Comments on: 2009 Formula 1 testing pictures part 2

By: Adam

Adam — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 00:12:30 +0000

what a heap of junk… I liked the cars the past few years, they looked fighter jets on wheels. These new 09 cars look like a 8 year old has put them together. But i kinda got the feelng its was gonna be ruined in 2009.

By: Derek

Derek — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:29:56 +0000

The side profile of the BMW looks nice and smooth. I did not like all the jagged bits sticking out everywhere on the F1 cars of recent years. A clumsy driver could break one off when getting into the car on the grid “Sorry Ron, I just caught it with my shoe climbing aboard, it’s dammed tight you know” That would go down well at McLaren!! I agree the front wing is a monstrosity and will cost teams some additional time in the pits to replace. But I’m up for anything that will allow racing and overtaking on the track, not in the pits!

By: dmw

dmw — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 14:34:53 +0000

These cars are hideous. Philistines, the one aero bit too many is the one that slows the car down. Does one look at the Bell X-1, Concorde, or the body of a sprinter and decide that it needs some re-styling?

Obviously, and as many have pointed out, this wing design means that there will be piles of front wings in Turn 1 (and cut tires at all times). That’s not going to be so much fun.

By: Gaga

Gaga — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 13:18:22 +0000

i prefer looking Honda 2009 car with wider rear wing than BMW’s or Williams’. they’re horrible.

Honda’s proportional and balance front and rear wings makes it cool (for 2009 cars)

By: sumedh

sumedh — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 12:28:23 +0000

Are bridge wings and spoon-shaped front wings “specifically” banned ?

By: stevepCambsUK

stevepCambsUK — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:40:26 +0000

the new rear wings are shocking and the front wings are going to be smashed off easier but if theres more overtaking then im all for it……

By: Sven Weichbrodt

Sven Weichbrodt — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 07:37:01 +0000

I am happy that the F1 Overtaking Group has finally recognised that in order to guarantee overtaking the cars need to be less reliant on aerodynamically derived downforce and more reliant on mechanic downforce, ie grip provided by the tyres (thank God the grooved tyres are gone).

However, I think somewhere deep down in their charter there is a clause which also states that the new cars must be as ugly as possible.

If this is the new 2009 look then I will listen to the GP’s on the wireless rather than on the TV as I doubt I can stomach it. The entire aesthetic of the car is wrong, with that tall, narrow rear wing combined with that ironing board on steroids at the front.

Could they have looked at visual balance, ie make the rear wing wider but limit its interaction with air off the rear tyres and limit the number and chord of the elements?

God help us, can they get anything right?

By: Jean

Jean — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 07:30:28 +0000

Apart from the high rear wing , I prefer the 2009 looks (at least from what we see so far) , I think it’s ’cause I never liked TOO many aero bits on an F1 car , now they are mostly gone. Much “cleaner”. Usually happens to me around end Jan. but I’m already filled with great excitement for the new season – maybe a long 4 months ahead.

By: Mr Soap

Mr Soap — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 07:00:11 +0000

Look at recent new F1 drivers. It’d be very hard to argue that either Piquet or Kovalainen particulary benefitted from testing for a year. Nakajima doesn’t really seem to have profited from his chunk of testing. Vettel also took a fair bit of the season until his form became obvious – although how much this was due to him is certainly debatable. Whatever, you can’t really say they enjoyed much of an advantage over those who didn’t come in from a years worth of testing.

I remember ages ago, Jackie Stewart doing a series where he drove different F1 cars, and his usual complaint with the bad cars was lack of comfort, caused by not having an experienced driver point out the flaws – obvious or not, but rather newer drivers who’d be accepting of them. And given that’s the kind of grunt work test drivers are meant to do, it’s not hard to see why you’d want people with years of experience as your development drivers.

I’d argue it’s a better use of time to get racing experience in other categories than to test extensively in F1. Racing talent is obvious enough, whether they’re in a lower formula car or an F1 car, and F1 test experience hasn’t really been a requirement. Senna didn’t have much to speak of prior to signing to Toleman, Hamilton certainly didn’t, Raikkonen only had three tests.

By: Too Good

Too Good — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 04:15:34 +0000

Mr Soap – Cost cutting 101 in F1 : Testing has significantly reduced since 2007. 2006 was the last year when teams tested as much as they wanted that too mainly because of Ferrari not agreeing to test mile limits claiming that its the only “Front runners” on Bridgestones and hence has less data.

Coming back to my point – given that as it is Testing times are restricted and “race drivers” prefer to spend as much time possible on track in test and on Fridays, this anyways has taken opportunity of Young drivers to become good testing experience and then promote to race seat.

With PDLR/ALEX WURZ the case is different these two guys are really sought after on the grid for their Technical feedback and as such I said now the time has come for them to move the next step in career Technical Roles within the team.

And at least whatever opportunity can be provided to the younger lot to get the “actual track time” should be given.
Once the 2009 specs are finalized that’s in Jan 2009 Race drivers will be back in the saddle to give their final feedbacks and the young pilots will be cooling their heels anyways.