The Stupid Questions thread

Discussion in 'Formula 1' started by genjigonzales, Jun 20, 2011.

  1. allsaintchris.

    allsaintchris. Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    6,495
    Likes Received:
    659
    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!
     
    #281
  2. El_Bando

    El_Bando Found
    Forum Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    Messages:
    12,766
    Likes Received:
    551
    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
     
    #282
  3. allsaintchris.

    allsaintchris. Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    6,495
    Likes Received:
    659
    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.
     
    #283
  4. SgtBhaji

    SgtBhaji Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Messages:
    9,245
    Likes Received:
    910
    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.
     
    #284
  5. Big Ern

    Big Ern Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    8,563
    Likes Received:
    1,922
    #285
  6. SgtBhaji

    SgtBhaji Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Messages:
    9,245
    Likes Received:
    910
    #286
  7. Big Ern

    Big Ern Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    8,563
    Likes Received:
    1,922
    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.
     
    #287
  8. SgtBhaji

    SgtBhaji Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Messages:
    9,245
    Likes Received:
    910
    I was thinking somewhere from '82 onwards, so '84 would be a reasonable spot to start. Good luck!!! :D
     
    #288
  9. Big Ern

    Big Ern Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    8,563
    Likes Received:
    1,922
    I've found one, dunno if it's the first though, there could be one pre-84. The driver concerned won't come as much of a surprise, De Crashalot in Montreal '85
     
    #289
    El_Bando likes this.
  10. SgtBhaji

    SgtBhaji Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Messages:
    9,245
    Likes Received:
    910
    de Cesaris?

    If so, that's hillarious. I was wondering if it might be him!
     
    #290

  11. Big Ern

    Big Ern Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    8,563
    Likes Received:
    1,922
    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.
     
    #291
  12. SgtBhaji

    SgtBhaji Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Messages:
    9,245
    Likes Received:
    910
    Lovely!!! I so hope this is the first. It would be a fitting tribute to the man! :D
     
    #292
  13. Big Ern

    Big Ern Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    8,563
    Likes Received:
    1,922
    this is a Brabham from 78, that is defo a removable nose-cone, I think it goes all the way back to it's origins
    please log in to view this image
     
    #293
    El_Bando likes this.
  14. TopClass

    TopClass Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2011
    Messages:
    7,549
    Likes Received:
    1,163
    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.
     
    #294
  15. DHCanary

    DHCanary Very Well-Known Member
    Forum Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    12,329
    Likes Received:
    1,445
    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.
     
    #295
    TopClass likes this.
  16. Big Ern

    Big Ern Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    8,563
    Likes Received:
    1,922
    on a side note, during a GP they do 7mpg.
     
    #296
    Smithers, ched999uk and DHCanary like this.
  17. allsaintchris.

    allsaintchris. Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    6,495
    Likes Received:
    659
    That's pretty bloody good!
     
    #297
  18. allsaintchris.

    allsaintchris. Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    6,495
    Likes Received:
    659
    Same can be said for the rest of an F1 car.
     
    #298
  19. Mr.B

    Mr.B Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2014
    Messages:
    161
    Likes Received:
    158
    Or, in McHonda's case, 7 miles per engine.
     
    #299
  20. Smithers

    Smithers Well-Known Member
    Forum Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2011
    Messages:
    7,905
    Likes Received:
    686
    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.
     
    #300

Share This Page