liam.mccaffrey
|
| posted on 1/7/09 at 08:23 PM |
|
|
F1 technical discussion at work
was having a discussion today in work about how quick an unrestricted F1 car could go. One that isn't subject to any rules.
what do people think. my opinion was that you are looking at least 4 secs on a qually lap.
things that would make the most difference imho
more power (more capacity, rev limits, turbos whatever )
traction control
variable aero, basically shifting between airbrakes and super low drag for the straights
CVT's
no min weights
adaptive suspension
what do you think, any obvious ones i have missed
Build Blog
Build Photo Album
|
|
|
|
|
iscmatt
|
| posted on 1/7/09 at 08:26 PM |
|
|
The best driver!?
|
|
|
markyb
|
| posted on 1/7/09 at 08:27 PM |
|
|
during the whole FOTA/FIA row there was a discussion on flexible rear wings and a team principal reckoned that no restrictions on flexibility could
make a difference of upto 2.5 secs on its own
just imagine if KERS actually worked as well 
|
|
|
Dangle_kt
|
| posted on 1/7/09 at 08:49 PM |
|
|
slicks
|
|
|
RickRick
|
| posted on 1/7/09 at 08:49 PM |
|
|
i recon easily 10 seconds with some of the mad suggestions above
|
|
|
Liam
|
| posted on 1/7/09 at 08:59 PM |
|
|
Full use of ground effect, and 4WD to handle the limitless power!
I should think you could easily get to the point where the human needs at least a G suit, and probably to be eliminated altogether, to get the most
from the car.
Liam
|
|
|
zilspeed
|
| posted on 1/7/09 at 09:00 PM |
|
|
Turbo F1 cars had 1500bhp in qualifying trim.
Who actually knows what the current 2.4 rev limited V8s have.
Some say it's 720-750bhp.
Then think of how much chassis design and tyre technology has come on since the turbo era.
Apparently, turbo engines are under consideration again.
|
|
|
Liam
|
| posted on 1/7/09 at 09:03 PM |
|
|
Turbo diesels? Wouldn't surprise me. Nooooooooooo.
|
|
|
Litemoth
|
| posted on 1/7/09 at 09:27 PM |
|
|
Parking sensors?
ooh ooh....and allowing women to drive them. They're much better drivers you know.
[Edited on 1/7/09 by Litemoth]
|
|
|
StevieB
|
| posted on 1/7/09 at 09:43 PM |
|
|
Was it the 1994 Williams that was the most technically advanced F1 car ever and led to the last major change in regs?
Take the tech from that car, advance it a bit and then add in the variable aero and you'd have an answer.
Didn't Honda produce a car that was effectively an unrestricted version of their F1 car? Instead of a rear wing it had something more akin to
an aeroplane tailplane.
|
|
|
eccsmk
|
| posted on 1/7/09 at 09:56 PM |
|
|
slightly off topic but does anyone have any tech spec for these engines (the ones they use now) dont they use hydraulicly controlled valves?/
sorry for the hijack
|
|
|
iank
|
| posted on 1/7/09 at 10:05 PM |
|
|
Things they banned that would make a huge difference (IMO) if they were allowed again.
Sucker cars (Brabham BT46B)
Skirts
Rear wing directly acting on rear suspension and much higher in the air
Dual chassis (as used by lotus 88)
Turbo's
But be aware the driver is the weak link and physical G forces and reaction times become the limiting factors on speed/cornering.
--
Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.
Anonymous
|
|
|
liam.mccaffrey
|
| posted on 1/7/09 at 10:06 PM |
|
|
not a hijack, all interesting info
Build Blog
Build Photo Album
|
|
|
iank
|
| posted on 1/7/09 at 10:08 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by eccsmk
slightly off topic but does anyone have any tech spec for these engines (the ones they use now) dont they use hydraulicly controlled valves?/
sorry for the hijack
They use Pneumatically controlled valves (can't get the rev's high enough with metal springs)
http://scarbsf1.com/valves.html
--
Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.
Anonymous
|
|
|
eccsmk
|
| posted on 1/7/09 at 10:16 PM |
|
|
thank you iank
thats a really good read
also helped me understand how they work now.
|
|
|
greggors84
|
| posted on 1/7/09 at 10:18 PM |
|
|
As Liam said the drivers are the limiting factor. They have got to be close to the max cornering Gs a driver would be able to cope with.
Stick them in a G suit and you will get a bit more out of them. Im sure those RedBull air race pilots hit 10g at times.
Also depends on circuit of course. Something like the Nordschleife would be a good test if it was smoothed out. Long straights for those 2000bhp
20,000rpm turbo monsters and some high speed twistys to test the fan ground effect with variable wings.
|
|
|
Liam
|
| posted on 1/7/09 at 11:03 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by StevieB
Was it the 1994 Williams that was the most technically advanced F1 car ever and led to the last major change in regs?
Think it may have been the bennetton of the same era as they also had an active four wheel steering system. Was mappable so the amount and direction
of rear steer could be varied with speed, acceleration etc etc. It dialed out low speed understeer and high speed oversteer. If memory serves, the
article I read about it mentioned Schumachers team mate didn't get on with it at all, but MS was measurably quicker (order of 0.5, 1 second per
lap or so) in testing with the early version. I think it may have seen a race or two, then it was unfortunately killed off with active suspension and
all the rest of that stuff that as a techy geek I found really interesting in F1 
|
|
|
vinny1275
|
| posted on 2/7/09 at 07:30 AM |
|
|
The old Honda F1 team were trying to do some runs at Bonneville to break the groupnd speed record for F1 class cars - it did have a tiny rear wing and
a tail-like thing ag the back (and actually, some of the cars did seem to start sporting similar things last year).
they got up to just shy of 400km/h - more details
here
as aerodynamic as they are though, you still need massive amounts of power to overcome the drag at higher speeds - more power means stronger (heavier)
transissions, etc., so you start needing more power to overcome the weight.... it turns into a law of diminishing returns I think...
Interesting tho
|
|
|
Phil.J
|
| posted on 2/7/09 at 07:47 AM |
|
|
The problem is, if you start to modify them then they are no longer F1 cars (Cars built to F1 rules), so it's a meaningless question!
|
|
|
liam.mccaffrey
|
| posted on 2/7/09 at 08:25 AM |
|
|
If you think its a meaningless question why did you post?? I think your reply is meaningless for what its worth. F1 cars are the ultimate circuit
vehicles for the type of races they compete in, what is so meaningless about discussing the technological limits imposed by F1's sactioning
body?
Its very interesting looking into why certain technologies were banned.
If on someone on here asked a question about stuff "falling off" their car following SVA/IVA would that be a meaningless question too? As
their car would technically no longer comply with VOSA's guidelines.
[Edited on 2/7/09 by liam.mccaffrey]
Build Blog
Build Photo Album
|
|
|
269butcher
|
| posted on 2/7/09 at 08:28 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Liam
Turbo diesels? Wouldn't surprise me. Nooooooooooo.
Pls leave turbo diesels for trucks and lorrys 
|
|
|
Vindi_andy
|
| posted on 2/7/09 at 08:50 AM |
|
|
Active damping as used by renault I think it was 2 years ago before it was deemed outside the rules at least i I think thats what it was called
[Edited on 2/7/09 by Vindi_andy]
|
|
|
fesycresy
|
| posted on 2/7/09 at 08:51 AM |
|
|
Would you say V8's produce the best compromise between power and weight / size ?
If so what do you think the maximum power would be from one of these motors ?
What would be the ideal capacity I wonder ?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The sooner you fall behind, the more time you'll have to catch up.
|
|
|
 (WinCE).JPG)
.jpg){kind=avatar}
