planetf1.com

It is currently Tue Aug 22, 2017 8:40 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 1:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4004
Location: Michigan, USA
So, the first real-life images of the 2018 IndyCar chassis are making their rounds of the internet, and I was wondering what the PF1 community thinks of the design.

Image

Image

Image

[All images sourced from Autoweek.com, article http://autoweek.com/article/indycar/ind ... -aero-kits)

I'm expecting opinion to fall largely along 'party lines', with the people who like complex aerodynamics (such as me) less in favor of the design, and the people who prefer simpler, sleeker cars liking it.

So what does everyone think? My own opinion is that the contours of the body itself are quite attractive, and it looks rather good from the side, but I'm turned off by the simple and unsophisticated look of the aerodynamics. And I think the front wing is ugly.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2017: Don't Ask| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
Wins: 3 | Podiums: 11

PF1 Top Three Constructor's Championship
2015 (No Limit Excedrin Racing): CHAMPIONS


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 3:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2599
I like them a lot. Much better than what they look like today. Looks like I'll be watching more Indy car races next year. :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 4:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1412
Location: Miami, Florida
Ewe… Still not pretty to me. Looks like it's trying far too hard to appear slippery.
The rear wing is vomit… Actually scratch that, the entire thing is vomit for me.
Looks like it was designed by a total amateur.

For me it's not about the lack of complex aerodynamics so much as it's the lack of character in the look. The entire thing lacks shape and pizazz.
The vertical element running along the entirety of the nose cone looks like extra flash like you get from molded products.

Disappointing in every regard.

_________________
HAMILTON :: VETTEL :: ROSBERG :: RAIKKONEN :: VERSTAPPEN :: SAINZ :: MASSA :: BOTTAS :: NASR
ALONSO :: BUTTON :: PEREZ :: RICCIARDO :: GROSJEAN :: KVYAT :: HULKENBERG :: MALDONADO
THE REST… THERE ARE FAR BETTER DRIVERS THAT SHOULD BE IN FORMULA 1


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 5:18 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 4:54 am
Posts: 490
They look nice, isn't that the low drag aero kit for speedways?? Where are the high down force pics??


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 8:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 9138
Location: Ireland
I love it

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost



FA#14


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 8:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 1353
deffinately better than this years


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 9:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2008 8:42 pm
Posts: 363
The reason it doesn't have complex aero parts on the body is they are trying to generate more downforce from underneath the car so cars can follow more closely. There's a 19% increase in downforce in this area compared to this years aero kit http://www.autosport.com/news/report.ph ... f-2018-car.

I like the design and like the way there going about it to try and make racing closely together easier


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 10:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 9:11 am
Posts: 859
I wish F1 rules were changed so that wings had to be this skinny. We'd see much more interesting racing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 10:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 28, 2013 11:29 am
Posts: 548
So what happens when a front wheel hits the rear wheel of a car in front, I tell you what, the car gets launched into the air and then into the fence, injuring if not killing the driver, the DW12 helped prevent this with the guards over the rear wheels. I guess that Dan Wheldon's death has been forgotten already.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 10:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 9:41 pm
Posts: 4124
I think the back end looks cool. Not a fan of the front end.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 11:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 5633
Location: Nebraska, USA
I think it looks great, though over time they will probably start hanging stuff on it to make it cluttered looking like they did the DW12. As it is, it is quite clean, looks very aero, and ... in my opinion.. much more aesthetically pleasing than F1 cars. Also I like the cleaner nose without the heavy front wings being hung off of it.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 11:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 11:51 am
Posts: 4104
Nice and smooth. With some gorgeous livery it will be a winner. Also better looking than current F1.

_________________
The end is near


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 12:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 6:08 pm
Posts: 1832
owenmahamilton wrote:
So what happens when a front wheel hits the rear wheel of a car in front, I tell you what, the car gets launched into the air and then into the fence, injuring if not killing the driver, the DW12 helped prevent this with the guards over the rear wheels. I guess that Dan Wheldon's death has been forgotten already.


Dallara said that the DW12's wheel guards didn't make enough of a difference stopping cars launching over the back of others, but did cause extra problems with debris and cutting tyres, that they didn't feel they were worth keeping.

edit: even in the Wheldon crash, he didn't flip off a tyre, he hit the side of a spinning car that launched him into the air.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 2:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:06 pm
Posts: 1923
Location: England
I like the shape, but it does look very, very basic for what is a top level open wheel series. I imagine that will change soon enough when all the little winglets etc start popping up.

_________________
http://tsatr.mooo.com
The Sun and The Rain - The reluctant runner.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 3:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 1:00 pm
Posts: 4386
Flash2k11 wrote:
I like the shape, but it does look very, very basic for what is a top level open wheel series. I imagine that will change soon enough when all the little winglets etc start popping up.

Keep in mind these are the low drag oval configuration. The street/road course will look more like we're used to but less cluttered looking than the current design.

Over all I'm liking it and can't wait to see them with full liveries.

_________________
{Insert clever sig line here}


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 3:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 11:39 am
Posts: 1198
I like it. Looks basic but very racy. F1 should go a similar route, not in design but having simpler aeroregs.

_________________
Winner of the [Charging Hamilton Trophy] !


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 3:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1412
Location: Miami, Florida
huggybear wrote:
owenmahamilton wrote:
So what happens when a front wheel hits the rear wheel of a car in front, I tell you what, the car gets launched into the air and then into the fence, injuring if not killing the driver, the DW12 helped prevent this with the guards over the rear wheels. I guess that Dan Wheldon's death has been forgotten already.


Dallara said that the DW12's wheel guards didn't make enough of a difference stopping cars launching over the back of others, but did cause extra problems with debris and cutting tyres, that they didn't feel they were worth keeping.

edit: even in the Wheldon crash, he didn't flip off a tyre, he hit the side of a spinning car that launched him into the air.

There are plenty of ways to design rear tire guards to at least minimize launching due to wheels coming together. It didn't have to be that exaggerated monstrosity the DW12 featured. It can simply be a tubular guard just behind the tires and if made from carbon fiber, it would hardly be visible as it would blend in with the all the dark suspension components. Additionally the reason the wheel guards of the DW12 did little to keep cars from launching is simple… There is nothing extending rearward to keep the front end of a car coming into contact with the guards from shooting upwards. If they designed it so that the upper surface extends rearward about 16", any car coming too close to the rear of a car ahead may want to launch but the extended portion of the guard would send it right back down. Ideally it would trap the front tire(s) to some degree.

_________________
HAMILTON :: VETTEL :: ROSBERG :: RAIKKONEN :: VERSTAPPEN :: SAINZ :: MASSA :: BOTTAS :: NASR
ALONSO :: BUTTON :: PEREZ :: RICCIARDO :: GROSJEAN :: KVYAT :: HULKENBERG :: MALDONADO
THE REST… THERE ARE FAR BETTER DRIVERS THAT SHOULD BE IN FORMULA 1


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 3:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 892
slide wrote:
deffinately better than this years


Agreed. I like it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 26, 2017 1:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 28, 2013 11:29 am
Posts: 548
Video here of the car's first run at Indianapolis.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Efbdxk1utSg

The rear wing looks far too small and a bit flimsy to me.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 26, 2017 1:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1412
Location: Miami, Florida
Thanks for that vid Owen. The car looks a lot better in motion but I agree the rear wing is still too minimal and flimsy. Perhaps a dual vertical element to make it absolutely rigid and adding a touch of a wicker pane would go a long way towards making the actual wing rigid so it doesn't do, well, this…

https://youtu.be/JLW1E0gRVlM?t=78

_________________
HAMILTON :: VETTEL :: ROSBERG :: RAIKKONEN :: VERSTAPPEN :: SAINZ :: MASSA :: BOTTAS :: NASR
ALONSO :: BUTTON :: PEREZ :: RICCIARDO :: GROSJEAN :: KVYAT :: HULKENBERG :: MALDONADO
THE REST… THERE ARE FAR BETTER DRIVERS THAT SHOULD BE IN FORMULA 1


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 26, 2017 2:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 1:00 pm
Posts: 4386
What are people seeing in that video that makes them think that the rear wing is flimsy? Have you ever seen the way F1 rear wings move and oscillate in the rear facing onboard shots?

I'm quite sure that the folks who work at Dallara know a good deal more about this stuff than the average forum poster and have done plenty of simulation and practical testing of this wing. I doubt we'll be seeing these wings shaking themselves apart or coming off while on track.

_________________
{Insert clever sig line here}


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 26, 2017 3:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 2:58 pm
Posts: 88
Loving the simplicity of the design. It has a certain visceral line to it and the rear view resonates very strongly - almost early F1 slim ground effect style.

The tell for me will be if they race well at close quarters...one of the objectives of the design, I believe.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 26, 2017 7:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 12:13 pm
Posts: 937
Image
http://hanabi.autoweek.com/sites/default/files/styles/gen-1200-675/public/indycar_fr_rc_red_01.jpg?itok=ndx-l0ml

_________________
Only dogs, mothers, and quality undergarments give unconditional support.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 26, 2017 8:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4004
Location: Michigan, USA
owenmahamilton wrote:
Video here of the car's first run at Indianapolis.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Efbdxk1utSg

The rear wing looks far too small and a bit flimsy to me.

Impressions from seeing it in motion:

1) It looks very modern, so that's a success.
2) It also looks unique. But then, the last one did too.
3) It looks like a lower series car to me, not a top-level car.

I do like the part about producing so much downforce from underneath the car - in theory. We'll see how well it works in the real world. If it lets the cars follow and race more closely, and nobody has an accident because the ground effect failed going over a bump, then hopefully F1 will take notice of that part in the future.

I still don't like the way it looks, but that's secondary to how well it works, I suppose.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2017: Don't Ask| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
Wins: 3 | Podiums: 11

PF1 Top Three Constructor's Championship
2015 (No Limit Excedrin Racing): CHAMPIONS


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 26, 2017 9:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2599
Blinky McSquinty wrote:


Simply gorgeous.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 27, 2017 3:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 5633
Location: Nebraska, USA
Exediron wrote:
owenmahamilton wrote:
Video here of the car's first run at Indianapolis.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Efbdxk1utSg

The rear wing looks far too small and a bit flimsy to me.

Impressions from seeing it in motion:

1) It looks very modern, so that's a success.
2) It also looks unique. But then, the last one did too.
3) It looks like a lower series car to me, not a top-level car.

I do like the part about producing so much downforce from underneath the car - in theory. We'll see how well it works in the real world. If it lets the cars follow and race more closely, and nobody has an accident because the ground effect failed going over a bump, then hopefully F1 will take notice of that part in the future.

I still don't like the way it looks, but that's secondary to how well it works, I suppose.


actually, I find it just the other way around. It is no secret that I have always disliked the "praying mantis" look of recent F1 cars with so many things hung on them and monsterous front wings. I look at the clean lines of this car, and to me it speaks TOP series. Of course, aesthetics differ with each of us and that is fine...

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 27, 2017 6:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 12:13 pm
Posts: 937
Blake wrote:
Exediron wrote:
owenmahamilton wrote:
Video here of the car's first run at Indianapolis.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Efbdxk1utSg

The rear wing looks far too small and a bit flimsy to me.

Impressions from seeing it in motion:

1) It looks very modern, so that's a success.
2) It also looks unique. But then, the last one did too.
3) It looks like a lower series car to me, not a top-level car.

I do like the part about producing so much downforce from underneath the car - in theory. We'll see how well it works in the real world. If it lets the cars follow and race more closely, and nobody has an accident because the ground effect failed going over a bump, then hopefully F1 will take notice of that part in the future.

I still don't like the way it looks, but that's secondary to how well it works, I suppose.


actually, I find it just the other way around. It is no secret that I have always disliked the "praying mantis" look of recent F1 cars with so many things hung on them and monsterous front wings. I look at the clean lines of this car, and to me it speaks TOP series. Of course, aesthetics differ with each of us and that is fine...


I fully agree Blake.

I come from the aerospace world, and classic designs were sleek and smooth, devoid of extra fences or vortex generators. And if they were installed, they were a solution to a component that should have been designed better. State of the art jet fighters (such as the Su-35) appear extremely simple and clean in appearance.

In Formula One the extra winglets and parts are there because of just one simple reason. The regulations leak, they are poorly constructed and allow aerodynamic engineers to add little pieces of crap where allowed. And if the regulations are so poorly written, I can never accept that this series is the top because it is painfully obvious it could be improved. Everyone talks about controlling costs, yet these loose rules force teams to spend insane amounts of money. That doesn't even make sense. The cars are just the external reflection of the efficiency of the organization that control the sport. And inefficient never equates to "top".

_________________
Only dogs, mothers, and quality undergarments give unconditional support.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 27, 2017 6:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 12:13 pm
Posts: 937


Source courtesy of The RACER Channel

_________________
Only dogs, mothers, and quality undergarments give unconditional support.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 27, 2017 9:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 2:58 pm
Posts: 88
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
Blake wrote:
Exediron wrote:
owenmahamilton wrote:
Video here of the car's first run at Indianapolis.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Efbdxk1utSg

The rear wing looks far too small and a bit flimsy to me.

Impressions from seeing it in motion:

1) It looks very modern, so that's a success.
2) It also looks unique. But then, the last one did too.
3) It looks like a lower series car to me, not a top-level car.

I do like the part about producing so much downforce from underneath the car - in theory. We'll see how well it works in the real world. If it lets the cars follow and race more closely, and nobody has an accident because the ground effect failed going over a bump, then hopefully F1 will take notice of that part in the future.

I still don't like the way it looks, but that's secondary to how well it works, I suppose.


actually, I find it just the other way around. It is no secret that I have always disliked the "praying mantis" look of recent F1 cars with so many things hung on them and monsterous front wings. I look at the clean lines of this car, and to me it speaks TOP series. Of course, aesthetics differ with each of us and that is fine...


I fully agree Blake.

I come from the aerospace world, and classic designs were sleek and smooth, devoid of extra fences or vortex generators. And if they were installed, they were a solution to a component that should have been designed better. State of the art jet fighters (such as the Su-35) appear extremely simple and clean in appearance.

In Formula One the extra winglets and parts are there because of just one simple reason. The regulations leak, they are poorly constructed and allow aerodynamic engineers to add little pieces of crap where allowed. And if the regulations are so poorly written, I can never accept that this series is the top because it is painfully obvious it could be improved. Everyone talks about controlling costs, yet these loose rules force teams to spend insane amounts of money. That doesn't even make sense. The cars are just the external reflection of the efficiency of the organization that control the sport. And inefficient never equates to "top".


Have to thumb this up big time :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 27, 2017 10:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 1:00 pm
Posts: 4386
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
Blake wrote:
Exediron wrote:
owenmahamilton wrote:
Video here of the car's first run at Indianapolis.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Efbdxk1utSg

The rear wing looks far too small and a bit flimsy to me.

Impressions from seeing it in motion:

1) It looks very modern, so that's a success.
2) It also looks unique. But then, the last one did too.
3) It looks like a lower series car to me, not a top-level car.

I do like the part about producing so much downforce from underneath the car - in theory. We'll see how well it works in the real world. If it lets the cars follow and race more closely, and nobody has an accident because the ground effect failed going over a bump, then hopefully F1 will take notice of that part in the future.

I still don't like the way it looks, but that's secondary to how well it works, I suppose.


actually, I find it just the other way around. It is no secret that I have always disliked the "praying mantis" look of recent F1 cars with so many things hung on them and monsterous front wings. I look at the clean lines of this car, and to me it speaks TOP series. Of course, aesthetics differ with each of us and that is fine...


I fully agree Blake.

I come from the aerospace world, and classic designs were sleek and smooth, devoid of extra fences or vortex generators. And if they were installed, they were a solution to a component that should have been designed better. State of the art jet fighters (such as the Su-35) appear extremely simple and clean in appearance.

In Formula One the extra winglets and parts are there because of just one simple reason. The regulations leak, they are poorly constructed and allow aerodynamic engineers to add little pieces of crap where allowed. And if the regulations are so poorly written, I can never accept that this series is the top because it is painfully obvious it could be improved. Everyone talks about controlling costs, yet these loose rules force teams to spend insane amounts of money. That doesn't even make sense. The cars are just the external reflection of the efficiency of the organization that control the sport. And inefficient never equates to "top".

Agree. The reason, at least the biggest reason, that there are always so many fiddly bits in F1 is the flat bottom rule. If not for that the teams wouldn't have to muck about with developing so much downforce from the top of the car and it would also clean up the air behind the car and allow for closer racing.

_________________
{Insert clever sig line here}


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 27, 2017 11:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 10241
Blake wrote:
Exediron wrote:
owenmahamilton wrote:
Video here of the car's first run at Indianapolis.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Efbdxk1utSg

The rear wing looks far too small and a bit flimsy to me.

Impressions from seeing it in motion:

1) It looks very modern, so that's a success.
2) It also looks unique. But then, the last one did too.
3) It looks like a lower series car to me, not a top-level car.

I do like the part about producing so much downforce from underneath the car - in theory. We'll see how well it works in the real world. If it lets the cars follow and race more closely, and nobody has an accident because the ground effect failed going over a bump, then hopefully F1 will take notice of that part in the future.

I still don't like the way it looks, but that's secondary to how well it works, I suppose.


actually, I find it just the other way around. It is no secret that I have always disliked the "praying mantis" look of recent F1 cars with so many things hung on them and monsterous front wings. I look at the clean lines of this car, and to me it speaks TOP series. Of course, aesthetics differ with each of us and that is fine...


Playing devil's advocate here: do you think the following car speaks "TOP series"? Because clean lines, simple wings, no bits and pieces hung on it.

Image

Maybe this helps to better understand Exediron's comment. This is what you tend to see in European single seater series: the further you're removed from the top series, the "cleaner" the car gets.

_________________
Supporting all drivers with surnames starting with "V".

Proud member of the "It's Toro Rosso, not Torro Rosso" action committee.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 27, 2017 11:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 5633
Location: Nebraska, USA
It is definitely cleaner, mds, though not very clean in the nose area which looks a bit bulky and the hung below front wing "ruin" it for me. The car, even though cleaner than an F1 car, certainly shows just how clean the lines of the new Indy car is. Sadly, I fear for what the road version of the INDY car will look like, as they too will probably hang a bunch of crap on it as well.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 27, 2017 12:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 1:00 pm
Posts: 4386
Blake wrote:
It is definitely cleaner, mds, though not very clean in the nose area which looks a bit bulky and the hung below front wing "ruin" it for me. The car, even though cleaner than an F1 car, certainly shows just how clean the lines of the new Indy car is. Sadly, I fear for what the road version of the INDY car will look like, as they too will probably hang a bunch of crap on it as well.

I believe (but could be wrong) that the only real changes between the oval and road course configurations are the front and rear wings. Hopefully none of those odd appendages that they were using a season or two ago will reappear.

_________________
{Insert clever sig line here}


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 27, 2017 12:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 2:12 pm
Posts: 123
Location: The Heart of Midlothian
Now that new IndyCar for 2018 is what a I call a racing car.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 27, 2017 2:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 2:53 pm
Posts: 1329
Location: Ontario Canada
Wow I love it. I'm excited about seeing how this changes things. Great stuff and no more ugly rear pods.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 27, 2017 4:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:21 am
Posts: 44
Sweet, loving the look of the speedway kit. Looking forward to seeing the road course kit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 28, 2017 10:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 11:35 am
Posts: 918
I do like that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 28, 2017 10:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 10:02 am
Posts: 807
Location: Far side of Koozebane
Get's my vote.

Sleek, flowing, clean. Impressive.

I'd like to see road course car looks like with the bigger wings but initial impression is that it's a winner in the looks class.

_________________
Never judge a man until you've walked a mile in his shoes. That way when you do judge him, you're a mile away, and you have his shoes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2017 1:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 12:13 pm
Posts: 937
RaggedMan wrote:
Agree. The reason, at least the biggest reason, that there are always so many fiddly bits in F1 is the flat bottom rule. If not for that the teams wouldn't have to muck about with developing so much downforce from the top of the car and it would also clean up the air behind the car and allow for closer racing.


After the death of Senna the FIA rushed to make sure the bottom of the car did not run against the ground, hence the rubbing block and flat bottom. Because of that the noses were raised even more and more, in order to force more air under the nose. That also led to all those vanes and winglets and other doohickeys tacked onto the bodywork in pursuit of downforce because the bottom of the car was limited how much downforce it created. Because the bottom of the car could only generate so much downforce, it became more difficult for cars to follow each other, which led to DRS. Because the noses got so high the FIA tried to push them down, resulting in a few painful years of stepped noses and phallic protuberances. And oh yea, somewhere in there we witnessed double diffusers and blown exhausts. What a mess, and caused by one change back in 1995. Lack of foresight, knee-jerk reaction, ugly cars, not exactly what one would expect of a "top" series.

_________________
Only dogs, mothers, and quality undergarments give unconditional support.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2017 2:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 12:13 pm
Posts: 937
Blake wrote:
It is definitely cleaner, mds, though not very clean in the nose area which looks a bit bulky and the hung below front wing "ruin" it for me. The car, even though cleaner than an F1 car, certainly shows just how clean the lines of the new Indy car is. Sadly, I fear for what the road version of the INDY car will look like, as they too will probably hang a bunch of crap on it as well.


Have no fear, Indycar is less insane than Formula One and the road car looks wonderful.


Source courtesy of "The RACER Channel"

This was an early rendering

Image
http://media3.speedcafe.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/0524-Render01-640x337.jpg

The 2018 DW12 will look very similar, the only differences I picked up was the nose strake, slightly different bodywork around the top of the front suspension arms, the bodywork directly behind the driver's head a little less rounded (and more squared off), and the mounting bracket for the rear wing angled forward.

The beauty and genius behind all of this is that the basic DW12 car is unchanged, the difference just external wings and bodywork for either road or oval. This will keep costs down, and allow teams with smaller budgets to survive.

_________________
Only dogs, mothers, and quality undergarments give unconditional support.


Last edited by Blinky McSquinty on Wed Aug 02, 2017 7:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group