A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter do not belong here.
I highly doubt it, but the lower a-arm does not seem to go directly on side of tub. The model may have been incomplete.
“To be able to actually make something is awfully nice”
Bruce McLaren on building his first McLaren racecars, 1970
“I've got to be careful what I say, but possibly to probably Juan would have had a bigger go”
Sir Frank Williams after the 2003 Canadian GP, where Ralf hesitated to pass brother M. Schumacher
toyota was setting a trend with abandoning the keels ,were they?
and the tobwishbone is mounted quite low on the tub....and these two tubes going down ..they would possibly not be enough to carry the suspension but with a vertical
conection ...just an idea..
looking into espimperiums nice data ,I´m quite puzzled by the fact that the gap tp HRT is indeed not increasing constantly over the season .
they should have have found the limits of the car and be in a position to be able to find the near 100% extraction of potential...
But looking in the graph the top teams still have NOT increased the gap. a .025s improvement as we have been told of per race is 0.3percent improvement so we could
expect a drop back of HRT by 1 percent in every 3rd race ..which would sum up to around 3 % until now.
But:of course the HRT boys had no clue about their car and did not test ..so they satrted way back and have only found their feet recently.
Still they slowly reeled in towards Virgin and lotus even though they did apparently not really develop their car with upgrades...
So where is the fault in my ways of thinking ,if the cars had gained speed through
development of new parts is al that new won potential eaten up by the teams losing track on how to set up their constantly improved machinery ...or is HRT devleoping their car without us taking notice of it?
I highly doubt it, but the lower a-arm does not seem to go directly on side of tub. The model may have been incomplete.
I don't know if this has been covered before, but I don't think that's a model of a modern formula one car:
There's quite a few giveaways, if you look:
the suspension looks old. I don't think any leading cars have used horizantal A-arms for a while, That includes the twin keel.
The front wing is high and curved, Those have been banned since 2009.
The sidepods are much boxier than we have seen in the past few years. The outline almost looks square
The car has inboard mirrors, Most 2009 and 2010 cars were designed with inboard ones.
The driver head side-protection does not look very big. I think current rules regulate that the protection should extend further forward than it does on that model.
Zoran Stefacovic is pointig to a now-outlawed flip-up
My guess is that the image is of a 2004 or possibly 2003 toyota
Has anyone noticed the irony that it seems McLaren is now better on aero than it is on mechanical, and Ferrari are good on mechanical but only decent on aero? That used to be the other way around in the past
raymondu999 wrote:Has anyone noticed the irony that it seems McLaren is now better on aero than it is on mechanical, and Ferrari are good on mechanical but only decent on aero? That used to be the other way around in the past
It happens. Although I won't say one is better in "aero" or "mechanical" than another, it's just that the focus of development and priorities are different.
toyota claiming they had the second best car for 2010 ...what an intriguing thought...
so just think about it if Stefan GP and USGP would have got their fingers on that thing ...they sure would have bagged some points?
Or lotus ... they could be already be firmly a second string outfit right now.I´m absolutely sure the newcomers should have put aside their own projects as soon as toyota bowed out and purchase that machine...even if there is no ways to hope to be in top of the setup at all times ...In HRT you can see it does not take a team too long to extract say 98% of what is on the plate....a serious mistake that would have paid back via to the results and constructors standing a classic shortcut .
marcush. wrote:toyota claiming they had the second best car for 2010 ...what an intriguing thought...
so just think about it if Stefan GP and USGP would have got their fingers on that thing ...they sure would have bagged some points?
Or lotus ... they could be already be firmly a second string outfit right now.I´m absolutely sure the newcomers should have put aside their own projects as soon as toyota bowed out and purchase that machine...even if there is no ways to hope to be in top of the setup at all times ...In HRT you can see it does not take a team too long to extract say 98% of what is on the plate....a serious mistake that would have paid back via to the results and constructors standing a classic shortcut .
Why toyota didnt do what Honda did in 08 and let the team become independent team? Stuck a cosworth engine in and might of done something.
Engineering student,but still learning alot about Formula One cars and I can Admit that
Because Toyota didn't have a team principal with the desire to keep the team alive and continue racing, much less willing to "buy" it. And remember that Ross Brawn wasn't alone, I believe at least Pat Fry was in on it too. It's pretty complicated and not as simple as it's made out to be, IMO.
One has to see that Toyota made a mess out of this.They even finished two cars but clearly sat always at the wrong table it seems ..
Villeneuve now looking for a slot is the best indicator that Toyota has had contact to to the right people but negotiated with the wrong.
As the facility is still in action now ...one has to ask what their real plan is...
well I think they did not want to give a xxx million $ facility away for a handful of dollars. They built this up over more then 20 years (ex WRC facility)and it is in the middle of "Toyota city" in Marsdof/Colonge. I´m sure they still have good use for it, for whatever they may want to do in the future (DTM,LeMans, etc.)
Sure they could have sold the two chassis and some spare parts.
The question is, would that have changed much for them in the larger picture. I doubt, that HRT or anybody would have paid much for it anyway, and 5 million dollar more or less, would not have much difference to them, in overall terms.
Non of the new teams would have had the money, to pay any sensible price for it.
And Honda (in 2009) and now BMW (Sauber) pay somebody else a full season, thats a lot of money, and what they get for it ???
What Toyota did was sad, but sensible IMHO.
"Make the suspension adjustable and they will adjust it wrong ......
look what they can do to a carburetor in just a few moments of stupidity with a screwdriver." - Colin Chapman
“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” - Leonardo da Vinci
The mistake was to commit to Stefan GP ...easily as mad as BMW doing that deal with that fraudster...we must not forget that Peter Sauber was the guy who sorted that one out ..not BMW.Them paying now the season is more than justified sentence for their incompetent dealings beforehand..putting the whole operation at risk with even more losses and damages.
toyota at least did not go as far ..thats a plus.But as they are now trying to sell their expertise anyways (and are already selling ..see mclaren windtunneltesting) ...a cool x million cash coming in plus advertising for their competence would have been better than building the cars to have them run for once on the parking lot ...their aim is to have involvement in F1 ..right?
I don´t know Marcus, you would need to ask that question to Toyota.
If their aim is to have involvment in F1, it´s funny that they pulled out in the first place.
But by keeping the infrastructure, and having now a competetive F1 car running in their windtunnel (data anyone) gives them at least the chance to come back anytime they choose to do so.
I think F1 does not fit their bill (image) at the moment.
This may change in the near future, but when they decided to pull out, they could see the writing on the wall, as did BMW and Honda.
At the time F1 was making the news for all the wrong reasons - remember.
I don´t think that the Stefan GP deal (if it ever was one) has hurt them, sure it did not gain them anything either, but did it hurt them?
I´m sure, they make more money out of the Pirelli test deal now, then they would have ever got from any of the new teams, and don´t need to see their IP (car) being associated with back markers.
I´m sure HRT would have looked better then they do now, but they would never have pulled a Brawn, even with the Toyota car. And as we know, it´s a money problem not so much a technical competence problem.
If you have enough of the former, you can buy enough of the later, if you want.
Peter Sauber has got a very good deal IMO - smart guy, and I´m happy for him.
Sell when the price is high, and someone is over eager to buy. Take the money and wait.
Now, he got his team and factory back, in much better condition for free, so BMW did actually pay twice for it.
Sauber is a smart man, and I´m sure he will come out o.k. of this.
I think BMW really did a very bad deal, judgement call with this one, it did cost them a ton of money and a lot of kudos - at least in my book.
"Make the suspension adjustable and they will adjust it wrong ......
look what they can do to a carburetor in just a few moments of stupidity with a screwdriver." - Colin Chapman
“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” - Leonardo da Vinci
the pirelli deal is surely a good move ,as is the windtunnelrenting out..easy to aquire current data and compare..
In my book this makes the Toyota facility and outfit a very interesting technological partner to anyone...so maybe rgeres more money in it for them that way around.and you split the risk compared to having just one client as chassis supplier..
Im pretty sure HRT would lokk damn good with that car now ,better than Lotus ..and that from hour 1 as they seem to be a competent bunch of people ..willis is sure a top guy as the technical director theyy could at least have been close to a points finish imo
