Jump to content


Photo

Why no CVT?


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1 Bluehair

Bluehair
  • Member

  • 186 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 24 January 2001 - 05:01

I read that the FIA banned the use of continuously variable transmissions not only due to development costs, but because it was thought to produce a boring pitch for the audience. I think they should allow such an interesting piece of technology to find its way into F1 with the stipulation that it be controlled manually. A gear-shift like lever would be required (with the option of mounting it to the steering wheel in a paddle-like appearance) that would be constantly operated by the driver. This "driver aid" would actually keep the driver more busy than shifting with buttons does today! I think it would take extreme skill to keep the car near its ideal RPM under acceleration and then be able to pull it back properly under braking. Would this be just another impossible-to-police bit of automated cheatery?

Advertisement

#2 desmo

desmo
  • Tech Forum Host

  • 32,241 posts
  • Joined: January 00

Posted 24 January 2001 - 07:44

I agree about the harder to drive part. I'd be surprised if it turned out to be faster under real race conditions. Personally I'd like to see the teams able to use any tranny they please, outlawing a technology because it might sound "boring" is low-order logic.

#3 miniman

miniman
  • Member

  • 2,457 posts
  • Joined: May 00

Posted 24 January 2001 - 15:31

I read somewhere that CVTs are inneficient when used with engines producing anything over 125HP. Perhaps that is not true but it seems like a reasonable statement given the obvious friction losses.

#4 TAB666

TAB666
  • Member

  • 1,755 posts
  • Joined: November 00

Posted 24 January 2001 - 23:57

CVT makes a big difference.
Some months ago there was some threads about this.
Williams tested a CVT and the lap times dropped by 2

#5 DangerMouse

DangerMouse
  • Member

  • 2,628 posts
  • Joined: December 98

Posted 25 January 2001 - 18:56

Bernie (or Max Canna remember) heard the Williams CVT during testing was alarmed at the constant wail of the engine and so got CVT effectively banned by the introduction of the 4 to 7 gears rule.



#6 Powersteer

Powersteer
  • Member

  • 2,460 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 25 January 2001 - 21:31

Turbos, cvt, ground effect and four wheel drive....what a lethal combination yum! yum!...put this technology on a 120 lap race




:cool:

#7 Bluehair

Bluehair
  • Member

  • 186 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 25 January 2001 - 21:50

Would CVT be legal if you added 3 really small gears to it? Now, it has the minimum of 4 forward gears, yet it may only use them to get to the first turn. Or maybe it has 2 little gears, CVT, and an optional high gear. The list goes on, but I think a clever team could outfox the rules if they wanted to.

#8 GunStar

GunStar
  • Member

  • 154 posts
  • Joined: January 01

Posted 25 January 2001 - 23:44

Yeah, and then they'll bring in a spec tranny...and engine...and bodywork...and chassis...and and and....

#9 Marco94

Marco94
  • Member

  • 393 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 26 January 2001 - 09:00

Bluehair,

Your proposal is not allowed. You have to have 4, 5, 6 or 7 fixed transmission ratios. What is allowed therefor, is using the construction of a CVT, but then limiting the transmission ratios. Some other thing that I just thought of is the definition of fix ratios. You could for instance consider a CVT as a transmission with an infinite set of 7 fixed ratios. I wouldn't expect to get away with it however.

Marco.