Formula 1 - 2009 Season

[DJ12]

That's why I said "look where they are now" because obviously they are still not using the cars from the 1980's ..doh!

Rallycross car, ex Group B, 150 000 miles, one careful owbner, still winning races. Yeah right....

As I said, the old rallycross Group B cars did 0-100kmh in under 3s, new cars are doing under 2.

Do I make myself clear on second reading ?

Where they (Rallycross) are now has nothing to do with group B, if you read what it says on the link it says JWRC chassis.

It should be look at what you can do with a junior WRC with 500 bhp.

Group B cars would be owned by a full blooded WRC, no doubt about it.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

Why? They are limited to 300bhp and have something like a 1200kg minimun weight limit right? You got to have some magical chassis, suspension and brakes (you can fit the modern tires on group B too) to make up for atleast 300kg extra and atleast 200bhp less. Not saying WRC wont be faster but I doubt B cars would be totally annihilated.

 

[Freak'n Big Panda]

I think with modern tires the group b cars would kill the WRC cars. just because of huge advantage they would have in acceleration. on corner exits they'd just pull away eliminating any advanatge modern suspension could give. And obviously on the straights they'd just dominate.

 

[DuckThor Evil]

Why? They are limited to 300bhp and have something like a 1200kg minimun weight limit right?

The power is not limited to 300hp, it used to be but not anymore. In reality the WRC cars have more than 300hp these days. I've heard figures of close to 400hp with wide rev range and pretty massive torque aswell. I don't how they would fare against B class cars though.

 

[Bludd]

FIA vice president and former rally driver Mohammed Ben Sulayem crashed the R28 at a Renault PR event in Dubai. Sounds expensive.

http://www.autosport.com/news/grapevine.php/id/74372

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

Better stick to riding camel's than eh.

Or is that being racist?

 

[Davros]

He tried but it gave him the hump

 

[suryad]

lol @tongue and Davros.

That F1 car sounded awesome though. Couldnt even hear the thundering Ford. Man that video was painful to watch.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

The sound would have been even better if he actually did full throttle. He wasnt close to doing that if you see that he wasnt that much in front of the Ford. Makes it even more suprising that he suddenly lost all controll.

 

[Bludd]

Remember, no traction control. He probably got too excited.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

No official TC that is. Given how you never see any smoke during a start and almost no spins at all I refuse to believe that TC is actually gone. If you compare that to the days they really did not have TC you'd see smoke at every start and plenty of spins accelerating out of corners.

There might be no official TC unit anymore, but im sure they can play with the default ECU enough to still make it do TC.

Well, not that TC would have saved the day. I remember that a year or so ago one reviewer for a big car magazine did a couple of laps at silverstone in the old Jagaur F1 car and explained that even though it had 8 TC settings even at the heaviest one if you'd just put your foot down there would be nothing the TC could do for you. Just too much power. He did pretty well though, especially since it was just a couple of degrees above freezing. He only had 2 spins or so.

I think he just cant drive for shit

 

[suryad]

Yeah you do have a point there. I refuse to believe all the electronics are gone from the cars. TC/launch control has to be there.

 

[shyam335]

There should be engine maps,but still drivers have to take care of things much more than they used to do couple of years ago.

 

[Bludd]

Rory Byrne on the legality of the diffuser gang's cars

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/74409

So they have just redefined what a hole is? Are the regulations that dumb? If so, you could make a turbo charged engine but call it naturally aspirated enhanced by a wind

 

[MfA]

Aren't the holes for Brawn vertical? You can't see anything through a hole in a vertical surface from "directly below", of course I'm assuming it means directly below the hole in question ... but then that's the problem with language isn't it, it means nothing without assumptions.

 

[Bludd]

Directly below the car is my interpretation.

 

[MfA]

Everyone has one

 

[Bludd]

Everyone has one

Yeah, but what is directly below a hole? A hole is not a surface.

 

[MfA]

The steward looking up and seeing only black carbon fiber?

 

[Bludd]

The steward looking up and seeing only black carbon fiber?

From directly below the car, as I said earlier.