Page 28 of 103 FirstFirst ... 1826272829303878 ... LastLast
Results 271 to 280 of 1027

Thread: Teh Formula 1 Encyclopedia: 2018 Edition.

  1. #271
    Ask me about my bottom br
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    ox.mx
    Posts
    2,814
    I'd say Magnetti and Brembo also benefited in the consumer market from being suppliers to sports teams.
    acket.

  2. #272
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    803
    Quote Originally Posted by IMOA View Post
    Cosworth, Tag and Repco.
    Also Ferrari, Cooper, BRM and Matra.

  3. #273
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    4,093
    I think Ferrari has made it as a 'major' manufacturer now.

  4. #274
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    803
    How? It makes sport cars and that's it. It is not a major manufacturer at all.

  5. #275
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    803
    8,014 units produced in 2016. That is abysmal compared to major ones...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...cle_production Look at 2016.

    Fiat Chrysler produced a total of 4,681,457 units in 2016. Ferrari is a tiny fraction of that.

    Also, from Ferrari's wikipedia: "As of 2018, the estimated total of Ferrari built and sold cars in whole company history was about 190,000."
    That's plenty nothing in a single year for a major manufacturer.

    A well known brand? Sure. A brand of high value? Surely. But no major manufacturer at all.
    Italy has 5 companies in the Fortune 500 and Ferrari doesn't barely approach their revenue.
    And by the way, Ferrari is indipendent from Fiat Chrysler... so, it is your tiny luxury sport car maker and that's it.
    Last edited by Blerpa; April 3rd, 2018 at 11:28 AM.

  6. #276
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    4,093
    Yeah, not sure what business metric to use to qualify somebody as a 'major'.

    When it became part of Fiat, I think they clearly became a 'major' manufacturer. Now that they divorced, does that really make Ferrari a tiny player again?

    From branding point of view, it's a globally known name even for non-autoenthusiasts. Most people don't need to google the name to know what this company is about.

    Anyway, I think it's 'major' enough that Ferrari can still thrive in the future even if F1 cease to exist.

    I just think it's important to have as many 'major' companies like that racing each other... compared to have bunch of racing companies who's sole mission is to win races... if they don't win a few races..., then their finances falls apart and then they disappear. Surely that's not healthy either. For these mini-racing teams, tiny Ferrari still has an unfair advantage over them even if FIA isn't favoring Ferrari. Need more companies like Mercedes and Renault and even Red Bull to make Ferrari work harder for its reputation. Ideally, I just want to see F1 as a R&D proving ground for international manufacturers... with various new technologies trickling down to our day to day vehicles.
    Last edited by Crazed_Insanity; April 3rd, 2018 at 01:21 PM.

  7. #277
    Junior Potato
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    3,959
    I think the core of the argument is not that they’re there, it’s that the big manufacturers use racing as a marketing instrument, then pull out when the boardroom decides that costs become too high or the series is no longer popular/relevant enough to sustain their involvement, leaving said series to languish and die.

    But were those series that died (Like the WTC) going to go anyway, or were they truly killed by manufacturer involvement? As I touched on before, F1 has the prestige and the popularity to sustain any number of manufacturers even if they pull the pin. I wouldn’t be worried about Mercedes (for example) at all; if they’re beating everyone all the time it’s because they’re objectively the best, if your favourite team is not winning them they need to get better and lift the level of competition, if you hate Lewis Hamilton then great and I do too!

  8. #278
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    4,093
    Yeah, I don't think we have to worry about F-1 ever going away just because the 'major' manufacturers pulled out... nor would I worry if a lot of them decided to join. More the merrier IMHO.

    I'm more worried about the smaller traditional f-1 teams barely making ends meet. More and more of them have disappeared. Dwindling # of teams can't be good for the sport.

    The only risk for F1 that I see is eventually auto manufacturers become more and more electrified. F-1 will then either merger with F-E or face extinction. But that's probably decades down the road.

  9. #279
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    847
    Quote Originally Posted by autosport.com
    The FIA will meet with technical directors from all F1 teams in Bahrain to discuss ways of urgently increasing overtaking opportunities for the 2019 season.

    The gathering is a direct response to the lack of passing moves seen in the Australian GP, albeit at a track that rarely sees much action.

    There is some urgency to the discussions as in theory rule changes for next season have to be confirmed by the FIA before April 30th. Any subsequent changes have to be passed unanimously by the teams.

    Ross Brawn has hired a team of aerodynamicists - headed by former Williams man Jason Sommerville - to help shape the future rules, and improving overtaking has been a key goal for the group, focusing particularly on how the aerodynamic surfaces of cars are disturbed by the ones ahead.

    Although the focus is primarily on 2021, Brawn said recently the results are already positive enough to consider making changes earlier.

    Two key changes for 2019 will be discussed on Saturday - to the front wing, which has emerged from Sommerville's research, and to the rear, which is understood to be an FIA concept.

    The rear proposal is for a bigger rear wing flap, which would create a bigger effect when DRS is employed.

    However, that does not address the fundamental issue of the current high downforce cars being unable to follow each other.

    The Sommerville idea is to improve the quality of the airflow onto the car behind by simplifying the front wing.

    That would involve the removal of certain elements that are specifically designed to control the airflow around the front wheels.

    It's this flow - which starts with the front wing of the car ahead and interacts with the turbulence around the front wheels - that subsequently makes it difficult for the car behind to follow.

    Removing the extra elements would slow the lead car slightly, and allow the following car to get closer.


    It's understood both ideas could be incorporated into the 2019 rules.
    yes, please

  10. #280
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    4,093
    Not convinced by the removal of elements of the front wing idea.

    As long as there are wings that produce downforce, whether front or back, in the wake of the vehicle will result in some sort of up-washing flow. It's often made visible during rain called the rooster tail.

    Naturally if your car is close behind that 'rooster tail' flow pushing you upwards, you'll suffer a loss of downforce making the chasing car less drivable.

    Only real fix would be to remove wings all together so that racers can race as in go karts or NASCAR.

    But then again leaders will be at a disadvantage because chasers drafting behind could zoom by much easier...

    So I guess best thing to do is probably to keep some wings so leaders won't lose out, but not so much so that'll disturb the chaser too much...

Posting Permissions

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