A case to go back to smaller wheels and tyres

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Greem

Just make them all race Caterhams. Wheel guards are mandatory at the start of a race but optional after the first corner

yes. Solves the downforce problem too.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Maybe mud guards aren’t such a bad idea?

[...]

For fun you could only fit it if they was a chance of rain. That might be a silly.

Or maybe not as silly as you thought?

"Nikolas Tombazis, the head of the FIA F1 technical department, is confident the wheel arches will be ready for 2024. But he hopes they might be ready for the second half of ’23, provided a design can be finalised and the teams agree to this happening.

This would mean the wheel arches would be available for high-risk rain events such as the Belgian, Japanese and Brazilian Grands Prix next season."

"“We only think it’s going to be something that hopefully gets used on a couple of occasions a year, maybe three,” said Tombazis of the wheel arches. “We don’t want it to be every time there’s a drop of rain."

[VIVA GT]

Just a quick comment about fitting mudguards over the wheels to reduce the spray created poor visibility. Surely this would also be counter productive as the water displaced from the track is unable to dissipate into the air, and can only fall back down onto the track surface behind the wheels and therefore making the track no drier?
maybe (just maybe) I'm over-thinking things here...

[Casper]

Not so long ago everyone was moaning about the lack of wet races to add some chance to the results.

[Taxi645]

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.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Taxi645

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.

Now, wrap it in bodywork that requires you to not just see over the tires, but the fenders as well, then look through an oil streaked windscreen, put other slower cars around you and finally do it at night without the circuit being fully illuminated. Is it difficult? Yes. Is it doable? They have been doing for decades in another series.

Richard

[chillibowl]

speaking of smaller cars, and the R25 specifically as i brought it up in the other thread but really all of those cars from the mid to latter part of the 2000s were not always nice to look at with all their winglets and antennae.

the mind plays tricks maybe, but those smaller less wide cars weren't exactly providing better racing then what we are seeing today with the larger cars no?

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

speaking of smaller cars, and the R25 specifically as i brought it up in the other thread but really all of those cars from the mid to latter part of the 2000s were not always nice to look at with all their winglets and antennae.

They varied, people got used to them I suppose:

the mind plays tricks maybe, but those smaller less wide cars weren't exactly providing better racing then what we are seeing today with the larger cars no?

It's annoying that shape and proportions were defined by misguided regulations and not by engineering progression. Changes to the dimensional regulations of the cars from 1993 onwards like narrow cars, narrow tyres, rectangular nose box cross section, grooved tyres etc only seemed to make the cars worse (with notable exceptions like the X-wing exclusion zone which was a good idea, and the minimum radius rule for the sidepods which was a good idea).

Do people really think the narrow second car on grooved tyres with its FIA-mandated rectangular nose cross-section, looks better than the wide former car on slick tyres with its elegant round nose... Really?



The FIA only ever reduced the width of the rear tyres too, not the fronts. That's why when the tyres were scaled up equally front and rear in '17, we ended up with ridiculously wide front tyres.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Taxi645

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.

[S griffin]

Those cars with winglets were horrible. It really went too far and it was soo good when they finally got rid of them. I don't mind odd looking cars, like the 6 wheeled Tyrrell, just as long as the bodywork is clean. Shame they allowed some of those ugly winglets back in 2017, but they seem to have recognised their mistake and we will have cars with beautiful in 2022

[crmalcolm]

Why are these five factors important?
- Visibility.
- Weight.
- Lower centre of gravity.
- Less drag.
- Less aero distrubance.

[Taxi645]

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.....

[crmalcolm]

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?

[Anyopenroad]

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

[wnut]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

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?

[Adam43]

Those periods included refueling. As such there were more times a driver had light tanks and around pit stops there was always an incentive to get your in laps right for race points not just for the fastest lap point. Fastest pole at Monza was 2020.

And as pointed out, there are way more circuits were the lap record is more recent.

Fortunately the cars are being slowed to protect those rare halcyon days.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Those periods included refueling. As such there were more times a driver had light tanks and around pit stops there was always an incentive to get your in laps right for race points not just for the fastest lap point. Fastest pole at Monza was 2020.

And as pointed out, there are way more circuits were the lap record is more recent.

Fortunately the cars are being slowed to protect those rare halcyon days.

Also remembering that the cars were carrying ballast and running on grooved slicks designed to hamper their performance between 1998 and 2008.

These cars may be able to set lap records because of the massive aero allowed to accomplish just that, but they are way too fat to be considered anywhere close to the pinnacle of F1 design.

[Adam43]

And the benefit of a tyre war.

But I was merely commenting on the selective choice.

Every rule set is comedy in some way. But it is reasonable to consider that these most recent cars are (or were) the fastest. However that was achieved.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Adam43

And the benefit of a tyre war.

But I was merely commenting on the selective choice.

Every rule set is comedy in some way. But it is reasonable to consider that these most recent cars are (or were) the fastest. However that was achieved.

You are right about the comedy bit.

This is the the bit that just does my head in from 2000.

https://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns02353.html

"THE minimum weight limit in Formula 1 is 600 kilograms, complete with the driver .....

This was designed to reduce the cost of Grand Prix racing by getting rid of the need for expensive exotic lightweight materials. ....

...some of the top F1 cars these days carrying as much as 80 kgs of ballast "

So that is a (excluding ballast) 520 kg car including the driver, then we come along with a 795kg car and try and pass it off as the pinnacle of motor racing engineering.

Everyone bangs on about the sport and entertainment aspect of F1, but it is actually the engineering that has been most compromised at the alter of commercial interest.

What would a car properly designed for minimum weight and performance actually weigh?

[Taxi645]

Originally Posted by Anyopenroad

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.

Originally Posted by Anyopenroad

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

I fully agree with all the above!


The last V10's had a maximum wheelbase of 3.100mm.

In 2010, with the addition of KERS to the V8's, that went to 3.400mm.

Last generation cars had a maximum of 3.700mm.

For this generation they wanted to go back to 3.400mm, but after team objections (probably too much stuff to package on these ultra complex V6 hybrid's), they settled on 3.600mm.


I hope in 2026 with the drop of the MGU-H, we will be able to go back to 3.400mm or perhaps a 100mm less even. It depends on how bulky the electric components are going to be with their power so much increased. If we keep the tire diameter proportionate to the wheel base than a 3.300-3.400mm wheel based car would have an equally proportioned tyre diameter with 66-68cm compared to the current generation with 72cm. So the proposed 16-inch wheel with 67cm diameter tires would be pretty much spot on.

Originally Posted by wnut

What would a car properly designed for minimum weight and performance actually weigh?

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/c...-flow/4719283/

https://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=28901



Reasonable minimal weight with equal modern safety (good), equal cost saving on common parts (good) and the same equal chance system for heavier drivers (good):
V10 with KERS: ~685kg
V6 turbo with KERS: ~700kg

V10 without KERS: ~655kg
V6 turbo without KERS: ~670kg

2026 V6 turbo with very strong electric component: who knows but hopefully below 725kg.

[Greem]

One of the reasons the cars are heavier and "fatter" is mostly overlooked: driver safety. Time was (and it wasn't that long ago really!) that F1 cars were metaphorical bathtubs filled with fuel, with the driver's safety right at the bottom of the priority pile at the design stage.

The central tub of all of the cars is massively over-engineered compared to what it could be, but that's one of the reasons drivers like Grosjean & Alonso got to escape from extremely high speed crashes. Yes, they're laid up from carbon fibre and other complex composites to keep the weight down and strength up, but when you look at the mandatory crash test requirements they need a lot more material than they used to.

Make the cars lighter by all means, but don't compromise the human holding the steering wheel!

[Taxi645]

Originally Posted by Greem

One of the reasons the cars are heavier and "fatter" is mostly overlooked: driver safety. Time was (and it wasn't that long ago really!) that F1 cars were metaphorical bathtubs filled with fuel, with the driver's safety right at the bottom of the priority pile at the design stage.

The central tub of all of the cars is massively over-engineered compared to what it could be, but that's one of the reasons drivers like Grosjean & Alonso got to escape from extremely high speed crashes. Yes, they're laid up from carbon fibre and other complex composites to keep the weight down and strength up, but when you look at the mandatory crash test requirements they need a lot more material than they used to.

Make the cars lighter by all means, but don't compromise the human holding the steering wheel!

Greem absolutely. Above numbers is with all the current safety measures. Weight saving is mostly drivetrain and wheels/tires.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Greem

One of the reasons the cars are heavier and "fatter" is mostly overlooked: driver safety. Time was (and it wasn't that long ago really!) that F1 cars were metaphorical bathtubs filled with fuel, with the driver's safety right at the bottom of the priority pile at the design stage.

The central tub of all of the cars is massively over-engineered compared to what it could be, but that's one of the reasons drivers like Grosjean & Alonso got to escape from extremely high speed crashes. Yes, they're laid up from carbon fibre and other complex composites to keep the weight down and strength up, but when you look at the mandatory crash test requirements they need a lot more material than they used to.

Make the cars lighter by all means, but don't compromise the human holding the steering wheel!

Small problem to the safety theory (which should not be comperomised), the monocoque of the 2019 cars weighed approximately 35 kg!

[Greem]

Originally Posted by wnut

Small problem to the safety theory (which should not be comperomised), the monocoque of the 2019 cars weighed approximately 35 kg!

I've seen quotes (none of them authoritative in any way) that the monocoque weighs 35kg, 50kg, 80kg and in one case 99.1kg, all of these being before any additional stuff like steering wheels, seats, drinks bottles, wiring looms, pedal box & pedals, leg foam, cockpit surround and halo are added in.

However, I was referring more to the visual perception of the cars being "fat". They look the way they do because there's simply more _stuff_ around the driver.

I'm quite liking the variation we're getting this year though.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Greem

I've seen quotes (none of them authoritative in any way) that the monocoque weighs 35kg, 50kg, 80kg and in one case 99.1kg, all of these being before any additional stuff like steering wheels, seats, drinks bottles, wiring looms, pedal box & pedals, leg foam, cockpit surround and halo are added in.

However, I was referring more to the visual perception of the cars being "fat". They look the way they do because there's simply more _stuff_ around the driver.

I'm quite liking the variation we're getting this year though.

Mercedes, RBR, Williams and Haas?

Oh, okay, anything that keeps the scenery off the driver is good as both Max and Lewis demonstrated last year, be good if the didn't behave like they were indestructible though. Neither would still be around with 70s level safety.

The variation in the designs is great, now to go and race them, can't wait.