2010 Car Launches

thehemogoblin · Post by **thehemogoblin** » 29 Jan 2010, 12:16

dr-baker wrote:
thehemogoblin wrote:It seems that longer wheelbases are en vogue this year...

Well, yes. That would be because of the refuelling ban, therefore bigger fuel tanks, and these sit between the engine and the driver, therefore the wheelbase is longer. Hey presto!

Work with me here... I was at work until 2:40 AM. Then I hopped on here because I can't go straight from work to bed. I have to unwind a bit. It's a high-stress night when you're missing deadline by more than two hours.

fjackdaw · Post by **fjackdaw** » 29 Jan 2010, 12:22

Shows how dumb I am - I thought Mercedes weren't with McLaren at all this year. I'm disappointed that they're sticking with the boring corporate silver. The Mercedes pearl silver is much nicer too.

jackanderton · Post by **jackanderton** » 29 Jan 2010, 12:51

The new McLaren looks very aggressive. It's beautiful, but in the same way the Batmobile is.

noisebox · Post by **noisebox** » 29 Jan 2010, 12:59

I think I may need to revise my opinion on the Ferrari. The new McLaren looks much more ambitious and agressive. I'm suporised they've shown that front wing at the launch, it looks very well developed for a launch car, and the aero around the sidepods looks interesting too.

There are already runours in the Italian press that the Ferrari data is showing the car will not meet performance targets and a 'b' spec is rumoured to be under development...

coops · Post by **coops** » 29 Jan 2010, 13:03

Captain Hammer wrote:
That's probably themost aggressive design I've seen in a long time.

Might be time to be concerned for Mclaren. The last time they came over all innovative around that part of the car it resulted in the 1995 disaster that Mansell couldnt get to go round corners and then it nearly killed Mika Hakkinen when it did.

Post by **mario** » 29 Jan 2010, 13:07

eytl wrote:Just been watching the streaming of the unveiling of the McLaren ...

It looks incredible. Mega engine cover fin and rectangular sidepod openings swooping down so much more aggressively than anything we've seen before.

Slightly disappointed that there has been no change to the colour scheme despite Mercedes selling its stake in the team. So now there's four silver cars on the grid.

The aero is pretty impressive, particularly the front wing, although that front wing is similar to one which they were testing in the last few races of 2009. But, they have been very busy beneath the engine cover as well. They've been working hard to modify amd move the cooling system so they can create more room for the fuel tanks, whilst the removal of the KERS system has changed the weight distribution and shifted the COG downwards. For an excerpt of the Q+A session, here's a link to it
http://www.f1technical.net/news/14067?s ... 13d7481dd8

All in all, Whitmarsh wasn't exaggerating when he said that the car would be getting a radical overhaul for 2010, and it has undergone extensive development. And that is before we've seen what the back end of the car looks like - they have completely redesigned the rear of the car to take full advantage of the DDD rules, so they might have something particularly interesting hidden round there. At this rate, it almost makes you wonder whether Ferrari have deliberately kept back some aero pieces from the car for the tests (to avoid the usual spate of copy cat imitations) because the F10 looks so underdeveloped by comparison.
Perhaps the only thing which may not make it onto the car by the start of the season could be that extra aerodynamic section between the camera mounts on the front wing. Whilst it is very clever of them, the FIA might not be so happy about it.

Phoenix · Post by **Phoenix** » 29 Jan 2010, 15:03

Just-impressive

Frentzen127 · Post by **Frentzen127** » 29 Jan 2010, 15:42

Just a quick question, were cars this long back when refueling was forbidden in '93?
Sure the engines wouldnt have been nearly as thirsty as they are now, but too long a wheelbase might be undesirable.

IdeFan · Post by **IdeFan** » 29 Jan 2010, 15:43

To me, the Mclaren looks fantastic from the side, but a little boxy from other angles. The rectangular sidepod intakes, the wide high noze, the way the huge sidepod fin joins to the rear wing, the trillion elements on the front wing: it all looks a little "overdone".

But, with regards to the side view picture: don't they look fantastic with no T-Cam? Much lower and sleeker, surely they've got the technology to make a less intrusive onboard camera nowadays.

@Cynon: If they want to do a "Team Britain" thing, they should paint the thing British Racing Green, i've never like the flag motif and I always thought A1GP missed an opportunity to bring back the proper racing colours.

Post by **DemocalypseNow** » 29 Jan 2010, 16:14

Vodafone Deathstar Racing DV4-25

What the.....

Post by **mario** » 29 Jan 2010, 17:07

Frentzen127 wrote:Just a quick question, were cars this long back when refueling was forbidden in '93?
Sure the engines wouldnt have been nearly as thirsty as they are now, but too long a wheelbase might be undesirable.

No - in fact, most of the cars from 1993 have a shorter wheelbase compared to the recent cars, because the 1993 cars were built in the 'wide wheel track' era. Therefore, there was more room laterally behind the driver's safety cell for the fuel tank. Compare, for example, the Williams FW15C and the FW31 (I've taken the most recent car for which there is data).

FW 15C: Wheelbase = 2921 mm [ http://www.f1technical.net/f1db/cars/745 ]
FW31: Wheelbase = 3100 mm [ http://www.f1technical.net/f1db/cars/951 ]

The fuel consumption is actually pretty similar, even though the engine format has changed a fair bit. The cars of the early 1990's would typically have fuel tanks of around 200-220 litres (for example, the FW15C has a 210 litre tank, whilst the Mclaren MP4/8 was 215 litres). Assuming a specific density of 0.74 for the fuel (about average for petrol), and a typical fuel weight of 145-165kg (the lower estimate is for Renault engines, and the upper for Ferrari engined cars), we would expect fuel tanks to be around about 200-220 litres.

dr-baker · Post by **dr-baker** » 29 Jan 2010, 17:35

thehemogoblin wrote:
dr-baker wrote:
thehemogoblin wrote:It seems that longer wheelbases are en vogue this year...

Well, yes. That would be because of the refuelling ban, therefore bigger fuel tanks, and these sit between the engine and the driver, therefore the wheelbase is longer. Hey presto!

Work with me here... I was at work until 2:40 AM. Then I hopped on here because I can't go straight from work to bed. I have to unwind a bit. It's a high-stress night when you're missing deadline by more than two hours.

I figured you would probably know the answer after all (hence the smiley...!!!) but there may have been others browsing the forum who may not have known so an explanation may be worthwhile for them...

Chewie · Post by **Chewie** » 29 Jan 2010, 20:19

can anyone help me out, cos i thought shark fins were banned this year.

After seeing the new ferrari and Williams I was just surprised to see the fin on the back of the McLaren, almost as surprised as when I realised they hadn't decided to change the color scheme.

Chewie

DonTirri · Post by **DonTirri** » 29 Jan 2010, 20:44

personally I HATE the McLaren.

1st of all, the shark fins are ATROCIOUS. Whoever invented them should be shot, hung and quartered for his crimes against aesthetics.

2nd of all, it bears and EERIE resemblance to the godawful midwing monstrosity of 95.

Mister Fungus · Post by **Mister Fungus** » 29 Jan 2010, 20:54

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rbtzx8ZGJg4

Williams FW32 footage, probably viral marketing but interesting nonetheless

thehemogoblin · Post by **thehemogoblin** » 29 Jan 2010, 21:04

Mister Fungus wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rbtzx8ZGJg4

Williams FW32 footage, probably viral marketing but interesting nonetheless

I really like the white wheels.

Captain Hammer · Post by **Captain Hammer** » 29 Jan 2010, 22:17

The thing I like most about the McLaren is that they haven't simply done what Ferrari did and sketch the best parts of the competition and stitch them all together. McLaren have seen the 2009 cars, knows what makes them what they are, and has gone about re-interpreting those designs. And that addressed my bigget fear for this season: that all the teams would essentially be running a Red Bull RB5. They've managed to produce something that makes the Ferrari F10 look several years out of date just twenty-for hours after the F10 was launched.

It's going to be very interesting to see what Adrian Newey can churn out.

Phoenix · Post by **Phoenix** » 29 Jan 2010, 22:40

DonTirri wrote:It bears and EERIE resemblance to the godawful midwing monstrosity of 95.

No, because the MP4-25 is MUCH more sleek than the MP4-10, and they don't have a fat bearded whinger behind the wheel.

Post by **mario** » 29 Jan 2010, 23:38

DonTirri wrote:personally I HATE the McLaren.

1st of all, the shark fins are ATROCIOUS. Whoever invented them should be shot, hung and quartered for his crimes against aesthetics.

2nd of all, it bears and EERIE resemblance to the godawful midwing monstrosity of 95.

Surely you don't want to shoot Adrian Newey, do you, given that this was the same man who designed the MP4-20 which Kimi was so quick with?

FullMetalJack · Post by **FullMetalJack** » 29 Jan 2010, 23:50

Ugh, I HATE the shark fin engine cover, I'm not a fan of the current Mclaren liveries. The best ones were the red and white ones but the black and silver cars from 1997-2005 were also very nice. I'm hoping Williams can win a race this season, but I'm not keeping my hopes up.

McDuck · Post by **McDuck** » 30 Jan 2010, 12:31

elho wrote:comparsion between last year's ferrari and the new one

F10 huh? It sounds like the name of an agricultural tractor.

Forza! Harvest!

Phoenix · Post by **Phoenix** » 30 Jan 2010, 12:57

You mean like this?

Post by **mario** » 30 Jan 2010, 13:46

Well, Lambourghini did originally start out as a tractor manufacturer - and I believe that they still do produce tractors, complete with the 'rampant bull' logo on them.

LucaPacchiarini · Post by **LucaPacchiarini** » 30 Jan 2010, 13:50

mario wrote:Well, Lambourghini did originally start out as a tractor manufacturer - and I believe that they still do produce tractors, complete with the 'rampant bull' logo on them.

Yes my grandfather has one Lamborgini (tractor :mrgreen:

)

Post by **Nuppiz** » 30 Jan 2010, 14:25

LucaPacchiarini wrote:
mario wrote:Well, Lambourghini did originally start out as a tractor manufacturer - and I believe that they still do produce tractors, complete with the 'rampant bull' logo on them.

Yes my grandfather has one Lamborgini (tractor )

Oh, my dad has a Bugatti (jacket) :mrgreen:

McDuck · Post by **McDuck** » 30 Jan 2010, 17:15

Phoenix wrote:You mean like this?

Yes. Like the name Ferrari F10, those other models SCREAM motoring passion, engineering excellence and the attainment of adequate agricultural yields to me.

One can only imagine what these fine examples would look like repainted in the 2010 Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro Santander livery (hint hint).

http://www.ferrari-tractors.com/Vipar1.jpg
http://www.ferrari-tractors.com/Vipar2.jpg
http://www.ferrari-tractors.com/Thor1.jpg

McDuck · Post by **McDuck** » 30 Jan 2010, 17:24

mario wrote:Well, Lambourghini did originally start out as a tractor manufacturer - and I believe that they still do produce tractors, complete with the 'rampant bull' logo on them.

http://www.lamborghini-tractors.com/UNI ... ultuk.html

Lamborghini Range: rationality and emotion.

Professionals choose Lamborghini tractors for two basic reasons: its advanced technology and the good looks assured by its elegant and exclusive styling. Whether you're guided by rational or emotional considerations, in the end it makes little difference!

Farming excellence...

Post by **mario** » 30 Jan 2010, 17:56

McDuck wrote:
mario wrote:Well, Lambourghini did originally start out as a tractor manufacturer - and I believe that they still do produce tractors, complete with the 'rampant bull' logo on them.

http://www.lamborghini-tractors.com/UNI ... ultuk.html

Lamborghini Range: rationality and emotion.

Professionals choose Lamborghini tractors for two basic reasons: its advanced technology and the good looks assured by its elegant and exclusive styling. Whether you're guided by rational or emotional considerations, in the end it makes little difference!

Farming excellence...

Are they made with carbon fibre?

Shadaza · Post by **Shadaza** » 30 Jan 2010, 18:10

McDuck wrote:
Phoenix wrote:You mean like this?

Yes. Like the name Ferrari F10, those other models SCREAM motoring passion, engineering excellence and the attainment of adequate agricultural yields to me.

One can only imagine what these fine examples would look like repainted in the 2010 Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro Santander livery (hint hint).

http://www.ferrari-tractors.com/Vipar1.jpg
http://www.ferrari-tractors.com/Vipar2.jpg
http://www.ferrari-tractors.com/Thor1.jpg

Looks like ferrari hav gone aggresive with the THOR 1 Aerodynamics

Post by **Nuppiz** » 30 Jan 2010, 18:11

McDuck wrote:One can only imagine what these fine examples would look like repainted in the 2010 Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro Santander livery (hint hint).

Not the actual Ferrari livery, but: http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/7459/ferraritractor.jpg

Admittely not exactly the best Paint Shop Pro edit ever, but I've never really had that much skill with it.

Phoenix · Post by **Phoenix** » 30 Jan 2010, 22:01

If Massa and Alonso aren't happy with the F10, certainly they have a wide choice of other options to seal the 2010 crown and threat the Maclarens

eytl · Post by **eytl** » 31 Jan 2010, 13:51

OK, this is getting ridiculous.

Not only have Sauber retained the "BMW Sauber" name despite no further BMW involvement and Ferrari engines, but the C29 (which, note, has returned to Sauber's car designations, instead of calling it the "F1.10") has retained the BMW colour scheme apart from plain black wings. Sponsorship screams loudly by its complete and utter absence.

Other first impressions: quite interesting nose and front wing design, rest of the car looks quite basic and engine cover fin has been retained.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/81144

Enforcer · Post by **Enforcer** » 31 Jan 2010, 13:53

eytl wrote:OK, this is getting ridiculous.

Not only have Sauber retained the "BMW Sauber" name despite no further BMW involvement and Ferrari engines, but the C29 (which, note, has returned to Sauber's car designations, instead of calling it the "F1.10") has retained the BMW colour scheme apart from plain black wings. Sponsorship screams loudly by its complete and utter absence.

Other first impressions: quite interesting nose and front wing design, rest of the car looks quite basic and engine cover fin has been retained.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/81144

Dear lord, it looks horrible.

Henrique · Post by **Henrique** » 31 Jan 2010, 14:15

Weird front wing. I can't wait to see it being tested.
I'm sure Peter Sauber will eventually change the name, since it's a simple process. It would be stupid to carry on the BMW name.

Yannick · Post by **Yannick** » 31 Jan 2010, 14:22

Reportedly, Playboy Virgin Manor have announced they will have their launch online only. Does that mean, we will get to see digital animations of their CFD car whilst Timo Glock races it in their simulator? Do they really have a car after all?

eytl · Post by **eytl** » 31 Jan 2010, 14:47

Henrique wrote:I'm sure Peter Sauber will eventually change the name, since it's a simple process. It would be stupid to carry on the BMW name.

They're saying they won't for TV money reasons: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/81145

Presumably it's so that they're not regarded as a new team.

Stupid technicalities. We will call them "Sauber" without the BMW just like Lotus is "Fondmetal Team Malaysia" and Virgin is really "Simtek"!!! 8-)

shinji · Post by **shinji** » 31 Jan 2010, 14:51

That front wing looks like it's already been in an accident. The rest looks OK, I like the names on the engine cover. Nice touch.

I don't get why the BMW thing is still an issue, damn bureaucracy.

Henrique · Post by **Henrique** » 31 Jan 2010, 14:59

eytl wrote:They're saying they won't for TV money reasons: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/81145

Presumably it's so that they're not regarded as a new team.

Stupid technicalities. We will call them "Sauber" without the BMW just like Lotus is "Fondmetal Team Malaysia" and Virgin is really "Simtek"!!!

If Sauber fails miserably, BMW may force Sauber to remove their name from it, to prevent the bad publicity

elho · Post by **elho** » 31 Jan 2010, 15:42

Welcome BEE-F12010

look a lot like last years car...

fjackdaw · Post by **fjackdaw** » 31 Jan 2010, 15:47

Hooray! Jordan are back!!!

I love it. I don't care what anyone else says. A nice bold colour scheme, it's gorgeous.