Yeah, must be mid to late eighties. Before then most were directly part of the car (riveted etc) or part of the whole bodywork, rather than bolt on/off parts.
If I had to put money on it, I'd say 1985 and probably Senna!
The Stupid Questions thread
- Thread starter genjigonzales
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
Yeah, must be mid to late eighties. Before then most were directly part of the car (riveted etc) or part of the whole bodywork, rather than bolt on/off parts.
If I had to put money on it, I'd say 1985 and probably Senna!
I was just thinking about it and wanted to see a video of it but cant find any record of it as it must have been an odd thing to see. I was wondering if it was since the uplift noses were introduced by Tyrrell in 1990
Definitely before. I know in at least 87 the nose cones could be replaced separately if required during a race, I'm sure Senna had to replace one during that year, and as that Lotus effectively dated back to 1985, hence my thought that it could be that year.
Definitely before the 90s. By the 90s, quick release mechanisms made it much quicker to replace one in a stop, but they were changed before then.
No answer here, sadly, but worth a watch anyway. The history of the Pit-stop.
https://www.redbull.tv/video/AP-1P6BWQ9JS1W11/the-history-of-the-pit-stop?playlist=AP-1P6BWQ9JS1W11
https://www.redbull.tv/video/AP-1P6BWQ9JS1W11/the-history-of-the-pit-stop?playlist=AP-1P6BWQ9JS1W11
Will check that out later.
You'd think the first nose change would be an easy thing to find, but apparently not.
lol, tell me about it, I'm currently watching the 1984 season review in the hope of seeing one, I don't think it was earlier than that as they don't look removable before that.
I was thinking somewhere from '82 onwards, so '84 would be a reasonable spot to start. Good luck!!! 
it's a proper 'doh' one too, he goes off in a spin, then as he spins it back around coming back onto the track he hits someone. An Andrea special.
I know this is the stupid questions thread but even so I feel like this might get laughed at.
But if F1 can go nearly as fast (and at times this year, faster than ever before) on less fuel and more efficiency, then why don't we use more fuel and go even faster?
I guess in a nutshell, why has F1 tried to match its speed on less fuel instead of pursuing a route that would see them become unbelievably fast?
Whilst the new engines are technological marvels, they aren't exactly WOW on screen.
But if F1 can go nearly as fast (and at times this year, faster than ever before) on less fuel and more efficiency, then why don't we use more fuel and go even faster?
I guess in a nutshell, why has F1 tried to match its speed on less fuel instead of pursuing a route that would see them become unbelievably fast?
Whilst the new engines are technological marvels, they aren't exactly WOW on screen.
The tracks, and drivers can only handle a certain amount of speed before it gets excessively dangerous, so that's one limitation. The second is that the engine manufacturers wanted a formula that encourages engine development in a way that is relevant to them. V12's with 0.5 mpg and 2000 bhp, as amazing as that would be to see, have no relevance to manufacturers road cars.
Or, in McHonda's case, 7 miles per engine.
Weight will also be a massive factor. Increasing fuel rates would obviously open the opportunity to more power from the combustion, but you would have to carry more fuel to accommodate it. So in simple terms twice the fuel would increase the race lap time from circa 5 seconds above quali time to 10 seconds above quali time. Even if you allow for a massive performance gains with the additional fuel allowance, its unlikely to fully neutralise the deficit incurred by the additional rate.
Now that you have raised the question, it would be interesting for one of the engineers within the sport to indicate (after the relevant trade offs) what the optimal fuel allowance would be for a GP, offsetting weight, race pace, increased tyre wear and fuel saving etc.
Now that you have raised the question, it would be interesting for one of the engineers within the sport to indicate (after the relevant trade offs) what the optimal fuel allowance would be for a GP, offsetting weight, race pace, increased tyre wear and fuel saving etc.