Logic, logic, logic!

[manchild]

Something that hit me out of the blue...

Two types of rim covers on F2007, one static relative to car one rotating with wheel. So, which one is static and legal than and which one is moving and illegal. Take your pick Charlie! They can't both be legal because one of them is moving, so which one is moving than? Ha! Deal with that!

I'm not beating the dead horse since I think this is something everyone skipped somehow.

[Steve Wilson]

Unless of course the reason they can get away with the rear ones is by claiming that they are part of the wheel itself (I don't know exactly how they attach on the rear). Obviously their reason for having the "spinners" on the front are so the gap for cooling is always in the optimal place.

It's an interesting one, and the only way I can think of that they can be both legal is what I said above...

[Rob W]

I still think a steering wheel is a movable aerodynamic device and should be banned like the mass damper.

Rob W

[manchild]

Unless of course the reason they can get away with the rear ones is by claiming that they are part of the wheel itself (I don't know exactly how they attach on the rear).

Ferrari glues theirs while Renault uses 5 screws. Rears are not part of the wheel but officially "part of the breaking system" just as front ones which are also screwed on, so - ?

[modbaraban]

I still think a steering wheel is a movable aerodynamic device and should be banned like the mass damper.

Rob W

Not to mention the cylinders (as they apparently influence the car balance, which was the definitive factor for an 'aero device' according to FIA)

[pRo]

They can't both be legal because one of them are moving, so which one are moving than?

If only they could make big noise about some other stuff, so no one would focus on their car.

[Ciro Pabón]

[Belatti]

Einstein must be revolving in his graveyard!!! aaarrrgggghhhh!!!

Wheels are definitively movable aero devices, and should be covered, like LeMans Cars way !!!

[modbaraban]

Wheels are definitively movable aero devices, and should be covered, like LeMans Cars way !!!

No! They should be banned!

[pompelmo]

the car is also moving relative to the crowd..LET'S BAN F1 cars(f1 selfdistucting by it's rules)

[Tom]

modbarabon wrote:

Belatti wrote:
Wheels are definitively movable aero devices, and should be covered, like LeMans Cars way !!!

No! They should be banned!

I would love to see hovering F1 cars without movable aero, now that would be designing, the winner would be the guy whp's least afraid of heights.

[mx_tifoso]

the car is also moving relative to the crowd..LET'S BAN F1 cars(f1 selfdistucting by it's rules)

=D>
-----
Maybe this is why Enzo disliked aerodynamics in the begginning stages of it. He knew all of this BS would come along with it.

[siskue2005]

I still think a steering wheel is a movable aerodynamic device and should be banned like the mass damper.

Rob W

Not to mention the cylinders (as they apparently influence the car balance, which was the definitive factor for an 'aero device' according to FIA)

i dont know if this is said before

But Alonso's hand should be banned, his frequent waving hand is used as illegal Moving aero device!

[modbaraban]

But Alonso's hand should be banned, his frequent waving hand is used as illegal Moving aero device!

Possibly to direct the airflow away from the rear wing to decrease drag on the straights

[Scuderia_Russ]

[
But Alonso's hand should be banned, his frequent waving hand is used as illegal Moving aero device!