3 replies to this topic

[pbukovca]

Does anybody have any information from old books or magazines on what specifically made the FW16 such a difficult car to drive ? What made the car pitch sensitive ? What was the issue with suspension and the aerodynamics ?

I'm was fairly young back then, so I don't have much archive material on what the real problems with the car were. I guess the only other thing is what did they do to fix the car by end of the season ?

It would cool if somebody could scan in old articles from Race Car Engineering Magazine or Race Tech magazine from way back then. Autosport issues from 94 may have stuff........but I don't know where to find these .

Many thanks.

Best regards.

[cheapracer]

For copies of historic info I suggest you go to The Nostalgic Forum and for any further tech info, Wiki had a reasonable writeup last time I looked.

F1 teams don't generally throw out their secrets even from past history so don't be too disappointed in your quest.

Personally I think the rear uprights upper being pivoted to the unconventional upper rear control arms close to the middle of the wheel put a lot more leverage on the rather thin CF upper arm and I wouldn't be surprised if there was flex leading to camber changes causing the apparent uncertainty feeling in the rear. The FW16B had the same arms but structure of them may have been completely different and the FW17 went back to convention arms.

[pbukovca]

How exactly did the upper wishbones work ? There was an aerodynamic sheath. But was there no upper wishbone,
or was it a normal wishbone just covered in a sheath (which apparently was removable. What was the point behind the anhedral
rear wing ?

Thanks for your reply.

[cheapracer]

How exactly did the upper wishbones work ?

Dunno.

What was the point behind the anhedral
rear wing ?

More surface area at a guess and also tends to be where the more stable air is. Great looking as well!