judging by this picture they don't use the cf gearbox. Well they only used over a year by know, while bar used half a season getting their cf gearbox ready
There's been a lot of talk recently about CF gearboxes. Wasn't titanium the new fad in gearboxes? I thought arrows and stewart tried out the CF gearbox but had serious troubles with stiffness and heat dissipation. Are these new geaboxes just titanium with CF wrapped around the outside?
"I'll bring us through this. As always. I'll carry you - kicking and screaming - and in the end you'll thank me. "
Have to agree with SpeedTech, there were some complaints that a double clutch arrangement could not only benifit traction control but also braking performance to! Hence the recent ban.
i dont see how the teams could have trouble with the stiffness of the cf gearbox as cf is much stiffer than aluminun or titanium. plus prost got it working. the only problem is heat as cf is a pretty lousy heat conductor. also when metals are taken to the limit, they bend or deform, cf just instantly shatters.
I was under the impression that MAC had sorted their issues with the CF gearbox casing, so I was surprised to see this casing at Melbourne. Whether the CF casing will be delayed for the proposed 19B car later in the year might be a possibility, Also the casing seen at Melbourne has fine surface finish unlike any Cast Ti or Alloy casing I have seen, I am checking my sources but could it be a full MMC case? the finish is about right, although I wouldn't like to be responsible for the huge amount of machining a gearbox casing needs, when MMC is hard to machine.
Only BAR use a full CF case, that is where the primary load bearing structure is made of CF, internal bulkhead and fixings can be metallic. Ferrari adopt the old Jordan principle of adding carbon skins over a primarily Metallic (Ti in Ferraris case) gearbox case. everyone else uses either a fully cast aluminium or Ti case.
The gain between either of these solutions is tight, base don weight, stiffness, complexity and cost. Bob Bell told me the full Ti case came out only a little stiffer over the split CF\Ti or full CF case, but the manufacturing time required in house to manufacture a full CF case put it out of the equation, compared with an outsourced investment-cast Ti casing.
Double clutch gearboxes are banned, Max Mosley has been on TV saying it, Gustav Brunner told me it was banned. IT is to do with the potential to phase the clutches so that two gear are driving at once, the gradual slip from one clutch to another could allow continuous infinitely variable drive, when on only seven speeds are allowed.
First of all, thank you for always sharing your indsight here and on your own webpage scarbs.
If this really is a metal matrix composite gearbox, would that be the first time this material is used, and which advantages may this material bring is it light, heatresistent, stiff/hard.
Thank you michael
I propably wouldn't be too wrong in guessing that ferrari was behind the ban of the double-clutch g-box. anything they cannot produce is in their opinion against the rules. Ferrari has Max Mosley and FIA eating out of their palm. the only top guy of F1 that isn't pro-Ferrari is bernie ecclestone. I just wish Mosley would quit soon and get replaced by somebody that isn't as biassed as him. there are many examples of bans considering other teams but I can't recall a single one affecting ferrari. for example the michelin tyres, mercedes's beryllium(?) engine, and now the clutch thingy. the other teams have spent months and millions of cash on developing their parts that in their opinion are completely within the rules. so what if somebody finds a loophole in the regulations, that's what f1 is all about.
inspectah,
Your Ferrari FIA consiracy theory is way out, clever transmissions have long been a banned area for the FIA. Williams CVT was banned and when double clutches were considered practical, they stepped in again.
BTW Ferrari werent in the running in F1 when when CVT was banned.
The FIA have a view on how a F1 car should look and work, too far form convention and they clarify the rules (aka. a Ban)
mad materials like berylium were banned at a time when other stiff materials were banned for brake calippers etc replaced by the 80Gpa rule. Michelin tyres were too wide for the rules, it was well known long before Monza that they stretched and rolled out the tread under load.
How about FIA introducing the parc ferme rules to prevent qualifying brakes, Qualifying engines and shifting masses of ballast between Q and the race? who lost out on that rule...?
I was under the impression that the double clutch system was banned by the FIA 