Quote from deggis :

Where did you read/hear this? Any source?

From the 2009 rules, although it does only say about the tyres...

Quote :

12.6.3 Tyre specifications will be determined by the FIA no later than 1 September of the previous season. Once determined in this way, the specification of the tyres will not be changed during the Championship season without the agreement of all competing teams.

Hmm. Ok. Though feels like final version could be needed much earlier... in September it's kinda late to start designing new car.

And by the way (not that it would change that Sept 1 date) but the 2009 regs PDF is published 22 December in 2006. So it can't be the very final version. More like v0.5 beta.

I think Bean0's going to be our resident rule man from now on.

With regards to that Renault fin... It's basically a complete rip off from Red Bull.

Quote from deggis :

And by the way (not that it would change that Sept 1 date) but the 2009 regs PDF is published 22 December in 2006. So it can't be the very final version. More like v0.5 beta.

Or just a typo? 6 is very close to 7 on my keyboard

I bet they forgot to amend the date when editing the old rules, we've all done it before :o

I just read it on another forum this morning, had to hurriedly double check there when challenged

F1 with slick tires and no TC. awesome

A1GP with slick tires, no TC, ferrari engine and chassis. awesome.

This will be a goooood year for motorsport.

Quote from MR_B :

Or just a typo? 6 is very close to 7 on my keyboard

http://www.fia.com/sport/Regulations/f1regs.html

"2009 Technical Regulations - published on: 22.12.2006"

At the bottom of every page of that PDF it says 22 December 2006. Typo? Not likely imho.

It's correct.

2009 regs were published in 2006.
2008 regs in 2005.

look how original Renault is..

Quote from tristancliffe :

Yes, I think you are. A lot of the time a functional design tends to look great, but CFD and FEA produces shapes (not just in F1) that are theoretically 'better', but rarely look nice.

are you sure its not a matter of polishing a turd that is the fia regulations for how the car has to be shaped?

Quote from traxxion :

Bah seems like I really am the only one who thinks nowadays F1 cars are the sexiest vehicles ever.

haha im with you mate.
they look awesome and complicated and unique.

Quote from Bean0 :

McLaren with 2009-spec rear wing & slicks from yesterday.Renault with dodgy looking fin from today.

McLaren wasnt running a 2009-spec rear wing

http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/he ... detail/080415100905.shtml

Quote :

Other teams, like McLaren, were trying the slicks in conjunction with simulated 2009 levels of downforce, including a flat rear wing that significantly reduced cornering speeds.

Yeh those wings are to simulate the 40% deduction in aerodynamics we will see in 2009. Thats why Massa was 3 seconds faster than everyone, he ran with the 2008 spec car on slicks.

That McLaren in the first page with the no top spec wings sticking out all over the car and the slicks is looking beautiful! Cant wait!

I think the F1 cars as they are just now as cool as hell, all those differn't components that are sticking around, just looks awesome...

http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/he ... detail/080415100905.shtml

Just looks half asssed if you ask me, it's like a buggatti veyron with space savers instead of alloys.

The best thing of this all is, when it's raining, you are having problems earlier than when you have 'semi-slicks'

that + no TC =

I like the new rules Slicks and no TC but its just the problem of the car design, That McLaren seems to have a ratherly small front wing rather then something that will strike fear into someone.
Bad choice of words in know.

KERS is more interested than slicks tire for me

Quote from scania :

KERS is more interested than slicks tire for me

It could be interesting, it's odd that no-one is really talking about it.

Why should we talk about it when it's more basic than a Prius, and rather than accepting the challenge of making it efficient and light the teams just want the weight limit increasing?

It would be worth talking about if it wasn't simply a "Green Gimmick" just to keep some mentalists away from the sport...

Fetish Man & FIA over-excited about KERS with big plans vs. Toyota's engine chief not so excited

Nothing against the technology but restricting it so much (together with the engine freeze) and strangling the whole idea by making it a hi-tech push-to-pass* system... not good. Why call it "KERS" anyway? Isn't it basicly a hybrid.

* not official, but mentioned here.

No. The KERS that was featured on Racecar Engineering is powered via the gearbox. When you want to brake, you connect them both, KERS spins up (via a CVT), takes up the amount of energy that can make the car accelerate with ~30 KW later by spinning up very fast (65k rpm i think, since that way it can have enough energy while still being light). When you need the power (or need a pass), you release it again via a CVT, slowing it down and accelerating the car. IT's just a mean to store the kinetic energy of a car that would be dissapated in the brakes otherwise.

KERS = Kenetic Energy Recovery System

Hybrid cars are usually just electric motors combined with a normal engine, the engine charges the electric motors at higher speeds while the electronic motors power the car at slow speeds, like when you are stuck in traffic.

I know what "KERS" means.

That Flybrid/flywheel is only one way of doing it... also hydraulics, pneumatics or electric drives are possible. For example BMW will use electric system (according to this).

lithium is toxic?

Blah kers. That oldskool turbo boost button did have way much bigger balls.

I prefer polluting.

F1 is 80% boring rubbish, but at least banning TC and allowing slicks was a good thing.

-EDIT- Nah crap just realised that this is really an old thread.

Well, at least those FIA monkeys have done ONE thing right...