Although I wish this forum supported the emojii with the little hearts for eyes!!!godlameroso wrote: ↑26 Dec 2020, 04:50Honda is rumored to be working on a next gen S2000. A man can dream.
Although I wish this forum supported the emojii with the little hearts for eyes!!!godlameroso wrote: ↑26 Dec 2020, 04:50Honda is rumored to be working on a next gen S2000. A man can dream.
I have an AP1 track car with 332,000km and a low mileage garage queen AP2 with ~52,000km.etusch wrote: ↑26 Dec 2020, 09:51What version was your s2000, first gen, ap1 or 2 ?godlameroso wrote: ↑26 Dec 2020, 04:50Honda is not going out soft, they're putting the best of the best in all their cars. Honda Boss said as much, lots of improvements to be made with Honda and all 4 cars. Why would Honda put anything but the best in their last year?!
I would love to see a Red Bull technology and Honda collaboration, perhaps something to consider if they win together. Honda is rumored to be working on a next gen S2000. A man can dream.
not far from dream garagegodlameroso wrote: ↑26 Dec 2020, 15:03I have an AP1 track car with 332,000km and a low mileage garage queen AP2 with ~52,000km.etusch wrote: ↑26 Dec 2020, 09:51What version was your s2000, first gen, ap1 or 2 ?godlameroso wrote: ↑26 Dec 2020, 04:50Honda is not going out soft, they're putting the best of the best in all their cars. Honda Boss said as much, lots of improvements to be made with Honda and all 4 cars. Why would Honda put anything but the best in their last year?!
I would love to see a Red Bull technology and Honda collaboration, perhaps something to consider if they win together. Honda is rumored to be working on a next gen S2000. A man can dream.
AP1 is on its spec 3 engine. F22 block, K24 crank, custom rods and OEM pistons.
I'm sure nobody else can get the mapping of Honda PU for Perez's needs better than Perez can. His knowledge of the Merc is completely useless. Different car, different PU.
(not picking on you) but I wonder what the overlap of people is that believe that drivers do/do not have significant influence on the design of the car 'Hamiltonstappen is good at developing cars' vs those that do/do not belive that drivers have/have not information about the PU operation and influence on its mapping.
Deployment and energy management strategies are the real value. Checo has lots of that info.
I mean, just moving to cast parts, and optimization outside F1 technical restraints (VVT) could lead to a more powerful/efficient ICE to save on the Hybrid weight (battery) would be a huge cost savings. Maybe even just skipping the battery entirely, and wire the H->K directly with no storage.etusch wrote: ↑26 Dec 2020, 09:58My opinion is;Zynerji wrote: ↑26 Dec 2020, 00:24
Time to build/ buy a factory and open Alpha Tauri Italian supercars with a toned down, heavier version of the 2019 Honda F1 engine?
I think they could get $1M each. Why wouldn't they? Newey has the experience, now he can do luxury supercars, not stripped down Valkyrie racecars.
1 m$ is still too cheap for a car powered with F1 based engine. But I would like to see them to set a company joint undertaking by Redbull Racing and Honda to produce purely track oriented supercars. Fully carbon fiber car designed under management of Newey and redbull engineers with f1 style seamless gb, and v6 or v8 honda engine. Maybe 2 different spec, if you like turbo a v6 turbo option and if you like NA, v8 high revving engine. Under this collaboration they can sell it with high price.
I think cars are built based on science with the understanding that they must give drivers confidence. So there is a fine tuning. It is also hard to deferentiate between driver feedback and all the data that is collected. I'm sure all the feedback that the drivers give is double checked with data.nzjrs wrote: ↑26 Dec 2020, 18:36(not picking on you) but I wonder what the overlap of people is that believe that drivers do/do not have significant influence on the design of the car 'Hamiltonstappen is good at developing cars' vs those that do/do not belive that drivers have/have not information about the PU operation and influence on its mapping.
Well said. I don't think the designers (aero, mechanical etc.,) really validate their design ideas with a driver to see if A driver feels comfortable with that concept or not. They simply do internal rationalization to see if the concept really gives performance benefits. If it does, they would go for it. A driver has to take it with his race engineers and mechanics to set it up for his liking in terms of balance. I don't think designers give a damn about what a driver likes or dislikes, they simply trust their collective understanding of physics to build fast cars. Drivers' feedback is more towards balancing setup. Some teams ends up building fast cars which suits both their drivers and in most cases, they might not. That is where an adaptable driver prevails. Like you rightly said, the data collected from the car would validate if what the designers saw in their simulations matches the ontrack performance, which in turn helps them refine their designs.diffuser wrote: ↑27 Dec 2020, 05:56I think cars are built based on science with the understanding that they must give drivers confidence. So there is a fine tuning. It is also hard to deferentiate between driver feedback and all the data that is collected. I'm sure all the feedback that the drivers give is double checked with data.nzjrs wrote: ↑26 Dec 2020, 18:36(not picking on you) but I wonder what the overlap of people is that believe that drivers do/do not have significant influence on the design of the car 'Hamiltonstappen is good at developing cars' vs those that do/do not belive that drivers have/have not information about the PU operation and influence on its mapping.
I think the biggest misconception is that cars are designed for one driver over another. When the reality is they just design the features to make the cars as fast as possible. It just turns out that some drivers can take better advantage of the car's strength.
Because of motorsport media, there are many people thinks that driver develops cars. Very recently I read someone claims that Mercedes pace comes from ham because he developed the car. This is really ridiculous. Maybe old school drivers were know more about how to do set ups but, I think, a driver doesn't know what mechanics do when he complain about understeer or oversteer if it is not just front or rear wing. He just know what is wrong but I don't think many of them know what need to be done to fix it by set up. In fact race engineers says them where they are faster and where they are slower, where they can be faster. Drivers have talent to do what they need to do to being faster. When engineer says you can gain x turn, they can do it or it is expected to... and if they can they are good as driver.Moore77 wrote: ↑27 Dec 2020, 07:44
Well said. I don't think the designers (aero, mechanical etc.,) really validate their design ideas with a driver to see if A driver feels comfortable with that concept or not. They simply do internal rationalization to see if the concept really gives performance benefits. If it does, they would go for it. A driver has to take it with his race engineers and mechanics to set it up for his liking in terms of balance. I don't think designers give a damn about what a driver likes or dislikes, they simply trust their collective understanding of physics to build fast cars. Drivers' feedback is more towards balancing setup. Some teams ends up building fast cars which suits both their drivers and in most cases, they might not. That is where an adaptable driver prevails. Like you rightly said, the data collected from the car would validate if what the designers saw in their simulations matches the ontrack performance, which in turn helps them refine their designs.
In one of the podcasts, Patrick Head sarcastically said, a lot of good drivers think they know engineering and laughed. That is what strong engineers think of a driver's engineering knowledge. Drivers are merely just a tool for engineers to collect data that would help them refine their ideas. I doubt if the engineers look at the drivers with the same awe that an average race fan looks at them as some kind of heroes. From that standpoint, i don't think drivers play a big role in development of a car.
I agree. However, all parts are NOT the same.diffuser wrote: ↑27 Dec 2020, 05:56I think cars are built based on science with the understanding that they must give drivers confidence. So there is a fine tuning. It is also hard to deferentiate between driver feedback and all the data that is collected. I'm sure all the feedback that the drivers give is double checked with data.nzjrs wrote: ↑26 Dec 2020, 18:36(not picking on you) but I wonder what the overlap of people is that believe that drivers do/do not have significant influence on the design of the car 'Hamiltonstappen is good at developing cars' vs those that do/do not belive that drivers have/have not information about the PU operation and influence on its mapping.
I think the biggest misconception is that cars are designed for one driver over another. When the reality is they just design the features to make the cars as fast as possible. It just turns out that some drivers can take better advantage of the car's strength.