It won't stop the whining about "cheating" though.Emag wrote: ↑20 Sep 2024, 13:47I am glad this happened to be honest. Too much fuss over such a small thing because it was operating in controversial circumstances by exploiting the DRS opening. If they do end up winning the WCC, doing it with a rear wing which was not perceived well by the general public would have tainted it somewhat.
It's better like this.
Red bull estimated it to be 1-2 tenths. Quite a bit.Darth-Piekus wrote: ↑20 Sep 2024, 14:12So what do you think the change might cost in time if we change the rear wing for Vegas? That should be the last race with huge straights.
Will it though? Now that the the FIA have said it's not legal, then it can be inferred that it was always illegal. McLaren just got away with it.BMMR61 wrote:It won't stop the whining about "cheating" though.Emag wrote: ↑20 Sep 2024, 13:47I am glad this happened to be honest. Too much fuss over such a small thing because it was operating in controversial circumstances by exploiting the DRS opening. If they do end up winning the WCC, doing it with a rear wing which was not perceived well by the general public would have tainted it somewhat.
It's better like this.
I forgot about that ugly racedialtone wrote: ↑20 Sep 2024, 13:41Las Vegas obviously will have the same wing.bauc wrote:That RW will not be used anyway by the end of the season, that was specifically made for SPA, Mozna & BAKU, correct me if I'm wrong but till the end, no other track require that low level of downforce set up on the rear.Darth-Piekus wrote: ↑20 Sep 2024, 13:36Even if they modify it I dont think that this wing really made a difference and I wouldnt count the RBR daily as consistent. I want to see something official from the FIA.
Ultra low probably uses the same effect.mwillems wrote: ↑20 Sep 2024, 13:44Or the ultra low down force wing.dialtone wrote: ↑20 Sep 2024, 13:41Las Vegas obviously will have the same wing.bauc wrote:
That RW will not be used anyway by the end of the season, that was specifically made for SPA, Mozna & BAKU, correct me if I'm wrong but till the end, no other track require that low level of downforce set up on the rear.
If AMuS are reporting it, I think it's true.
The effect would have been beneficial, otherwise they wouldn't have done it. In a sport when .0.01 can separate anything can be deemed large enough an effect.FittingMechanics wrote: ↑20 Sep 2024, 14:24Ultra low probably uses the same effect.
But I don't think the effect is that large. I wish it wasn't banned as it would mean other teams spend a lot of time to develop their variants for little gain.
Yes obviously but I don't think that the effect is significant. If it was McLaren would be relatively faster in Spa/Monza/Baku compared to other races and that is just not visible.
This position doesn’t make sense.FittingMechanics wrote:Yes obviously but I don't think that the effect is significant. If it was McLaren would be relatively faster in Spa/Monza/Baku compared to other races and that is just not visible.
Who says no gain. Don't be making stuff up.dialtone wrote: ↑20 Sep 2024, 14:32This position doesn’t make sense.FittingMechanics wrote:Yes obviously but I don't think that the effect is significant. If it was McLaren would be relatively faster in Spa/Monza/Baku compared to other races and that is just not visible.
They designed it on purpose and are awesome for exploiting gray areas, but they did all of this for no gain and thus just spent money to gain nothing.
So are they awesome or what?
If you can see it clearly with your own eyes, the effect cannot be insignificant. You can also argue that in Spa/Monza/Baku they were a bit faster than they should have been because of it.FittingMechanics wrote: ↑20 Sep 2024, 14:29Yes obviously but I don't think that the effect is significant. If it was McLaren would be relatively faster in Spa/Monza/Baku compared to other races and that is just not visible.