Group Admins

  • Profile picture of Keith Collantine

Group Mods

  • Profile picture of damonsmedley
  • Profile picture of Bradley Downton

F1

Public Group active 1 hour, 13 minutes ago

F1 discussion

Rules about car entires

This topic contains 8 replies, has 7 voices, and was last updated by Avatar of MazdaChris MazdaChris 1 year, 1 month ago.

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #132829
    Avatar of MazdaChris
    MazdaChris
    Participant

    Just a thought that occured to me, and wondered if anyone knew the answer for sure.

    Basically, I remember not so long ago that teams would sometimes change cars during a season, or use the previous year’s car partway through the season before introducing the new one. I know this doesn’t happen any more, with teams rolling out effectively a new car every season and then binning it at the end of the year.

    But what got me thinking is that McLaren are struggling a little with their new car. Now I fully expect them to work on it and make it work properly, at which point it will all pay off. But imagine it didn’t for a moment, and they realised that the new car was a mistake and last year’s car would be quicker.

    Last year’s car would still be more or less legal, barring a couple of tweaks, and has passed all of the crash tests and so on. So would there be anything stopping them from just showing up with last year’s car to do back to back tests, or run the older car in a race?

    They definitely used to be able to do this, but I wonder if that’s changed and now they’d not be allowed. Anyone know?

    #228682

    I imagine that would contravene chassis homologation regulations, and so wouldn’t be allowed.

    #228683
    Avatar of MazdaChris
    MazdaChris
    Participant

    Would it? The chassis are already homologated and passed FIA safety standards, so would just need to pass scrutineering surely?

    (note – that should say ‘entries’ in the subject line…)

    #228684
    Avatar of PieLighter
    PieLighter
    Participant

    On paper, an MP4-27B might be a better option on pace. How it would compare to the rest of the 2013 cars is another question, but I’d imagine that it would do better than the MP4-28.
    Perhaps it was a quiet regulation change if it’s no longer allowed? I’m sure if it was allowed then McLaren would have considered this option.

    #228685
    Avatar of JamieFranklinF1
    JamieFranklinF1
    Participant

    As great as it would be, there would be some problems. Getting the old car out would probably give them a lot more performance, but it would be at the detriment of track time of the new car, which means they may never figure out how to get a good handle on it. But, if they do think they have figured it out, and bring it out to a new race, and it doesn’t work, then it’ll be another wasted weekend.

    If it is possible, then it’s an idea that they’d probably consider. However, I as I mentioned before, they will probably stick to their guns and try to figure it out. I reckon that they’ll have a good handle on it, and be a lot closer by Barcelona.

    #228686
    Avatar of
    Anonymous

    Among the current drivers I think Vettel’s the one who had the most recent example of that, if not the only one.

    #228687
    Avatar of F1Yankee
    F1Yankee
    Participant

    i forget where i read it, but a mclaren person explained they have already reached the maximum of the previous chassis’ development. while 2+ seconds off now, surely they will be comparable to the fastest cars at some point in the season.

    i went through the 2013 sporting and technical regulations, but i can’t find any language relating to homologation of chassis/survival cells. engines yes, chassis no.

    strangely i did find (tech) article 15.1 (permitted materials) which outlaws the coolest thing on earth, carbon nanotubes:
    13) Carbon fibres manufactured from polyacrylonitrile (PAN) precursor which have :
    - a tensile modulus ¡Â 550GPa ;
    - a density ¡Â 1.92 g/cm ;
    - unidirectional or planar reinforcement within their pre-impregnated form, not including three dimensional weaves or stitched fabrics (but three-dimensional preforms and fibre reinforcement using Z-pinning technology are permitted) ;
    - no carbon nanotubes incorporated within the fibre or its matrix ;
    - a permitted matrix, not including a carbon matrix.

    #228688
    Avatar of DavidS
    DavidS
    Participant

    The 2013 car would be an improvement over the 2012 car on paper, otherwise it would’ve been scrapped.
    They just have a few problems with their new car that is not making them particularly competitive. Once they sort those out, they should be in a better position.

    Throwing in the towel and using the 2012 car again would make all the developments and new parts that are in the pipeline useless.

    Also, there isn’t a lot of evidence to suggest that this years car is bad. The only running we’ve had where they are actually competing (testing and Friday practice sessions don’t count because teams are running through a test program and don’t show true pace) is a wet street circuit during qualifying.

    Besides, most teams will be devoting the majority of their development resources to 2014 now.

    #228689
    Avatar of MazdaChris
    MazdaChris
    Participant

    I agree with all these points, I was just interested in whether they would be able to if they chose to. Thankfully, Whitmarsh himself has confirmed that, yes, they could if they wanted to, and that right now the MP4-27 would likely be faster than the 28, but that they intend to stick with the difficult new car because they believe that its potential for development is higher than the 27. I suspect there are other things there, such as gaining experience with the pullrod front suspension, so that they can decide whether it’s something that’ll be worth having on the 29.

    Still, interesting to know that they could potentially fall back on the 27 if it all seemed to be going badly wrong.

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.