Aero 101, Vehicle 40, Engine 17 (photo gallery)

Component Upgrades of a Season

Hint: Link to full-size image

3 thoughts on “Aero 101, Vehicle 40, Engine 17 (photo gallery)

  1. Pingback: Tweets that mention Aero 101, Vehicle 40, Engine 17 (photo gallery) « Hunnylander's Blog -- Topsy.com

  2. Interesting that many of their upgrades seem to be weight shedding – I wonder if they had a too high CoG at the start, or a slightly wrong weight distribution. Or maybe it was just shaving to be able to migrate more and more weight close to the centre of the car.

    • It was a big car, such cars tend to be heavy, even if the big teams are very good in light construction. That’s why poorer and less experienced teams hardly can build such long big cars (to keep allocation for optimal ballast amount).

      But in general, weight saving is a goal which always continues to give pace and handling improvements. They never can have enough, only sometimes it’s less crucial or more harder to achieve. The more lower the CoG, the more concentrated the weight toward the CoG, the better, non stop.

      Considering the driver position, the nose, so the whole monocoque, the car was very low with that area. Also its good high speed cornering suggest, there wasn’t big trouble with the CoG. I think it’s a continuous pursuit through the season to make a new car lighter and lighter especially in seasons when there are significant weight increasing changes, like no refuelling, longer cars.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s