Fell out the ugly tree

[tuscan_thunder]

Kenny, that's a couple of excellent comparison pics.

I think the front looks good, the aerial profile is much cleaner but the rear wing looks very odd.

It's still actually quite a big wing if you look at it from side profile. I'd have thought a wide, low, single plane wing would've looked better

[Shug]

Kenny, that's a couple of excellent comparison pics.

I think the front looks good, the aerial profile is much cleaner but the rear wing looks very odd.

It's still actually quite a big wing if you look at it from side profile. I'd have thought a wide, low, single plane wing would've looked better

But wouldn't have solved the issue of a big wide turbulent wake that this wing is supposed to do. The idea is to separate the effects of the rear wing from a front wing following - plus they use standard shapes, so less chance for more complex, turbulence inducing flow devices to appear. Racing matters more than looks IMO - especially as we'll quickly get used to them, when they start winning stuff. Some spectacularly ugly cars are seen as classics because they are race winners (see WRC for details!)

[tuscan_thunder]

aye, I know the overtaking/turbulence was part of the problem. Hope the ugliness pays dividends for overtaking!

[ryallm]

I think it isnt much more ugly than last year, but still ugly. I would have liked them to go further, with teenys wing like Indy cars in Daytona/500 trim. This is what a fast single seater should look like

[BigD]

It's ugly but if means exciting racing then who cares.

Although it doesn't look too bad. If the "racing" improves than that's all that matters to me.

[BiggestNizzy]

I just think it looks different the massive front wing does look odd but after the first few races I am sure we will all be used to it, I am a form follows funtion type of bloke (awaits bad taste jokes) anyway so If it works it's a from me.

[jason]

Looks good to me... way better than all the aero appendages in recent years. And if it improves the racing (which I am sadly not convinced it will), then all the better Disappointed they're able to fit those fugly wing mirrors on pylons, must be a loophole in the rulebook whereby these aero devices are just 'wing mirror mounts', in the same way the front wheel brake ducts/flow conditioners are just 'brake ducts'

Sure we'll get used to the proportions. Remember when they switched to narrow track ('98 IIRC?)... soon got used to that and now the older wide-track cars look a bit 'odd'.

[Matelotman]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsp ... 824258.stm

Piccy 5 shows what Massa thinks of it

[tut]

I like the naming, F60 to follow F40 and F50.

tut

[Matelotman]

I like the naming, F60 to follow F40 and F50.

tut

Thought the Enzo was the F60?

[mckeann]

I wonder what effect the front wheel/wishbone arrangement will have on the handling??

Seems a lot further back, so should effect the weight distribution, and also angled rearwards, compared to right angles.


Anybody any ideas?

[Graemei]

I can see a lot of front wing going askew this season which should make things interesting.... FUGLY as though

Damn right, tis a huge front wing.

Cool comparison pics Kenny.

[jamie]

Excellect tec review in Autosport
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/72741

[Shug]

I wonder what effect the front wheel/wishbone arrangement will have on the handling??

Seems a lot further back, so should effect the weight distribution, and also angled rearwards, compared to right angles.


Anybody any ideas?

Wishbone angles are probably more to do with locating the wishbones at a convenient place on the tub for mounting points, rather than any thrust reasons (F1 teams have been compromising suspension geometry for aero for some time now - see zero keel cars) The usual reason for cutting wheelbase is to make the car more nimble (although Ross Brawn has gone on record saying that in some cases, this isn't necessarily true) Last years Ferrari had a massive wheelbase - for aero reasons, to get cleaner air to the front of the sidepods and maximise the airflow-taming that went on across the body. I suppose there could be a couple of reasons for hacking it - 1. the new regulation front wing plane is bigger and it might be regulated where that has to be in relation to the rear (dunno about this exactly) 2. they are running full slicks again and will have more mechanical grip to take advantage of a quicker-turning car - less need to tame twitchiness with more low-speed grip on offer.

(disclaimer) opinions of an F1 anorak only

[Scotty C]

I was thinking that the wheelbase was about the same and that the driver was further forward on the new car?