View Poll Results: F2012 Front spec/nose, final or not? your view!

Voters
88. You may not vote on this poll
  • Final (will not change)

    57 64.77%
  • Not final (Will change/Dummy)

    31 35.23%
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 132

Thread: F2012 Nose, final or not? your view!

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    UK/FR
    Posts
    634

    F2012 Nose, final or not? your view!

    Please answer and explain why!!!

    Ps: Be polite and respect each other's arguments, thank you!

    "I cannot judge what he did in his time at Renault and McLaren but I have worked with World Champions Schumacher, Villeneuve and Raikkonen and Fernando is the one who impresses me the most," said Gene.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    25,618
    Final, because to change it would need a new chassis

    Forza Ferrari

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Uppingham, UK
    Posts
    17,863
    Final, but we will adapt it.


  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    650
    Quote Originally Posted by Greig View Post
    Final, because to change it would need a new chassis

    This

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    74
    Final. But I expect even more impressive things for the final tests and Australian GP.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    762
    Can someone explain whi Ferrari use a pull rod front sus then? If it has just created much space that we dont use. It canīt just be a lower point of gravity? What is it that we all miss?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    UK/FR
    Posts
    634
    I am just posting this poll because something does not make sense to me. Why go for a pull rod suspension system which would in theory allow a front end shape described by scarbs erasing that bump when you could go for a push rod system and gain significant pressure with higher rod attachment/bulkhead???

    "I cannot judge what he did in his time at Renault and McLaren but I have worked with World Champions Schumacher, Villeneuve and Raikkonen and Fernando is the one who impresses me the most," said Gene.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    650
    Quote Originally Posted by NanoTheQuickest View Post
    I am just posting this poll because something does not make sense to me. Why go for a pull rod suspension system which would in theory allow a front end shape described by scarbs erasing that bump when you could go for a push rod system and gain significant pressure with higher rod attachment/bulkhead???
    Tombazis said due to "aero benefits".

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    762
    Quote Originally Posted by Gerhard Berger View Post
    Tombazis said due to "aero benefits".
    So the aero benefit must be on the underside of the nose? Donīt get it. Because the top of the nose is as "bulky" as any other car...

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Everywhere
    Posts
    2,871
    Final, but there is a lot more to it yet to come. Fry and Tombazis both talked about a big upgrade at the final test, then again for the first race.

    The future is RED

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,672
    LOL... I actually love how it look...

    I love how suddenly people became aerodynamicist and started panicking.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    UK/FR
    Posts
    634
    Quote Originally Posted by Gerhard Berger View Post
    Tombazis said due to "aero benefits".
    yes I know, but aero vs mechanical/supension grip!!!

    I'm not trying to say they're approach is wrong but?

    "I cannot judge what he did in his time at Renault and McLaren but I have worked with World Champions Schumacher, Villeneuve and Raikkonen and Fernando is the one who impresses me the most," said Gene.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Ferrari
    Posts
    234
    I think that it might change as we use pull rod and like everyone's saying there is too much space but im not a designer nor a mechanic so i don't know for sure .Im pleased with the car seems to be better than our previous 150 Italia.Does anyone know why we aren't using the " V " style nose?Thanks in advance
    http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/35/sigpic83481gif.jpg/

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Malaysia
    Posts
    8,109
    Right now, I have a concern that the bump may have been unintended. Here's why.

    Firstly, I think Ferrari aimed for a smaller front nose, lower top to meet the specification, but without having to lower the bottom side. The reason why I'm guessing this is because of how compact our front suspension is. If we intended that bump, we could just settled for push rod like everyone else so far. Instead, we went for pull rod, which can help reduce the space above the mount (push rod have its suspension rod attached higher than the wheel mount). Yet we fit the push rod suspension to no lower than the lower mount. This results in a more compact front wheel suspension system.

    So why did we ended up with such a high bulkhead, higher than the nose cone which results in that ugly bump?
    Its a mystery but this is just my wild guess.

    Imagine of we did not have that bump. The cross section at the front end of the bulk head will be as large as the nose cone inner cross section, right. While the thin nose should crumple upon impact, the front end of the bulkhead needs to survive a frontal impact, and this is tested during the FIA crash test.

    Now, the smaller the area of impact is, the more focused the force would be so the material needs to be stronger to withstand the impact. Imagine if you have a very sharp pencil. Its very easy to break the tip when you knock it on a table because all the impact force is focused on a small point. If you cut the pencil in the middle, now the area becomes very wide and you can knock it as hard as you can and it may not break at all.

    With that in mind, what if, the original cross section was TOO small that the structure was not strong enough to pass the FIA crash test? Remember the rumor we heard about Ferrari failing the first test? If we indeed failed the frontal impact crash test, then one solution would be to increase the cross section area again to the more traditional design.

    So, consequently, we ended up with such a compact front suspension, but without the bulkhead to take advantage of it.

    This is just a wild guess anyway.

    Why Ferrari did not curve it in the middle to allow the air to slip through like Lotus and Force India did, that's strange to me too. Our bump looks rather crude.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    nameless city
    Posts
    5,051
    Quote Originally Posted by impactX View Post
    LOL... I actually love how it look...

    I love how suddenly people became aerodynamicist and started panicking.
    in some silly way i like it too, it looks like a tank
    Siren in my head is making awful sound

  16. #16
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    UK/FR
    Posts
    634
    Quote Originally Posted by impactX View Post
    LOL... I actually love how it look...

    I love how suddenly people became aerodynamicist and started panicking.
    I'm no aerodynamicist and I'm not panicking, just wandering?

    And I like how it looks too!!

    "I cannot judge what he did in his time at Renault and McLaren but I have worked with World Champions Schumacher, Villeneuve and Raikkonen and Fernando is the one who impresses me the most," said Gene.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    UK/FR
    Posts
    634
    Quote Originally Posted by Hornet View Post

    Imagine of we did not have that bump. The cross section at the front end of the bulk head will be as large as the nose cone inner cross section, right. While the thin nose should crumple upon impact, the front end of the bulkhead needs to survive a frontal impact, and this is tested during the FIA crash test.
    Very good point, thanks a lot indeed, I appreciate the developed argument!

    "I cannot judge what he did in his time at Renault and McLaren but I have worked with World Champions Schumacher, Villeneuve and Raikkonen and Fernando is the one who impresses me the most," said Gene.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    762
    Quote Originally Posted by Hornet View Post
    Right now, I have a concern that the bump may have been unintended. Here's why.

    Firstly, I think Ferrari aimed for a smaller front nose, lower top to meet the specification, but without having to lower the bottom side. The reason why I'm guessing this is because of how compact our front suspension is. If we intended that bump, we could just settled for push rod like everyone else so far. Instead, we went for pull rod, which can help reduce the space above the mount (push rod have its suspension rod attached higher than the wheel mount). Yet we fit the push rod suspension to no lower than the lower mount. This results in a more compact front wheel suspension system.

    So why did we ended up with such a high bulkhead, higher than the nose cone which results in that ugly bump?
    Its a mystery but this is just my wild guess.

    Imagine of we did not have that bump. The cross section at the front end of the bulk head will be as large as the nose cone inner cross section, right. While the thin nose should crumple upon impact, the front end of the bulkhead needs to survive a frontal impact, and this is tested during the FIA crash test.

    Now, the smaller the area of impact is, the more focused the force would be so the material needs to be stronger to withstand the impact. Imagine if you have a very sharp pencil. Its very easy to break the tip when you knock it on a table because all the impact force is focused on a small point. If you cut the pencil in the middle, now the area becomes very wide and you can knock it as hard as you can and it may not break at all.

    With that in mind, what if, the original cross section was TOO small that the structure was not strong enough to pass the FIA crash test? Remember the rumor we heard about Ferrari failing the first test? If we indeed failed the frontal impact crash test, then one solution would be to increase the cross section area again to the more traditional design.

    So, consequently, we ended up with such a compact front suspension, but without the bulkhead to take advantage of it.

    This is just a wild guess anyway.

    Why Ferrari did not curve it in the middle to allow the air to slip through like Lotus and Force India did, that's strange to me too. Our bump looks rather crude.
    SO would they really try and make everyone to belive that they have an aerogain due to this suspension as Tombazis say in the clip?

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    F360
    Posts
    738
    I hope this was just a dummy, but that's unlikely cos testing will start just 4 days from now. What would be the point to test a dummy?

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    unknow
    Posts
    74
    i think they will change,its because mclaren proves it,like they can have a solution like f-duct,and ferrari will change the chassis i think i know im been ignore but if ferrari has a secret weapon,chassis will be change it,and that car that we see is just a dummy,i think a 2012 prototype, the actual face of the car is unknown,sorry to my words i predict mclaren has a plan in making the u-pod again if they succeed its a treat to ferrari,i hoping that ferrari will change ther chasssis in test because its like 2011 to me, sorry to my word im not please with that car top to bottom

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    25,618
    Quote Originally Posted by scudvirgin10 View Post
    i think the will change,it because mclaran proves it,like they can have a solution like f-duct,and ferrari will change the chassis i think i know im been ignore but if ferrari has a secret weapon,chassis will be change,and that car that we see is just a dummy,i think a 2012 prototype, the actual face of the car is unknown,sorry to my words i predict mclaren has a plan in making the u-pod again if they succeed its a treat to ferrari,i hoping that ferrari will change ther chasssis in test because its like 2011 to me, sorry to my word im not please with that car top to bottom
    why would they change it to be like McLaren? McLaren have probably done it wrong.

    Forza Ferrari

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Malaysia
    Posts
    8,109
    Quote Originally Posted by Curbs View Post
    SO would they really try and make everyone to belive that they have an aerogain due to this suspension as Tombazis say in the clip?
    Well, the underside of the nose remains high so that could be the aero gain he was referring too. But anyway I doubt the team will really explain to us why they ended up with what we saw today, teams can't expose their design technique, at least not until the car is no longer used

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    228
    Is this a beauty contest or formula 1?

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    unknow
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by Greig View Post
    why would they change it to be like McLaren? McLaren have probably done it wrong.
    sorry if im wrong,but i believe that mclaren could be right,i have the feeling that mclaren could make a design like what they did in f-duct,but i believing that ferrari could make an innovative front wing if they want too im just hoping that ferrari will make change to the design of the car after the test before the race,maybe ferarri has a innovative design like what other does.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Everywhere
    Posts
    52
    Quote Originally Posted by Hornet View Post
    Right now, I have a concern that the bump may have been unintended. Here's why.

    Firstly, I think Ferrari aimed for a smaller front nose, lower top to meet the specification, but without having to lower the bottom side. The reason why I'm guessing this is because of how compact our front suspension is. If we intended that bump, we could just settled for push rod like everyone else so far. Instead, we went for pull rod, which can help reduce the space above the mount (push rod have its suspension rod attached higher than the wheel mount). Yet we fit the push rod suspension to no lower than the lower mount. This results in a more compact front wheel suspension system.

    So why did we ended up with such a high bulkhead, higher than the nose cone which results in that ugly bump?
    Its a mystery but this is just my wild guess.

    Imagine of we did not have that bump. The cross section at the front end of the bulk head will be as large as the nose cone inner cross section, right. While the thin nose should crumple upon impact, the front end of the bulkhead needs to survive a frontal impact, and this is tested during the FIA crash test.

    Now, the smaller the area of impact is, the more focused the force would be so the material needs to be stronger to withstand the impact. Imagine if you have a very sharp pencil. Its very easy to break the tip when you knock it on a table because all the impact force is focused on a small point. If you cut the pencil in the middle, now the area becomes very wide and you can knock it as hard as you can and it may not break at all.

    With that in mind, what if, the original cross section was TOO small that the structure was not strong enough to pass the FIA crash test? Remember the rumor we heard about Ferrari failing the first test? If we indeed failed the frontal impact crash test, then one solution would be to increase the cross section area again to the more traditional design.

    So, consequently, we ended up with such a compact front suspension, but without the bulkhead to take advantage of it.

    This is just a wild guess anyway.

    Why Ferrari did not curve it in the middle to allow the air to slip through like Lotus and Force India did, that's strange to me too. Our bump looks rather crude.
    How about no.

    It has nothing to do with the crash test. The chassis design is final way before the first crash test. When the chassis failed the first crash test, the chassis had already been that way, that ugly shape. The only thing they can do to the chassis is to add strength, which only adds a negligible weight. The shape didn't change even a little. The carbon fibre thickness, lay-up and curing is re-assessed to obtain the intended maximum strength and rigidity with minimum weight.

    The crash structure/the nose can look better throughout the season. But for chassis, no.

    That pull-rod look to have a very small travel, which means a really stiff front suspension. We can see McLaren had been running stiff front, soft rear suspension for the last 2 years and the car have a very poor stability and poor braking under bumps. Lewis addressed that to the engineers and their front suspension this year looks even more promising.

    Lets hope that the pull-rod will turn out ok and the problem of heating the tires is gone. Tombazis said the pull-rod retained the characteristics and behaviour of a push rod. But I can't see the aero benefit brought by the pull-rod. It may save a little/negligible weight and size, but a good mechanical grip is all. A good suspension is everything, the best aero can't save a bad suspension.

    If not, fernando and felipe will be driving like in the wet again, driving defensive and all over the place in Melbourne like last season.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Malaysia
    Posts
    8,109
    Quote Originally Posted by sheikomatic View Post
    How about no.

    It has nothing to do with the crash test. The chassis design is final way before the first crash test. When the chassis failed the first crash test, the chassis had already been that way, that ugly shape. The only thing they can do to the chassis is to add strength, which only adds a negligible weight. The shape didn't change even a little. The carbon fibre thickness, lay-up and curing is re-assessed to obtain the intended maximum strength and rigidity with minimum weight.

    The crash structure/the nose can look better throughout the season. But for chassis, no.
    Thanks for the correction on the crash test remedy.

    So with that out of the picture, we can only assume that Ferrari indeed intentionally design the front nose to be that way. Thats very puzzling to me, hopefully we hear more opinions about why they might have design it that way

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Amsterdam-Vincios
    Posts
    750
    compare the f10 front with the f2010 you can see that at the front suspension it's cleaner, that's what Tombazis is talking about aero benefits...The suspension are not making a X on the f2012 where with the f10 there was...

    About the the bulk, it think it will change not dramatically but it will change, where the nose de-attaches is a bit behind the bulk, so they can make a groove or something there...
    But where we will see the most changes will be at the back, the exhaust will change...
    Veni Vidi Vici e Vici Vici Vici.... Ferrari F2012 WDC WCC Champion

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Lithuania
    Posts
    1,540
    Quote Originally Posted by Greig View Post
    why would they change it to be like McLaren? McLaren have probably done it wrong.
    My thoughts exactly.

    Can't really beleave that our whole team full of aerodynamic speciallists could actually make a mistake, that some people here point out. IMO, the car is far from something we'll see at the first race, and some new parts that have something to do with our *cough* beautiful *cough* nose and the emtyness under it will come up. Don't really think we would show everything we got in the presentation.

    I'm actually happy to see people confused about our nose. It means Ferrari has done great with hidding what we got

    PS. Nice to finally come back here after the break and see some movement again BRING ON 2012 season!

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    1,231
    It stays if it works but will change/evolve if required. F1 car design
    is and always will be a pragmatic craft.

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Ferrari Car
    Posts
    1,621
    I think is a dummy, but the bump will stay.

+ Reply to Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts