Caterham CT-03 Renault

[Coefficient]

Interestingly, that looks like the same chassis… I thought Caterham were bringing their 2013 chassis to Barcelona? I'm surprised they're not testing it.

B spec version of the car they started the year with as far as I heard. They always intended to race this year with last years tub to save money.

[Neno]

Interestingly, that looks like the same chassis… I thought Caterham were bringing their 2013 chassis to Barcelona? I'm surprised they're not testing it.

B spec version of the car they started the year with as far as I heard. They always intended to race this year with last years tub to save money.

Ofcourse, that was smart move for saving money for 2014 and devoloping new car, they could close the gap completly next year, even if they increase it this year.

[Pierce89]

Interestingly, that looks like the same chassis… I thought Caterham were bringing their 2013 chassis to Barcelona? I'm surprised they're not testing it.

They are bringing the 2013 car, but its the old chassis with a completely revised aero package(supposedly).

[RB7ate9]

Upon closer inspection of the nose, IMO the bulge underneath the nose is a bit large (I was expecting Lotus, and got FI instead). Also, they have that large shallow channel on the top of the nose that appears to end at an air dam of the front bulkhead.

I don't know if they are utilizing the Sauber concept, but if they are then they should have a channel feeding air through the nose like Sauber.

[Huntresa]

Upon closer inspection of the nose, IMO the bulge underneath the nose is a bit large (I was expecting Lotus, and got FI instead). Also, they have that large shallow channel on the top of the nose that appears to end at an air dam of the front bulkhead.

I don't know if they are utilizing the Sauber concept, but if they are then they should have a channel feeding air through the nose like Sauber.

What makes you think they use Sauber duct? They just have the same vanity panel.

[beelsebob]

Upon closer inspection of the nose, IMO the bulge underneath the nose is a bit large (I was expecting Lotus, and got FI instead).

Okay, and you've seen their data and know that Caterham's solution is wrong for their car when? And you've seen Lotus/FI's data and know that their solution is the one that Caterham should have chosen too, right?

Also, they have that large shallow channel on the top of the nose that appears to end at an air dam of the front bulkhead.

I don't know if they are utilizing the Sauber concept, but if they are then they should have a channel feeding air through the nose like Sauber.

They are not. What makes you think that they should, or that it would benefit them in any way here?

For reference – the reason for the channel up the centre of the nose is because Caterham designed last year's chassis with a dip in the middle of the nose, and as such, have to meet up with that dip with the aero somehow.

[raymondu999]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJQYClLqZi8[/youtube]

[Pierce89]

Upon closer inspection of the nose, IMO the bulge underneath the nose is a bit large (I was expecting Lotus, and got FI instead).

Okay, and you've seen their data and know that Caterham's solution is wrong for their car when? And you've seen Lotus/FI's data and know that their solution is the one that Caterham should have chosen too, right?

Also, they have that large shallow channel on the top of the nose that appears to end at an air dam of the front bulkhead.

I don't know if they are utilizing the Sauber concept, but if they are then they should have a channel feeding air through the nose like Sauber.

They are not. What makes you think that they should, or that it would benefit them in any way here?

For reference – the reason for the channel up the centre of the nose is because Caterham designed last year's chassis with a dip in the middle of the nose, and as such, have to meet up with that dip with the aero somehow.

Easy killer.

[turbof1]

Shht don't feed beelzebub's evil little brother .

It's just his style; he is not trying to offend or anything. It's his way of discussing things.
(Although demands for empirical proof is somewhat annoying. We are just fans and can't be expected to have that.)

[Pierce89]

Shht don't feed beelzebub's evil little brother .

It's just his style; he is not trying to offend or anything. It's his way of discussing things.
(Although demands for empirical proof is somewhat annoying. We are just fans and can't be expected to have that.)

I know, I was just giving Beez a hard time.

[Richard]

Upon closer inspection of the nose, IMO the bulge underneath the nose is a bit large (I was expecting Lotus, and got FI instead).

Thanks. It is interesting to note how different teams vary an otherwise common feature. Some have bigger bulges than others. Which pics did you use for the comparison?

I'm suppose that's what Beelsebob meant ....

[beelsebob]

Shht don't feed beelzebub's evil little brother .

It's just his style; he is not trying to offend or anything. It's his way of discussing things.
(Although demands for empirical proof is somewhat annoying. We are just fans and can't be expected to have that.)

I agree, demands for empirical proof are silly. What's not silly, is actually expecting a discussion of the technical properties. If you want to say "the bulge should be the size of lotus's", then you need to at least give some explanation of what you think is going on, why it's going on, why one design is better than the other.

I myself am guilty of not giving empirical evidence, and fudging stuff (lately in the McLaren thread), but I do kinda expect that posts here have some kind of thought process behind them, that can be discussed, rather than simply "hey, this team did this, their car is fast, therefore all parts of their car must be the right way to design it". If that logic worked, then last year's Caterham would have been the fastest on the grid, because it looked really like an RB6.

Sorry for sounding snappy, just posts with no kind of thought process behind them frustrate me.

Thanks richard for putting it in rather more diplomatic terms.

While we're at it. Does anyone around here have an idea of how that bulge under the nose is expected to be working. My best guess would be that they're trying to exploit the venturi effect somehow by narrowing the gap under the nose, but I don't really see what the benefit would be. Can someone explain it?

[Blackout]

The biggest difference betwen the Lotus and the FI/caterham style bulge is the shape not the size. The FI/Cat bulge has a rectangular section while the E21 and the Sauber bulge have a half circle shaped bulge.

[Blackout]

They conducted straight line test at Lucry-Levis on Monday and were filming at Magny Cours on Wednesday.

Some pictures:
http://sphotos-f.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-a ... 4299_n.jpg
http://sphotos-f.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-a ... 2527_n.jpg
http://sphotos-b.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-a ... 5857_n.jpg

What they have changed on the CT03 car in Bahrain (not FW as was reported by BBC or Autosport):
http://f1news.autoroad.cz/technika/4429 ... ssii-foto/
Source: F1news.cz

F1news forgot the bargeaboards.

And it seems the Barcelona updates include new turning-vanes under the nose too. Like Ferrari last year, Caterham extended the slit you can see on each vane. Now the TV are completely split..



old ones

[Blackout]

Beam wing (left)