2253 replies to this topic

[Skyliner]

I'm not looking forward to all the other teams have sweet diffusers too.

[Nacho]

I'm not looking forward to all the other teams have sweet diffusers too.

I honestly don't think all the other teams will be magically as fast. Williams and Brawn in particular started development on their cars first. Then Red Bull and BMW. And last was Ferrari and McLaren. Who do you see where on the time sheets?

Again: Blaming the diffuser alone is a cop-out.

[MrHahn]

I'll say it's amateur it looked like Michael J Fox shot the video

Oh burn!

[MrHahn]

I honestly don't think all the other teams will be magically as fast. Williams and Brawn in particular started development on their cars first. Then Red Bull and BMW. And last was Ferrari and McLaren. Who do you see where on the time sheets?

Again: Blaming the diffuser alone is a cop-out.

It's like adding a turbo to a civic - it will sound (look) the part but won't be set up for it.

Adding the diffuser will (should) throw out the aero balance for the entire car. I'm not saying they dont have the man-power to overcome it, but doing it between race weekends seems a stretch.

[Dr. Jimmmah!]

It's like adding a turbo to a civic - it will sound (look) the part but won't be set up for it.

Adding the diffuser will (should) throw out the aero balance for the entire car. I'm not saying they dont have the man-power to overcome it, but doing it between race weekends seems a stretch.

unlike horsepower there is no 'bolt-on' solution for aerodynamics. i'd go as far as saying that ferrari won't run a double decker diffuser until barcelona.

[_R_]

unlike horsepower there is no 'bolt-on' solution for aerodynamics.

i beg to differ

[_R_]

Rivals of the Williams, Toyota and Brawn GP teams told the FIA's International Court of Appeal on Tuesday that there was no doubt the rear diffusers used by trio were illegal.

Ferrari, Renault, BMW Sauber and Red Bull have all appealed against the decision by the Australian and Malaysian Grands Prix stewards to deem the 'diffuser gang's' cars within the scope of the 2009 technical regulations.

Ferrari's legal representative Nigel Tozzi told the court in Paris on Tuesday there was no doubt the teams have exploited a loophole in the regulations to use an illegal device.

"Anyone with a command of English will tell you it is a hole, so do not let someone attempting to be clever with words defeat the express purpose of the rules," Tozzi was quoted as saying by the Press Association.

"The appeal is not because we have not made the most of an opportunity, but because Brawn, Toyota and Williams have not acted within the regulations."

Renault's representative Andrew Ford said the sport's governing body had already concluded the design was illegal, and that was the reason why the French team decided not to use it.

"It is not that Renault missed the boat, as Brawn have pointed out, it is because the FIA said it was illegal. It was at that point the diffuser was abandoned," said Ford.

Brawn GP has won the first two races of the season and the result of today's hearing could completely change the championship situation.

If the ICA decides the diffuser is legal, the British team looks certain to continue at the front until rivals copy the design and catch up.

If it's decided that the 'double-diffusers' contravene the rules, Jenson Button could face the prospect of losing his two victories.

Team boss Ross Brawn said he was optimistic the decision would favour his team.

"You can't be 100 percent confident," Brawn told the BBC. "But I hope that common sense prevails on our side and the appeal court judges that there is a mechanism, a procedure, a policy and that it was followed properly and we should be left to get on with it."

The verdict is not due until Wednesday afternoon.

i thought his wins were safe?

[Dr. Jimmmah!]

i beg to differ

touche. though efficiency is probably minimal at best.

[kngrsll]

touche. though efficiency is probably minimal at best.

i hear over and over again that the S2k is very sensitive to aero mods. apparently a rear wing will do alot for stability and speed.

[Redliner]

i hear over and over again that the S2k is very sensitive to aero mods. apparently a rear wing will do alot for stability and speed.

but that's because the S2k in stock form, has the aerodynamic properties of a turd .42 w/ the top up, .54 w/ the top down IIRC.

[Dr. Jimmmah!]

but that's because the S2k in stock form, has the aerodynamic properties of a turd .42 w/ the top up, .54 w/ the top down IIRC.

i really doubt the Cd of a S2000 is up in the 0.4x-0.5x range.. also noteworthy is that even tho Cd is the number thats cited (because its nondimensional and can be used to compare car to car aero efficiency), the real number of interest is the CdA, or the frontal area * the Cd.

to put that number in perspective, here are a few vehicles that fall in that range:


Cd 0.51-0.52, CdA 0.84-0.86 [m^2]


Cd 0.48-0.49, CdA 0.86-0.88 [m^2]


Cd 0.47-0.49, CdA 0.80-0.84 [m^2]


I don't have the numbers off hand for the S2000 (the book i have is a bit dated) but are some values from the same class of vehicle:

Porsche 944 Turbo: 0.33-0.34, CdA 0.63-0.65
Z32 Nissan 300ZX: 0.33-0.36, CdA 0.60-0.66
Audi Coupe GT 5E: 0.36-0.37, CdA 0.66-0.68
FC Mazda RX-7: 0.36-0.39, CdA 0.61-0.66


now a good example of form over function is the FD RX-7.. Cd 0.29 (baseline), 0.31 w/ R2 package rear wing, but it generates absolutely no downforce

[_R_]

now a good example of form over function is the FD RX-7.. Cd 0.29 (baseline), 0.31 w/ R2 package rear wing, but it generates absolutely no downforce

not like it mattered, your apex seals would be destroyed before reaching speeds where it'd need down force

i love how in this forum we mix and match so many tangents into a single thread

[Redliner]

Maybe you're right Kero. Someone put those numbers on on an S2k board and I just kind of took it as truth. It kind of made sense at the time b/c of the windshield rake which nearly sits straight up compared to many other cars. That and the cloth top doesn't seem to be good for clean air.

Plus, you look at this link and all I could think of was "wow, stock S2k is an aerodynamic turd..."
http://www.c-westusa...1_s2000spec.asp

But I did another search and saw this list:
http://ecomodder.com...-list-1935.html
Their numbers seem to be more in line with what you said.

[Nacho]

Remember that Cd is sort of useless on it's own.

[F1]

I has the internets again.

[kngrsll]

I has the internets again.

[Redliner]

I has the internets again.

lulz. when i was on my snowboard trip, i brought my laptop. i'd check F1-crew and the CNN.com...they called my laptop my GF named "Dell"... It's hard to go w/o the interwebs. Even on the slopes, I'd be checking my email on my phone after I fell for the umpteenth time.

being a slave to technology FTL.

[Redliner]

http://www.autoblog....-williams-toyo/

Formula 1 so far this year has probably provided a lot more excitement than anyone expected, and in a change from the usual, this time a lot of it is good. The two races so far have seen a heap of on-track passing – and not just of backmarkers – as well as an inversion of the standings: McLaren and Ferrari near at the bottom, Brawn (née Honda) and Toyota are at the top.

Much of that has been credited to the diffusers that the Brawn (above) and Toyota teams are using, which, along with the Williams diffuser, have been challenged as illegal by the other teams. Today, the FIA Court of Appeal will hear arguments for and against the diffuser design and a decision is due Wednesday. It is being reported already by The Daily Mail, however, that the court of appeal will declare the diffusers legal, not wanting to contradict the FIA stewards in Australia and Malaysia, as well as the FIA race director Charlie Whiting.

Ross Brawn has been called out specifically by both Bernie Ecclestone and Renault's Flavio Briatore because he is the technical representative for the Formula One Teams Alliance. Both accused him in a roundabout way of using the rules to his advantage from his privileged position and leaving the others in the dust. In reply, Brawn said "I did explain that I felt we should have a different set of rules to simplify what needed to be done. I offered them, and they were rejected. We needed to clean the rules up, but nobody was interested. They're interested now."

[MrHahn]

Anyone else get the feeling that now that Schuey and Brawn have moved on, Ferrari is becoming more and more like they were in the early 90's? Failing and having woeful pace. I get a weird feeling of deja vu - but it may be the beers.

[Nacho]

Anyone else get the feeling that now that Schuey and Brawn have moved on, Ferrari is becoming more and more like they were in the early 90's? Failing and having woeful pace. I get a weird feeling of deja vu - but it may be the beers.

I've thought that ever since the end of 2006 when, essentially the F1 Dream Team, disbanded.... although after they'd been dethroned by the boys in blue.

2007 was momentum, and in 2008 you could already see the team falling apart in the later half of the season.

[Nacho]

I dunno whether to or

F1's governing body will on Wednesday announce the verdict of the FIA International Court of Appeal hearing in relation to the diffuser saga.

In front of nearly 40 involved lawyers, officials and team personnel, the panel of judges heard the hearing for eight hours in Paris on Tuesday.

The future unity of the Formula One Teams' Association came under intense pressure, as the technical arguments veered into personal attacks, with Brawn, Williams and Toyota accused of fielding illegal cars by their rivals.

Ferrari QC Nigel Tozzi led the charge for the appellants, accusing the team's former long-time Technical Director Ross Brawn of 'supreme arrogance'.

Brawn returned fire, accusing Ferrari designer Rory Byrne of making arguments that were 'vindictive' and amounted to a 'fishing expedition'.

When twice asked to withdraw his slight against his former friend, Brawn insisted: "We are on opposite sides in this argument, so I stand by my statements."

Brawn accused Red Bull's Adrian Newey of 'bringing the sport into disrepute' by arguing that because the diffusers made the cars faster, an argument on the grounds of safety is valid.

"The safety implication relating to a technical feature of the car is a bit below the belt," the Briton said.


Ferrari's Tozzi also argued that the diffusers fly in the face of Max Mosley's attempts to reduce costs by 'limiting the opportunities for technical innovation'.

Brawn countered: "Formula one is all about innovative design. It's a cornerstone and objective of the sport."

Brawn lawyer Paul Harris surmised of the appellants' arguments: "What we have seen is a sideshow, irrelevancies, or to coin an English phrase, a red herring."

FIA Race Director Charlie Whiting, meanwhile, was accused by Ferrari of 'getting it wrong' when he cleared the controversial cars to race, and 'not understanding the point'.

During a lengthy and detailed exchange debating the definition of a 'hole', one of the FIA judges, Malta's Guido de Marco, reportedly fell asleep more than once.

Non-diffuser teams seem pretty fucking petty. And i'm sure insulting Charlie Whiting isn't going to help your case. I can't help but root for Brawn and Williams even more now. And Ferrari can go fuck themselves in the corner... at least then they'd have a partial excuse for the massive butthurt they've put on display.

[vietlol]

Diffuser legal, no surprise there

[Robert]

Diffuser legal, no surprise there

[Redliner]

I can't help but think that Ferrari of old would've already had a diffuser already in the works and slapped on the car...rather than drag this thing through the mud.

[_R_]

it's legal... here we go

The FIA International Court of Appeal has declared the double-decker diffuser designs used by Brawn GP, Toyota and Williams as legal.

Following overnight deliberation by the judges after a court hearing in Paris on Tuesday, the ICA has rejected the appeals lodged by Ferrari, Red Bull Racing and Renault. BMW Sauber and McLaren had also entered the appeal as affected parties.

A statement issued by the FIA on Wednesday morning said: "The FIA International Court of Appeal has decided to deny the appeals submitted against decisions numbered 16 to 24 taken by the Panel of the Stewards on 26 March at the 2009 Grand Prix of Australia and counting towards the 2009 FIA Formula One World Championship.

"Based on the arguments heard and evidence before it, the Court has concluded that the Stewards were correct to find that the cars in question comply with the applicable regulations."

The ICA's decision is a blow to those teams that did not pursue the design concept when they created their 2009 cars - as it is widely accepted that the double-decker diffusers have brought a performance advantage.

Ferrari's Kimi Raikkonen suggested last week that the diffuser decision would be vital for the outcome of the world title - with his team likely to have to wait for several races before being able to fit a suitable one to their car.

"The FIA's Court of Appeal will decide about the diffuser and this decision will have an enormous impact on the championship," Raikkonen said.

"We're missing grip and downforce. You just need to analyse the performance in the three sectors at Sepang to understand that we're losing a lot compared to the best cars. You could see it especially in the middle sector where downforce is really crucial.

The row over the diffusers has also led to intense confrontation between the rival factions - with Brawn GP team principal Ross Brawn being on the receiving end of attacks from Renault and Ferrari about his use of the diffuser concept.

However, he has stood firm in his belief that the design was legal – and confirmed recently that he offered rivals the chance to close off the regulations to prevent teams exploiting the diffuser designs, but they rejected the opportunity.

"In March 2008 that was offered," said Brawn, when asked by AUTOSPORT about the matter.

"If I'm frank I didn't say 'look we are going to do this diffuser if you don't accept this rule' because I'm not going to tell people what we're doing, but I explained that I felt that we should have a different set of rules to simplify what needs to be done.

"I offered them and they were rejected, so my conscience is very clear. And those rules that I put on the table would have stopped a lot of things. It would have stopped the diffuser, it would have stopped all those bargeboards around the front, and it would have cleaned the cars up.

"Because it was clear that when we started to work on the regulations that there were things that you could do, and we needed to perhaps clean them up, but nobody was interested. They are interested now."