PDA

View Full Version : Ferrari Airbox Wing



Hard Driver
02-24-04, 11:37 AM
Looks like Ferrari has a new wing on their airbox

http://www.autosport.com/images/cms/NG_Image1_Image_18.JPG

Article (http://www.autosport.com/newsitem.asp?id=26095&s=5) says Toyota ran one like it at Monaco last year. If people want more wing, I wonder why more have not used this before. Seems to make more sense than those banned X-wings next to the driver or the banned wing on stilts in front of the driver, etc.

Dirty Sanchez
02-24-04, 11:49 AM
Nothing new. I doubt you'll see this on the car in Oz. Monaco, Hungary perhaps...

Here's the Toiletta version :gomer:

http://f1.racing-live.com/photos/2002/monaco/diapo_359.jpg

chop456
02-24-04, 11:53 AM
Reminds me of that awful McLaren.

4wheeldrifter
02-24-04, 12:41 PM
Reminds me of that awful McLaren.

Was thinking the same thing. That was one f-ugly car.

pchall
02-24-04, 01:39 PM
Was thinking the same thing. That was one f-ugly car.

Yup. It was definitely the urCrapwagon design.

Chaos
02-24-04, 01:49 PM
Was thinking the same thing. That was one f-ugly car.

found it!

http://www.transe.co.jp/peter.berger/pictures/mclaren_startfinish.jpg

nz_climber
02-24-04, 03:22 PM
Wow that is fugly, now I know what the folks at crapwagon were aspiring too! And they passed their goal with ease! :rolleyes:

ferrarigod
02-24-04, 04:10 PM
honestly i can't say the McLaren is ugly. Its so technically advanced it interests me more than I might ever think it is bad looking.

Turn7
02-24-04, 04:41 PM
Are the small wings on the toyota and ferrari used for downforce or to channel the air so that the rear wing can be more efficient?

It seems awfully small to produce much downforce.

On the other hand, if it is an effective downforce piece, it seems as if they would increase the "mid" wing in size and reduce the nose and rear wings. The "mid" wing seems as if it would offer a more balanced downforce and you could adjust the balance by moving the mid-wing fore and aft to increase/decrease downforce between the front and rear of the car.

4wheeldrifter
02-24-04, 04:43 PM
honestly i can't say the McLaren is ugly. Its so technically advanced it interests me more than I might ever think it is bad looking.

Take it from us, it's f-ugly. Interesting? yes. Fugly? Also yes.

Now that you mention it pchall, in the Marlboro livery, it does have more than a passing resemblence to the '04 Poopski Crapwagon.

Chaos
02-24-04, 05:00 PM
honestly i can't say the McLaren is ugly. Its so technically advanced it interests me more than I might ever think it is bad looking.

ugly race cars are only pretty when they win...and that car did not win.

Joe in LA
02-24-04, 07:40 PM
ugly race cars are only pretty when they win...and that car did not win.

It wasn't even close. Ugly and slow.

Ziggy
02-24-04, 09:04 PM
Turn7, You might be onto something. It's either to deflect air with control or used as a "trim tab" close to the CG so they can find tune the floor exit (cant spell difusser) It would have to be very stout bodyword over the mill to do any good.

Thats my story and Im sticking to it!

Ziggy

Lizzerd
02-24-04, 09:10 PM
It's what I thought too. I can't see any downforce from those things. Like, if you could actually see downforce. But yeah, I'd guess that they are more for the benefit of the rear wing than anything else.

pinniped
02-24-04, 09:18 PM
I respectfully disagree and say it is an inverted wing. While it might have secondary benefits, it clearly has the profile of an inverted wing and is designed to function to produce downforce...every little bit helps in F1...maybe it is a high downforce setup inclusion only but who knows...anyway...just my theory... :cool:

Ziggy
02-25-04, 12:37 AM
Sounds like a good question for "ask Nigel" from Autosport........

Wont take my registration info

Ziggy

Lizzerd
02-25-04, 02:20 AM
I respectfully disagree and say it is an inverted wing. While it might have secondary benefits, it clearly has the profile of an inverted wing and is designed to function to produce downforce...every little bit helps in F1...maybe it is a high downforce setup inclusion only but who knows...anyway...just my theory... :cool:

I don't know if you were addressing me, but I agree, somewhat Yes, I think it is likely an inverted wing too. That said, it would indeed generate a bit of downforce, but relatively insignificant, IMHO. I said that in my perception, the airbox wing is more likely there to benefit the rear wing, which I should elaborate on. It could be, and I'm just speculating, of course, that the airbox wings are meant to divert more turbulent air up and over the rear wings so that they may be more efficient creating downforce from the more laminar airflow directed to the rear wings by the bodywork.

Any aero gurus out there, feel free to join in.

pinniped
02-25-04, 03:04 AM
After looking at some side view photos it appears it might be both...there is a second "element" on the airbox and that *looks* like it might be to smooth airflow over the back of the car...interesting that they would run the wing at Imola though as that isn't typically a high downforce set up...

Dirty Sanchez
02-25-04, 11:00 AM
I tend to lean towards the "it creates downforce" theory... while also not disturbing any airflow over the rear wing. Although we should remember that the rear wing is now limited to only 2 horizontal elements this year... so there may also be something to what Lizzerd said.

My personal feeling is that we will not see this on the car in Melbourne... and I don't believe this is anything that the tifosi should be concerned with. ;)

Ankf00
02-25-04, 12:02 PM
Turn7, You might be onto something. It's either to deflect air with control or used as a "trim tab" close to the CG so they can find tune the floor exit (cant spell difusser) It would have to be very stout bodyword over the mill to do any good.

Thats my story and Im sticking to it!

Ziggy

works for me

wouldn't you have turbulent vortices created on the trailing edge of those foils though which end up on the wing surface?


re: downforce
from the pics they don't seem to be adjustable, and there aren't any endplates, DF doesn't seem like their goal

Dirty Sanchez
02-25-04, 12:41 PM
In other news... McLaren are running a different front wing on the 19... so many changes, so little time :D

I think McLaren are going to be the suck this year.

http://www.f1total.de/bilder/2004/tests/imo03/z054.jpg

Ankf00
02-25-04, 12:51 PM
I see secret turbo-lasers from TIE-Bombers being hidden in those brake ducts, invisible to the naked eye, deadly to the bridgestones of ferrari!

4wheeldrifter
02-25-04, 01:05 PM
I see secret turbo-lasers from TIE-Bombers being hidden in those brake ducts, invisible to the naked eye, deadly to the bridgestones of ferrari!

As deadly as the cow-catcher-esque "chrome horn" on the new Willy's that JPM will be applying with vigor this year against Rubens tail-end? :D

ilferrari
02-25-04, 02:17 PM
Might be ugly but its quick...

Michael Schumacher improved his own lap record at Imola with the new F2004. The World Champion's previous record was 1'20"411 (in February 2003). Today, Schumacher finished the session with a best time of 1'19"664, which is a new record at Imola!

Testing will resume for a final day of action tomorrow and then the teams will be heading to Australia for the first GP of the 2004 season on 7 March.

Imola - 25/02/04
1. M. Schumacher - Ferrari F2004 - 1'19"664 - 98 laps
2. D. Coulthard - McLaren-Mercedes MP4/19 - 1'20"928 - 69 laps
3. J.P. Montoya - Williams-BMW FW26 - 1'21"026 - 72 laps
4. R. Barrichello - Ferrari F2003-GA - 1'21"235 - 52 laps
5. C. Da Matta - Toyota TF104 - 1'22"162 - 69 laps
6. O. Panis - Toyota TF104 - 1'24"356 - 54 laps

http://f1.racing-live.com/photos/2004/tests18/diapo_156.jpg

pinniped
02-25-04, 03:13 PM
You are all missing the boat. The Williams has superior tuning of the flugelhorns, the ultimate key to top-end speed.

JoeBob
02-25-04, 03:39 PM
Or maybe the put them on just so the others would waste some time in the wind tunnel trying to figure out just what they do. :D

ferrarigod
02-25-04, 05:27 PM
No picture on Ferrari.it shows this wing, so either they think it does something and don't want to show it, or it does nothing :gomer:

With the reduction in rear wing downforce adding more makes sense. It also makes sense to add a wing to disrupt airflow, not for the rear wing, but for behind the car to prevent overtaking. I could see something like that, after all everyone complains how hard it is to overtake so they changed the rules. Hmm :)

Ankf00
02-26-04, 01:18 AM
you don't intentionally create turbulent eddies before the air hits your own rear wing.

ferrarigod
02-26-04, 02:54 AM
you don't intentionally create turbulent eddies before the air hits your own rear wing.

i know, thats a bad thing, thats why maybe they have found it doesn't hit the rear wing, but does impact following cars. the Ferrari pics I have seen, especially the front one, shows no curve at any part, the Toyota clearly does. No clue though, will be interesting to see what parts of the testing cars show up at Melbourne.

pinniped
02-26-04, 03:42 AM
Maybe its some kind of appeal to the "useless wing crowd": http://www.riceboypage.com

Joe in LA
02-26-04, 04:09 PM
No, if that was what they were after, they would have put a much bigger wing on the airbox, and it wouldn't match the car color.

Hard Driver
03-08-04, 12:19 PM
We'll They raced with the airbox wing in Australia. How long until the other teams have one? Then how long until it is banned?

http://f1.racing-live.com/photos/2004/melbourne/diapo_331.jpg