2007 F1 Season

[djr81]

Ferrari do put some watered down old F1 technology into their high end cars. Manetino tricky diff etc. Also the F50 was their first real road car where the engine was a structural stressed member in the chasis and the block was the same casting as the 3.5L F1 ....but thats about it.....it just proves how irrelivent F1 has become and always has been really.

May also prove how irrelevent technology is to Ferrari road cars....

[gtr660hp]

????? The F430 is the best road car I have driven period

Perfect garage F430 for sundays and RS4 for weekdays

[Kozeyekan]

I did say the last 20 years, but anyway:

CVT: are only used in small cars.

Turbo's: Renault used them on their F1 cars in 1977. GM used them on their road cars in 1962 - the shitbox that was the Corvair.

Mid engines: Well to be honest I dont think the Fiat X1-9 owes anything much to what Charlie Cooper once did. In any case the Fiat used a transverse engine, the Cooper didn't.

Ground effects: Well designers have worried about aero approximately for ever. Ground effects implies a sealed side skirt which is something no road car has ever had.

Note there is a difference between invented & made fashionable.

f1 development isn't about invention but perfection.

True, things like ABS, traction control, roll cages, carbon fibre bodies monocoque chassis etc were around before F1 got them, but they poured the money into developing them, showing a practical use for them that was adapted to road cars. I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that the modern cars systems are in many was derived from research done by F1 engineers. Add in rubber compounds, brake compounds, light weight material research... the list goes on and on. Comparing the systems on an F1 car to a passenger vehicle is like comparing a fighter jet to a single prop joy rider, but the new ones DO incorporate design elements and technologies trialed and developed in the high tech versions.

I stand by my criticism that Hyundai simply has no need to access this technology, thus would get very little out of Formula 1. Even the halo effect, as you put it, would have very limited impact. If someone's into F1, you can probably safely guess they like a bit of speed in their cars, or perhaps reliability and maybe just a bit of oomph. Hyundai really does not have the line up or brand name recognition that would allow them to take advantage of this. What would you rather drive? An M3? A 430? An AMG mercedes? Or a Hyundai coupe?

it's just not the same leagues. Hyundai's main attraction has always been their affordability and quality relative to that price. To chase the high end market after having a reputation for simple engineering is pretty silly, and Hyundai's people are not stupid.

Nissan could conceivably make the jump, Ford are trying to get their engines in again, but the Korean car makers just don't seem to be looking for that market, though I think Mitsubishi did have some sort of developmental agreement with them over one chassis or another.

Edited October 18, 2007 by Kozeyekan

[djr81]

There used to be a time when F1 was all about invention. Ahh, happy days.

As for engines you could say the same for Ford, Peugeot, Honda, Subaru (!), Alfa Romeo, Jaguar, Matra, Lamborghini and any number of others who have tried & succeeded/failed to build proper F1 motors.

As for the MB versus Hyundai comparison, well not every Benz is an AMG. There is a C180 in the car park most mornings when I get to work. Whenever my mind strays to thinking about its rubbish 8V 4 cylinder motor, vinyl trim, (Mmmm, MB tech) acceleration you need an hour glass to measure, well it doesn't make the link to F1 cars. Mostly it just makes me feel nauseous. Curiously there is also a 300SE with purple embroided cushions on the parcel shelf - logo reads F1.

I would contend that if any technology transfer is to be had from F1 it does not come from the constructors - it comes from the suppliers. Like Bridgestone (But who is to say their F1 program yields better results than its touring car program?), AP, Rays, Enkei - even down to the suppliers of stuff people don't take a blind bit of notice of - things like sensors & electrical connectors.

There again no car was ever sold because it had fancy electrical connections - although people bought XM Citroens discovered they may have been a good idea.

Recent trends in car design have included the more common use such things as diesel engines, DVD screens, run flat tyres, hybrid engines etc etc. None of which has any use in F1.

For the marketing departments F1 is about glamour & competition. Show me someone who bought a Camry because Ralf Schumacher qualified 22nd & I will show you a certifiable fkwit. Same goes for any other road car and any other grid position.

I usually find that for a car company F1 success coincides with their road cars being awful. Take BMW. F1 success in the early eighties & again now. Both times their range was crap. Same for MB. Same for Ferrari.

Edited October 18, 2007 by djr81

[gtr660hp]

I hope Nissan spare themselves the embarresment of entering F1...their parent compant Renault has lost the plot and the Japanese mega buck giant Toyota is flat out pathetic...how do Toyota throw 500 Mill at that team and get those cars to run so slow.It makes me laugh watching Spykers and Scuderia Torro Rosso's wizzing past the Toyotas knowing the difference in budgets. Nissan dont need that at the moment. It seems there is only one Japanese company that commands respect and has past glories in F1 and thats Honda...and even then there chassis are sht but they can screw an engine together

[Beer Baron]

It seems there is only one Japanese company that commands respect.....

I thought you were going to say super aguri!

[gtr660hp]

I thought you were going to say super aguri!

ha ha them to.......

[m3gtr]

May also prove how irrelevent technology is to Ferrari road cars....

what???

what is the 430 then??

you think they drag schumi around just for the hell of it or do you really believe these cars arent created from the same genepool?

its nonsense to think its not.

When Robert smashed the shit out of himself in canada and WALKED away, i almost got up right then and there to go and buy myself a BMW...

[m3gtr]

I usually find that for a car company F1 success coincides with their road cars being awful. Take BMW. F1 success in the early eighties & again now. Both times their range was crap. Same for MB. Same for Ferrari.

thats horseshit. sorry mate, it really is. BMW scared the shit out of everyone including gerhard berger with a 1000 HP 4 cylinder handgrenade in the 80s. That block was straight from my old E21 i had years ago. after finding out about that i was tempted ( motormechanic at the time ) to see how much i could squeeze out of it. BMW have always been good. thats why the M3 shit on every other sports car for years on end. It looks like its just about to take another dump too...direct comparison to the new GTR anyone??

The 2002 in the 70"s was a purists driving car and is still highly desirable. It wasnt an alfa that would rust itself to shit. It wasnt a Fiat where tony would have to fix it again every week. It wasnt a temperamental redhead looking for a one night stand and being colder than ice in the morning. It wasnt a snobby german in the black suit who thought he epitomized an automotive deity.

The 3.0CSL was another example.

The M1 was a revolutionary breakthrough. The M5 was a ballbreaking bullet capable of getting the wife to the shops and back in warp speed. The current version has a V10 with technology sourced directly from their racing genepool. The M6 took it up another notch with a shape to make you cream.

The only mistake they made in my opinion was hiring chris bangle..and the other being not replacing him sooner...

[Marco-R34GTT]

much prefered the E46 body shell though... Think BMW have lost there lines... It is kinda like when Nissan/Datsun made the 260Z, which was a lot like the 240Z, then they released the 280Z/ZX and lost the plot very quickly, yet the original Zeds look very nice indeed...

[kralster]

Formula 1 is a racing event for prototype cars and tyre's.

And lets question toyota's, or renaults, or honda's involvement in F1 then. I don't see them as selling cars in the same kind of league as ferrari. Hell no-one in formula 1 is a supercar maker except for ferrari. Sure bmw and mercedes and that make cars that are very sporty, but they don't make cars like ferrari, only companies like lamboghini (sp?) do.

[m3gtr]

Formula 1 is a racing event for prototype cars and tyre's.

And lets question toyota's, or renaults, or honda's involvement in F1 then. I don't see them as selling cars in the same kind of league as ferrari. Hell no-one in formula 1 is a supercar maker except for ferrari. Sure bmw and mercedes and that make cars that are very sporty, but they don't make cars like ferrari, only companies like lamboghini (sp?) do.

excuse me??

the Mclaren f1 ring a bell? designed by Gordon Murray, Mercedes engineering, BMW engine. What about the mac SLR?

Have you ever heard of the Guigarro designed NAZCA???

hmmmm..not "supercar" enough for you?

maybe not. ever play need for speed on the PS1? that car is featured along with...AHEM, lamborghinis...

while we are on the subject of bulls..not only was your post a load of one, Lambo never got their footing in the sport and the best thing they could manage was to put a V12 anchor in the back of a Minardi...It was a miserable failure.

If we are to take the approach of some who say the f1 one car is indicative and directly related to the quality of the road car then going by Lambo's pathetic attempts in f1 all their cars should be shit...and they were, despite the murderous tendencies of the beautiful Miura and the lesbian body builder on its rags, Countage. Only when Audi bought the arm has Lambo been revived...but thats a separate issue.

Sorry if im coming across as a scathing prick..im tired, its been a long day and i dont feel like putting up with nonsensical mumbo jumbo

[m3gtr]

back on topic, even if this is garbage, its significant garbage...

Mercedes ready to axe Alonso`

Thursday 18th October 2007

Play Jenson's SEIKO Challenge

Take part and you could win a superb SEIKO watch. ENTER NOW!

Media speculation suggests that McLaren and its partners have decided to part company with Fernando Alonso.

The Spanish daily Marca reports Meredes-Benz's management held a meeting this week and gave the double World Champion a vote of no confidence.

'[Mercedes] reached the conclusion it is in the best interests of the company and the team to let go of the Spaniard at the end of the year,' the Marca's report reads.

'This situation means that all roads for Alonso lead to Renault,' it continued.

Alonso's relations with the Woking constructor have soured through the season. And the newspaper claims sources close to McLaren say Ron Dennis' relationship with Lewis Hamilton is, as most F1 fans are aware, the root of the problem.

It also suggested that Renault had 'promised him a place with the possibility of winning the title and is currently taking steps to find the funds necessary to sign him on a contract equivalent' to his current deal.

The French marque appears to be Alonso's most likely destination as rivals Ferrari have Kimi Raikkonen and Felipe Massa contracted until 2009 and 2010 respectively.

[Marco-R34GTT]

WHY DID FERRARI SIGN MASSA!??!?!?!!??!?!!

Massa is a hack, decent in the dry, but utter mud in wet conditions, and he is far too inconsistant...

[djr81]

thats horseshit. sorry mate, it really is. BMW scared the shit out of everyone including gerhard berger with a 1000 HP 4 cylinder handgrenade in the 80s. That block was straight from my old E21 i had years ago. after finding out about that i was tempted ( motormechanic at the time ) to see how much i could squeeze out of it. BMW have always been good. thats why the M3 shit on every other sports car for years on end. It looks like its just about to take another dump too...direct comparison to the new GTR anyone??

The 2002 in the 70"s was a purists driving car and is still highly desirable. It wasnt an alfa that would rust itself to shit. It wasnt a Fiat where tony would have to fix it again every week. It wasnt a temperamental redhead looking for a one night stand and being colder than ice in the morning. It wasnt a snobby german in the black suit who thought he epitomized an automotive deity.

The 3.0CSL was another example.

The M1 was a revolutionary breakthrough. The M5 was a ballbreaking bullet capable of getting the wife to the shops and back in warp speed. The current version has a V10 with technology sourced directly from their racing genepool. The M6 took it up another notch with a shape to make you cream.

The only mistake they made in my opinion was hiring chris bangle..and the other being not replacing him sooner...

Well my contention is simply this: as often as not manufacturers use motorsport to add some interest and glamour to an otherwise dull model range. The more prosaic their product the more likely it is they will pump big dollars into formula one.

As for the BMW thing - well they should sack Chris Bangle, but anyway. My favourite BMW's were from the late eighties/early nineties. A time when BMW were involved in touring car racing & not F1. The Brabham BMW's from 1982 to 86 & then subsequent Megatron/BMW engines in the Benettons & Arrows were a marvellous thing for a time - although the laydown Brabham was an abject failure due in part to the engine. That it took the life of my favourite GP driver probably put me off BMW for a bit.

Anyway I remember the god awful engines in the road cars when unleaded was introduced. These were some of the worst BMW's you could imagine. Gutless & all torque no hp. The original M5s we saw in Australia is (along with the M635csi & the M3's) probably the finest of all cars ever to come from Bavaria. The shame of it is their model range has just gotten fat and stupid - like me probably.

The 2002 was derived from touring car participation, as was the M3. Touring cars have done much more for BMW than F1 & even the sublime skills of Nelson Piquet ever could.

[djr81]

what???

what is the 430 then??

you think they drag schumi around just for the hell of it or do you really believe these cars arent created from the same genepool?

its nonsense to think its not.

When Robert smashed the shit out of himself in canada and WALKED away, i almost got up right then and there to go and buy myself a BMW...

I don't believe that the F1 programs (any of them) & the road car programs cross pollinate to any degree. Hell John Barnard used to design the F1 cars (The 640 was a particularly pretty example) in England - GTO meant Guilford Technical Office.

Historically Ferrari road cars were never particularly high tech, but then again neither were the F1 cars. Take a random example as the F40 - the first road car to make use of carbon fibre - but they used it for meaningless purposes & still built the bloody thing with a bundle of steel tube in it. Could you imagine anyone else getting away with that? Gordon Murray did it properly a few years later.

Maybe I am just bitter because I could never afford either a 288GTO nor a 365GTB.

[Marco-R34GTT]

HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!11!!!!11!!

ROFL! WTF!?!?!

http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news...018190709.shtml

[djr81]

What is your point, I mean obviously they are best mates. They hang out on weekends, don't they?

[m3gtr]

this is now completely ridiculous...

who the hell do they think we are? monkeys?

[ctjet]

you want a banana?