Caterham CT01

Caterham CT01

Caterham CT01

61 comments on Caterham CT01

  1. Thomas said on 26th January 2012, 1:45

    I guess it’s just the angle making it look ****… compare the 2011 HRT, the nose is pretty much similiar, and it cleary wasn’t an ugly car.

    I’m sure it’ll look much better when they reveal the car today and show more pictures.

  2. Mickrock (@mickrock) said on 26th January 2012, 3:51

    She looks great in the dark light at 2:00 am in the nightclub, unfortunately she’s gonna look a lot worse in the morning.

  3. Chris b said on 26th January 2012, 6:58

    As always in F1 two groups of people were not considered when this was given the green light. The drivers and the viewing public. It’s been proven often enough tht the nose up is not working for drivers. And personally I don’t want to see slower and uglier cars.

  4. This is clear indication that something is badly wrong with FIA.

  5. Keith C in NY said on 26th January 2012, 15:36

    Looks as though it has inherited a bit of Lotus 18?

  6. Flavio Briatore said on 26th January 2012, 17:04

    U G L Y

  7. Tim Servo said on 26th January 2012, 20:22

    The first thing I thought when I saw this was “Thunderbirds are go!” I hope it’s fast, because it certainly isn’t pretty.

  8. JACoz (@jacoz) said on 27th January 2012, 5:23

    Wow, I thought the new Dallara Indycar was ugly..

  9. There has to be a smoother transition while maintaining aero performance… this cannot be the best solution to the new regulations… if you notice, the step-effect is amplified by the side walls that are even higher for the wheel bars to hook. A possible solution would be a) give the mid-part a steeper angle = gets rid of the step-effect, and b) instead of building side walls to hook the wheel bars, build just one in right in the middle (so the two bars meet in the middle) = at least from the side view, you would have a much smoother-looking aero… Again, not sure but I hope another team will come up with a more creative solution to comply to the new regulations (which you cannot really blame as they give priority to safety…)

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.