires should be. But I don't believe radically changing them (particularly to make the diameter much smaller or to reduce the width to reduce spray and increase traction in the wet) are good ideas at all. Or any of the other points you make. At least enough to support a change.

The topic has been dead for months and I really just don't see anyone who supports this idea either here or in F1 in general. When you posted earlier this week, I saw it and thought... "Nope, not gonna engage on this again!" even when I was thinking all of the comments I posted above. Sadly, V8 Fireworks post sucked me back in. I should have just not posted. I think I will go back into hibernation on this topic until I think there is something I can add beyond what I have already said. This is basically the same conclusion I had back in Oct. when we had a number of back and forth on this.

Richard

Fair enough!

Last edited by Taxi645; 12 Feb 2022 at 08:11.
Taxi645 is offline  
__________________
Constructive discussion: A conversion where participants are maximally open to yet critical of each others (and their own) arguments, with the intend of enhancing the knowledge, understanding and/or handling of it's subject.
Quote
Old 12 Feb 2022, 12:21 (Ref:4098385)   #59
Anyopenroad
Veteran
 
Anyopenroad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
England
London
Posts: 1,442
Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
Well perhaps I should accept we live in a world that prioritizes the look of a car over the ability of a racing driver being able to look out of his cockpit and see the damn parts of the track he is being well paid to navigate around...
Works for me!
Anyopenroad is offline  
__________________
I like taking pictures of cars going round tracks, through forests and up hills.
Quote
Old 12 Feb 2022, 12:28 (Ref:4098386)   #60
crmalcolm
Subscriber
Veteran
 
crmalcolm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Nepal
Exactly where I need to be.
Posts: 12,292
crmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Fame
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post

Well perhaps I should accept we live in a world that prioritizes the look of a car over the ability of a racing driver being able to look out of his cockpit and see the damn parts of the track he is being well paid to navigate around...
I prefer a world that challenges a driver to earn the money he is being well paid for.
crmalcolm is offline  
Quote
Old 12 Feb 2022, 18:30 (Ref:4098421)   #61
V8 Fireworks
Veteran
 
V8 Fireworks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,923
V8 Fireworks should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridV8 Fireworks should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridV8 Fireworks should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
Well perhaps I should accept we live in a world that prioritizes the look of a car over the ability of a racing driver being able to look out of his cockpit and see the damn parts of the track he is being well paid to navigate around...

If these F1 cars weren't such enormous barges, smaller wheels would look perfectly proportionate. I didn't hear anyone complain about the small wheels and tires on the 2021 cars though.
At least two cars from the 1968 season already used 15" wheels:


Front rims: 15x8.5"
Rear rims: 15x9.5" (Lotus 43 sizes, 49 may be wider)


Front rims: 15"x9.65"
Rear rims: 15"x11.5" (Honda RA273 rim sizes)

Source: http://srmz.net/index.php?showtopic=4952

Therefore 13" wheels with high profile tyres being regulated in Formula One was surely arbitrary and of no real engineering basis? I think the rear wheels were restricted to 13" first, as teams still had a choice of 15" fronts in the early 80's.

Why stick to 13" when USAC allowed 15" to the present day with no issue? 13" is so arbitrary, adopting 18" is perfectly fine... The only drawback is the FIA increasing the total tyre diameter as well, which is silly.

18" wheels with 680mm tyres (so only +10mm instead of +55mm) look perfectly ok:


Last edited by V8 Fireworks; 12 Feb 2022 at 18:36.
V8 Fireworks is offline  
Quote
Old 12 Feb 2022, 23:16 (Ref:4098436)   #62
wnut
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
wnut has a real shot at the championship!wnut has a real shot at the championship!wnut has a real shot at the championship!wnut has a real shot at the championship!wnut has a real shot at the championship!
13" wheels were originally introduced to limit the size of the brakes, as most of the overtaking occurred under braking and the longer the distance the more opportunity to overtake. It is also the reason that F1 brakes are not allowed to be boosted. Then somebody introduced carbon fibre brake discs, and these were just allowed to continue with no thought to what they were doing to the racing.

F1, what would you expect, certainly not continuity of thought.
wnut is offline  
Quote
Old 13 Feb 2022, 12:48 (Ref:4098488)   #63
Taxi645
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Netherlands
Posts: 979
Taxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridTaxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks View Post
At least two cars from the 1968 season already used 15" wheels:


Front rims: 15x8.5"
Rear rims: 15x9.5" (Lotus 43 sizes, 49 may be wider)


Front rims: 15"x9.65"
Rear rims: 15"x11.5" (Honda RA273 rim sizes)

Source: http://srmz.net/index.php?showtopic=4952

Therefore 13" wheels with high profile tyres being regulated in Formula One was surely arbitrary and of no real engineering basis? I think the rear wheels were restricted to 13" first, as teams still had a choice of 15" fronts in the early 80's.

Why stick to 13" when USAC allowed 15" to the present day with no issue? 13" is so arbitrary, adopting 18" is perfectly fine... The only drawback is the FIA increasing the total tyre diameter as well, which is silly.

18" wheels with 680mm tyres (so only +10mm instead of +55mm) look perfectly ok:

Yes, smaller cars means smaller wheels look equally good. For clarification again, I'm not suggesting to stick with 13-inch. I'm saying use the same tyrewall height as the 18-inch but on a 16-inch wheel for a overall diameter of 670mm.

Here's a picture that compares the 13'' to the 18'' (and this is without the wake deflector):




See how much wider the rears actually look on the smaller diameter?

They would nut be very dissimilar to a 15-inch indycar tyre. Just a slightly larger 16-inch wheel and a slightly lower side wall within roughly the same diameter.

Since 2016 the wheel/tyre combo gained ~16.5kg due to the extra width in 2017 and another 14kg due the larger diameter wheels and tyres in 2022. So in total the wheel/tyre combo got more than 30kg heavier. All rotational unsprung mass.

If in 2026 we drop the MGU-H and we then do get the originally planned addition 20cm reduction in wheelbase on the current 10cm reduction (or perhaps even a bit more), we could go to a smaller diameter again which would still be nicely in proportion to the then smaller car.

I could then imagine the following size:
Front 265/670/16
Rear 365/670/16

For reference:
2016:
Front 245/670/13
Rear 325/670/13

2022:
Front 305/720/18
Rear 405/720/18

That tyre/wheel combo would weight about 15kg more on all corners combined than the 2016 combo, but 15.5kg less than the 2022 combo.

You'd have:

- The same tire wall height of the 2022 cars.
- Proper visibility
- Wheel size still nicely in proportion to the then smaller cars.
- Less aquaplaning
- Less spray
- Less (unsprung) (rotation) mass.
- Less drag
- Less aero interference
- 8cm wider opening leading to the venturi tunnels.

Last edited by Taxi645; 13 Feb 2022 at 12:53.
Taxi645 is offline  
__________________
Constructive discussion: A conversion where participants are maximally open to yet critical of each others (and their own) arguments, with the intend of enhancing the knowledge, understanding and/or handling of it's subject.
Quote
Old 13 Feb 2022, 14:42 (Ref:4098499)   #64
Taxi645
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Netherlands
Posts: 979
Taxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridTaxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
That tyre/wheel combo would weight about 15kg more on all corners combined than the 2016 combo, but 15.5kg less than the 2022 combo.

Sorry miscalculated. Should be closer to +10kg compared to 2016 and -20,5kg compared to 2022.
Taxi645 is offline  
__________________
Constructive discussion: A conversion where participants are maximally open to yet critical of each others (and their own) arguments, with the intend of enhancing the knowledge, understanding and/or handling of it's subject.
Quote
Old 13 Feb 2022, 15:20 (Ref:4098502)   #65
crmalcolm
Subscriber
Veteran
 
crmalcolm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Nepal
Exactly where I need to be.
Posts: 12,292
crmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Fame
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
You'd have:

- The same tire wall height of the 2022 cars.
- Proper visibility
- Wheel size still nicely in proportion to the then smaller cars.
- Less aquaplaning
- Less spray
- Less (unsprung) (rotation) mass.
- Less drag
- Less aero interference
- 8cm wider opening leading to the venturi tunnels.
Other than less spray, why would any of these 'improve' F1?
crmalcolm is offline  
__________________
"When you’re just too socially awkward for real life, Ten-Tenths welcomes you with open arms. Everyone has me figured out, which makes it super easy for me."
Quote
Old 13 Feb 2022, 15:25 (Ref:4098503)   #66
crmalcolm
Subscriber
Veteran
 
crmalcolm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Nepal
Exactly where I need to be.
Posts: 12,292
crmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Fame
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
https://www.racefans.net/2022/02/09/...lt-verstappen/

Another driver pointing to the poor visibility with the new tyres:

“For me actually, the biggest thing is just the view in the cockpit with these big tyres,” he said. “To hit an apex in some tight corners is a bit more difficult.

Red Bull’s chief engineer Paul Monaghan:

“It’s certainly put a bit of weight onto the car, the tyre is bigger overall, so it has a fairly significant aerodynamic effect.
Apologies for the delayed response to this - but I went back through the article and looked at what the Red Bull staff actually said:

"To hit an apex in some tight corners is a bit more difficult." - Good
"The driving just feels like the car has a bit less grip" - Good
"It’s certainly put a bit of weight onto the car, the tyre is bigger overall, so it has a fairly significant aerodynamic effect." - so what? Deal with it
"It’s a bit of a new drawing board for us, isn’t it?" - Good

Everything Red Bull are highlighting about the new tyres (IMO) is a good thing, it means teams and drivers have to work a bit harder.
crmalcolm is offline  
__________________
"When you’re just too socially awkward for real life, Ten-Tenths welcomes you with open arms. Everyone has me figured out, which makes it super easy for me."
Quote
Old 13 Feb 2022, 16:37 (Ref:4098506)   #67
Taxi645
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Netherlands
Posts: 979
Taxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridTaxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid







These are Super Formula cars. At front: 270/620/R13 and rear: 360/620/R13 they don't have extremely wide tires. Still they look like proper wide open-wheel class tires. Why? Because they are not ridiculously tall like the 2022 F1 tires and the cars are not barges like current F1 cars.

This is the average wheelbase and length of an F1 car:
3.660mm and 5.695mm

This is from the Super Formula car:
3.115mm and 5.233mm

Super Formula has logically specced tires that makes technical sense. F1 well.....
Taxi645 is offline  
__________________
Constructive discussion: A conversion where participants are maximally open to yet critical of each others (and their own) arguments, with the intend of enhancing the knowledge, understanding and/or handling of it's subject.
Quote
Old 13 Feb 2022, 16:55 (Ref:4098508)   #68
Taxi645
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Netherlands
Posts: 979
Taxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridTaxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by crmalcolm View Post
Other than less spray, why would any of these 'improve' F1?

- The same tire wall height of the 2022 cars. This not what I'm suggesting, this is the change F1 and Pirelli wanted.
- Proper visibility. I won't explain again cause it bad for my mood.
- Wheel size still nicely in proportion to the then smaller cars.
Important to the 18-inch crowd apparently (allthough to me they look too big even on the huge F1 cars we have today).
- Less aquaplaning Safer, less rounds behind the safety car and more racing on a wet race day.
- Less spray
Agreed apparently
- Less (unsprung) (rotation) mass.
Improves acceleration (less fuel needed= lighter cars), grip (faster cars, need less downforce= less drag=less fuel = lighter cars) and better handling/more fun to drive.
- Less drag
less fuel needed=lighter cars
- Less aero interference
cleaner air to the following car=better following= better racing and better lift to drag= less fuel=lighter cars
- 8cm wider opening leading to the venturi tunnels.
better lift to drag= less fuel= lighter cars


In aviation if an airplane is 15% heavier than it needs to be and it's engine 7x more expensive than necessary, any investor would laugh you out the door. in F1 we say it looks good and make excuses why it is a good design.
Taxi645 is offline  
__________________
Constructive discussion: A conversion where participants are maximally open to yet critical of each others (and their own) arguments, with the intend of enhancing the knowledge, understanding and/or handling of it's subject.
Quote
Old 13 Feb 2022, 18:03 (Ref:4098509)   #69
crmalcolm
Subscriber
Veteran
 
crmalcolm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Nepal
Exactly where I need to be.
Posts: 12,292
crmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Fame
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
In aviation if an airplane is 15% heavier than it needs to be and it's engine 7x more expensive than necessary, any investor would laugh you out the door. in F1 we say it looks good and make excuses why it is a good design.
That depends on what the intended use of the airplane is.
I don't see the analogy. An airplane designed to carry people over a long distance and is built to one set of parameters.

If a car can be designed, built and sold for less than £8k in the UK - then why don't we laugh every other heavier, more expensive car out of the door? Because F1 is not about building the lightest car to move people around in - it is about creating a formula within which competitors race.

There are many things about F1 that could be done to make cheaper, lighter cars to race in. Why don't they just use F4 regulations?

From the outset, it seems like the case to go back to smaller wheels and tyres is based on a dislike for the 18" wheels, and has no real benefits to F1.
crmalcolm is offline  
__________________
"When you’re just too socially awkward for real life, Ten-Tenths welcomes you with open arms. Everyone has me figured out, which makes it super easy for me."
Quote
Old 13 Feb 2022, 18:11 (Ref:4098510)   #70
Anyopenroad
Veteran
 
Anyopenroad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
England
London
Posts: 1,442
Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
In aviation if an airplane is 15% heavier than it needs to be and it's engine 7x more expensive than necessary, any investor would laugh you out the door. in F1 we say it looks good and make excuses why it is a good design.
That's true if the investor is expecting a commercial return from a company selling aircraft to other companies who in turn plan to use them in a competitive market.

None of those factors is true of F1. The commercial return F1 teams get depends in large part on the appeal of the cars to fans with a wide range of preferences, from the highly technical (you) to the purely aesthetic (me). It's never been purely about building a car with bleeding edge technology.

Personally as well anything that makes the cars harder to drive is good. Driver can't see the apex? Great! I also agree with the observation above that if a WEC or IMSA prototype driver can manage in the dark, in the rain, for three hours at a time, on four hours sleep, in a car not set up for them, with a greasy windshield and while constantly lapping slower cars, then it's not obvious to me why we should give an F1 driver seeing over the big front tyre even the slightest consideration.
Anyopenroad is offline  
__________________
I like taking pictures of cars going round tracks, through forests and up hills.
Quote
Old 14 Feb 2022, 08:57 (Ref:4098580)   #71
Taxi645
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Netherlands
Posts: 979
Taxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridTaxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by crmalcolm View Post
That depends on what the intended use of the airplane is.
I don't see the analogy. An airplane designed to carry people over a long distance and is built to one set of parameters.

If a car can be designed, built and sold for less than £8k in the UK - then why don't we laugh every other heavier, more expensive car out of the door? Because F1 is not about building the lightest car to move people around in - it is about creating a formula within which competitors race.

There are many things about F1 that could be done to make cheaper, lighter cars to race in. Why don't they just use F4 regulations?
For the obvious reason that they don't fulfil the basic requirement of being the fastest racing cars on the planet.

Current F1 cars are ~110kg heavier than they need be to fulfil the requirement of being the premier racing class, but because the manufacturers like greenwashing and F1 let's teenagers in fan survey's and the marketing department at Pirelli determine the proper wheel size, we are now stuck with what we have. Maybe they don't want light F1 cars any more. Because then the transition to battery powered electric cars would be such big disappointment. We'll see in 2026, where the weight will be going. I hope for sensible wheels sizes and sub 700kg, we'll see.

Quote:
From the outset, it seems like the case to go back to smaller wheels and tyres is based on a dislike for the 18" wheels, and has no real benefits to F1.
Yes, I dislike the 18'' wheels and I've explained across 5 pages exactly why I don't like them. You accuse me of disliking them from the onset, while at the same time don't engage in the arguments I brought forward on your request. Arguments that are bloody obvious to me and anyone who expects a minimal amount of technical merit from designs chosen for a class that is called the pinnacle of motorsport.

Perhaps F1 should abandon this class completely, slap "F1, the pinnacle of motorsport" on the windscreen at truckracing and be done. You know, they are low downforce (good), high drag (good), quite a handful to drive (excellent), huge wheels and tyres (looks so good).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anyopenroad View Post
That's true if the investor is expecting a commercial return from a company selling aircraft to other companies who in turn plan to use them in a competitive market.

None of those factors is true of F1. The commercial return F1 teams get depends in large part on the appeal of the cars to fans with a wide range of preferences, from the highly technical (you) to the purely aesthetic (me). It's never been purely about building a car with bleeding edge technology.
I'm not as far on the technical side as you think. I was in favour or restricting the aerodynamic freedom and complexity in order to improve the racing. But in this case the balance of form, function, cost and excitement has shifted way to far into the looks department. Drivers have have been sharing their frustration with cars getting heavier for years. This is just another mayor shift in the wrong direction and these wheels are just not fit for purpose in my view.

To further expand, the 30.5kg change from the two wheel spec changes between 2016 and 2022 along with the change in diameter means in accelerations terms, they've added ~66kg equivalent of none rotating mass to the car.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anyopenroad View Post
Personally as well anything that makes the cars harder to drive is good. Driver can't see the apex? Great! I also agree with the observation above that if a WEC or IMSA prototype driver can manage in the dark, in the rain, for three hours at a time, on four hours sleep, in a car not set up for them, with a greasy windshield and while constantly lapping slower cars, then it's not obvious to me why we should give an F1 driver seeing over the big front tyre even the slightest consideration.
Let's just agree to disagree on that.

https://www.racefans.net/2022/02/14/...nd-up-14-02-5/

This is a quote from Norris:
“For certain tracks, it might be extremely different like Singapore or Monaco. One of my friends who’s in F2 said that they have to put cones on top of the barriers in places because the barriers were lower than the new tyres that we have, and that they can’t actually see where the barrier is, because the car looks higher than the barriers. We’ll have to get used to the size of it, the front wing and how big that is and so on.”

So they are putting cones on top of barriers because the wheels obscure the view to the barriers they need to navigate. Again this is without the 5-7cm wake deflectors that F2 cars are not running.

To further illustrate. A driver sits about 1.7m from the wake deflector. That means a 5-7cm height of the wake deflector will obscure an addition 50-70cm height at a barrier 17m away. Compared to 2021 wheels it's even 100 to 120cm. I know you guys think it's all fine when the wheels block your view on what you are supposed to navigate. To me it's utter nonsense.

I think the chances that we are back to smaller diameter tires by 2026, are above 70%.
Taxi645 is offline  
__________________
Constructive discussion: A conversion where participants are maximally open to yet critical of each others (and their own) arguments, with the intend of enhancing the knowledge, understanding and/or handling of it's subject.
Quote
Old 14 Feb 2022, 10:01 (Ref:4098592)   #72
Anyopenroad
Veteran
 
Anyopenroad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
England
London
Posts: 1,442
Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!
I agree with you about the cars being too big and heavy and also take your point about smaller wheels having the same aesthetic impact when the cars themselves are smaller. We have big heavy wheels now because the cars are big and heavy, which makes the cars bigger and heavier still. That is an escalator I would like F1 to step off.
Anyopenroad is offline  
__________________
I like taking pictures of cars going round tracks, through forests and up hills.
Quote
Old 14 Feb 2022, 10:48 (Ref:4098597)   #73
crmalcolm
Subscriber
Veteran
 
crmalcolm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Nepal
Exactly where I need to be.
Posts: 12,292
crmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famecrmalcolm will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Fame
Are these 'too big and heavy' F1 cars the ones that were setting lap record times at 12 of the circuits on the calendar in the last two seasons?

I assume that they don't fulfil the basic requirement of being the fastest racing cars on the planet?
crmalcolm is offline  
__________________
"When you’re just too socially awkward for real life, Ten-Tenths welcomes you with open arms. Everyone has me figured out, which makes it super easy for me."
Quote
Old 14 Feb 2022, 12:36 (Ref:4098612)   #74
Anyopenroad
Veteran
 
Anyopenroad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
England
London
Posts: 1,442
Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!
That’s a tribute to aero and powertrain engineering. The cars are awesome, but they are also much larger than previous generations of F1. You may well not mind that or think it a problem. Personally I’d rather they achieved their ‘fastest car on the planet’ title with less weight, shorter wheelbase … and big wide tyres
Anyopenroad is offline  
__________________
I like taking pictures of cars going round tracks, through forests and up hills.
Quote
Old 14 Feb 2022, 23:38 (Ref:4098713)   #75
wnut
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
wnut has a real shot at the championship!wnut has a real shot at the championship!wnut has a real shot at the championship!wnut has a real shot at the championship!wnut has a real shot at the championship!
Quote:
Originally Posted by crmalcolm View Post
Are these 'too big and heavy' F1 cars the ones that were setting lap record times at 12 of the circuits on the calendar in the last two seasons?

I assume that they don't fulfil the basic requirement of being the fastest racing cars on the planet?
Australian Grand Prix's Albert Park Lap record set in 2004 that is still held by Scumacher, but they have changed the circuit this year so this will go away!

Italian GP Monza Record 2004 Barrichelo

Bahrain Sakhir Lap Record - De La Rosa 2005.

Allocating a point to the fastest race lap has also provided an incentive to set the fastest lap that did not previously exist, so why bother show boating?
wnut is offline  
Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
tyres tyres tyres f2boy 460 Racing Technology 14 14 Oct 2014 10:00
4 stolen wheels and tyres Stuart H Racers Forum 1 13 Nov 2011 12:15
Smaller turbo engines and bigger wheels planned for WTCC JMeissner Touring Car Racing 100 22 Dec 2008 21:09
spare tyres and wheels! gadgit National & International Single Seaters 5 15 Feb 2004 16:45


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:18.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Original Website Copyright © 1998-2003 Craig Antil. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2004-2021 Royalridge Computing. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2021-2022 Grant MacDonald. All Rights Reserved.