48 replies to this topic

[bullystoke]

Ive Created a Bugatti 2020 F1 Concept, here is the First Stage of this Project: The testing! ive looked into what makes F1 so attractive, the Aesthetics, the innovations, and the aggressiveness, so with this i went about creating this concept,

much more to come from this, but in the meantime, check out some more images on my Behance here:

 

https://www.behance....-Testing-Livery

 

any feedback would be greatly appreciated and stay tuned for more!

Edited by bullystoke, 17 October 2016 - 13:08.

[ensign14]

Reminded a bit of the Arrows A2 or Lotus 80.  If F1 looked like that I doubt there would be such angst in everyone's pants.

 

An F1 Bugatti maybe ought to be called the Trintignant?  Veyron and Chiron drove au Mans, Le Petoulet had a go in Bugatti's one F1 car...OK, not the best of omens...

[Henri Greuter]

I wonder how you expect such an extreme long car to get through the streets of Monaco.....

 

Will it bend somwhere in the middle or so?

 

No matter the names or whatever but a car like this can only run at Tilke tracks with little to no chicane and tight corners.

Waaaayyyyyyy toooooo long!

 

 

 

 

Henri

[HistoryFan]

Bugatti now is not involved in Racing - a shame. Would be nice to see them in F1.

[jcpower13]

Driver's vision looks severely impaired, hell in some of the shots it looks like the driver won;t even be able to see from out of the cockpit.

[doc83]

Batmobile

[asdf24]

The rear wing sits so low that no clean air is going around it.

[Mekola]

101? Will Peugeot allow to use that number?

[Augurk]

If noone else will: that looks pretty awesome. It's a beautiful design. This is the first enclosed cockpit design I've seen that I actually like. Kudo's man.

 

Of course there is a lot of practical feedback in here. I doubt if the drivers vision is actually impaired as the head seems to be in about the same position as it would be in current F1. I also think because of the slick design the rear wing will still be able to function, albeit somewhat less than now. I am more worried about the size of the front wing. It's really small. 

 

Other than that: wow. 

[myattitude]

I wonder how you expect such an extreme long car to get through the streets of Monaco.....

 

Will it bend somwhere in the middle or so?

 

No matter the names or whatever but a car like this can only run at Tilke tracks with little to no chicane and tight corners.

Waaaayyyyyyy toooooo long!

 

 

 

 

Henri

Easily. Very very easily.

[superden]

Impressive, but not my cup of tea.

[THEWALL]

Aren't Bugatti street cars ugly enough already?

[bullystoke]

I wonder how you expect such an extreme long car to get through the streets of Monaco.....

 

Will it bend somwhere in the middle or so?

 

No matter the names or whatever but a car like this can only run at Tilke tracks with little to no chicane and tight corners.

Waaaayyyyyyy toooooo long!

 

 

 

 

Henri

Its given the appearance of being much longer that it is due to  no top air intake, as ive moved them to the sides

 

dimensions here:

 

 

Mercedes W07 Dimensions for comparison:

 

Length 5,000 mm (197 in) Width 1,800 mm (71 in) Height 950 mm (37 in)

Edited by bullystoke, 17 October 2016 - 17:39.

[d246]

Cross between an Indycar and a WEC. May as well be remote controlled!

[quaint]

I sure hope F1 cars never look like that.

[Henri Greuter]

 

Its given the appearance of being much longer that it is due to  no top air intake, as ive moved them to the sides

 

dimensions here:

 

 

Mercedes W07 Dimensions for comparison:

 

Length 5,000 mm (197 in) Width 1,800 mm (71 in) Height 950 mm (37 in)

 

 

I am sorry but though your design certainly has some attractive features and etails, and the drawing itself is great, in my (old) eyes the cars with wheelbases of nearly 3.5 meter, lengths of over 5 m with little to no rear overhang whatsoever are hideously misproportioned and a pain to the eye. In real of fictive, it's just completely lost in balance and style for me. I prefer the Pre '83 and cars up to about 2000 better for proportions and dimensions.

No styling fetaure, effective or not can make thos ugly overstretched limousinelength contraptions with bookshrank style rear wings lovely to me.

No offensce meant  to you and your work, but it simply isn't looking right for me as a whole, fined details and masterful drawing style, graphics etc not withstanding.

If you had used a car with year 2000 dimensions for starters, it might have been an entirely different game....

 

 

Henri

Edited by Henri Greuter, 17 October 2016 - 19:20.

[Mat13]

Good god that's pretty.

[KarlCson]

She´s a charismatic and truly beautiful beast, a femme fatale in shape of a car! -and since f1 anyway seems to head toward covered cockpits, this solution certainly is much more aesthetically appealing and a lot cleaner than the proposed (and disastrous) halo idea.

I also really like that concept of less wing and a transition towards more mechanical dependent grip by reduced aerodynamical drag, and perhaps an implementation of ground effects to compensate for the loss of stability that follows thereby. All in all, a great prototype (with lots of space for ads on the bodywork too!  ) Nice work , you might be into something very interesting there!

Edited by KarlCson, 17 October 2016 - 21:32.

[KnucklesAgain]

Why the flat floor beneath the whole car where there is no bodywork above it (around the cokebottle like it is in real current cars as well, and also forward of the sidepods)? I thought that's an artifact of current rules and not something designers would choose.

[PayasYouRace]

Why the flat floor beneath the whole car where there is no bodywork above it (around the cokebottle like it is in real current cars as well, and also forward of the sidepods)? I thought that's an artifact of current rules and not something designers would choose.

More downforce.

[eirwal]

I don't know if I'd like to be sitting in that cockpit (merely academic, because I won't). It looks more land-speed-record than racing car, with pretty hamperd visibility. But, oh well, I´m an old man who still remebers whe you could see a driver's arms and elbows at work!

Lovely artwork, though.

[KnucklesAgain]

More downforce.

 

Yeah, under current rules. But if there was design freedom, would they do it too? Probably not, because they'd go with a real ground effect car and not its comparatively poor substitute of a diffuser coupled with a flat floor. Given that the concept assumes considerable design freedom elsewhere, as most of the car has little to do with current regulations, I was wondering why it inherits the current flat floor regulation and what the concept's assumed regulation framework is in general.

Edited by KnucklesAgain, 17 October 2016 - 22:24.

[Santosdf]

I sure hope F1 cars never look like that.

we have seen much worse

[AlexS]

The pilot has no visibility.  You might as well put an antenna and make it be a robot and take the driver out.

[Wretched]

Tough crowd.

In any case, i like it, the cockpit glasshouse could be a bit more open but otherwise, good job.

[Wuzak]

 

Ive Created a Bugatti 2020 F1 Concept, here is the First Stage of this Project: The testing! ive looked into what makes F1 so attractive, the Aesthetics, the innovations, and the aggressiveness, so with this i went about creating this concept,

much more to come from this, but in the meantime, check out some more images on my Behance here:

 

https://www.behance....-Testing-Livery

 

any feedback would be greatly appreciated and stay tuned for more!

 

 

Nice work bully.

 

I see that you are predicting that Pirelli will still be supplying marbles generators in 2020.

[quaint]

we have seen much worse

 

Nope. Bulky is bulky, but ugly is worse.

[pingu666]

id make the fronts narrower

[Pete_f1]

Looks awsome

[mjjTT]

now also on amus

http://www.auto-moto...t-11573349.html

[mistareno]

Nice quality renders.

 

I don't mind the overall proportions, but the length between the drivers seat and rear wheels is a bit to long imho (unless you plan on shoving the Bugatti V16 in the back)

 

I generally like the low profile look with the side engine air intakes. It looks like the airflow would be better attached over the upper body with a smooth transition over the canopy, but the gentle curve almost looks wing like in  profile from the side and the upper body may actually create lift...

 

 

The sweeping bodywork that flows back to the rear wing endplates looks stylish but would be an aerodynamic disaster - especially with the rear wing in dirty air across much of its span. It's a real 'form over function' area of the design...which for a concept is fine, but I'd prefer a slightly more functional design from the cockpit back...

Edited by mistareno, 18 October 2016 - 07:09.

[RedBaron]

Amazing talent, superbly executed. Not 100% sure about the car though as an F1 car, but the more I look at it (bar the odd aspect) it grows on me.

 

It looks good from this angle Sean:

 

 

and 

 

 

Front wing looks a little wimpy though, kind of like an after thought just stuck on after the meaty body was created. The 'webbing' that extends to the rear wing makes it look a little messy. Visibility looks like it would be an issue.

 

I think the black livery might compliment the design and make it more appealing than it might be in reality, what would it look like in other liveries? Black is very forgiving, that's why the ugly parts of F1 cars are often painted black.

[Henri Greuter]

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think the black livery might compliment the design and make it more appealing than it might be in reality, what would it look like in other liveries? Black is very forgiving, that's why the ugly parts of F1 cars are often painted black.

 

 

Perfect example for that is the rear wing on the 1974 Porsche Carrera RSR Turbo. The thing looked sooooo grotesque on what was basically still inspired on the by then already classic 911 shape that high officers at Porsche, when they saw the car, insisted on the rear wing being painted black in order to reduce its obvious presence a bit. 

 

I am aware of the fact that many posetrs out here were not born in 1974 yet so might have no clue about how a 1974 Porsche Carrera RSR Turbo looked.

 

So here is a link to a page with sopme pictures of the car and a description about it.

 

http://www.sportscar...bo-car-profile/

 

Disclaimer:

I hereby make it clear that I have no connections with this site and jus put down the link since I felt that using google for pictures of the RSR Turbo, the best pics I got to see on screen came from this site. There is no other reason why I gave this link.

 

Henri

Edited by Henri Greuter, 18 October 2016 - 10:41.

[JacobRPP]

I think that looks fantastic. I would love to see cars like that on the F1 grid. Beasty and powerful. Great job on the design.

[PayasYouRace]

Yeah, under current rules. But if there was design freedom, would they do it too? Probably not, because they'd go with a real ground effect car and not its comparatively poor substitute of a diffuser coupled with a flat floor. Given that the concept assumes considerable design freedom elsewhere, as most of the car has little to do with current regulations, I was wondering why it inherits the current flat floor regulation and what the concept's assumed regulation framework is in general.

 

It depends on what regulations Sean's fantasy car is racing under. That's obviously been a feature of the flat floor regulations since the beginning. If you had more design freedom you'd undoutably go with a ground effect design.

 

 

 

To change the subject a little. Does anyone else think that Bugatti's current "image" doesn't fit in with it's history of Grand Prix racing cars? Bugatti would be an ideal name in F1, if only they didn't have their name on Volkwagen's 200mph+ land yachts for people with more money than sense.

[BRG]

I wonder why anyone would think Bugatti are a good choice for a F1 entry?  Apparently their cars cost more to build than they sell them for, so VAG make a stonking LOSS on every Bugatti they sell.  Why then pay out a lot more cash in order to encourage more people to buy Bugattis and lose even more money??

[RedBaron]

Good point BRG. Sean any particular reason you picked Bugatti for the concept?

[bullystoke]

Good point BRG. Sean any particular reason you picked Bugatti for the concept?

 

Mainly the fun behind the possibility of 'Unfinished Business' as Bugatti's first entrance in F1 was a disaster despite historic pre war grand prix success, the brand is historically built on a racing pedigree matched only by Ferrari despite its absence from the sport.

 

Every keeps fuelling the fire of a VW brand entering F1, and what better brand to push into it than its ultimate Marque?

 

A key design influence was the 101 Bugatti Plane, hence the name, and its such a beautiful natural form that i wanted to translate something similar to the track.

 

these are just a few of the reasons, but im busy preparing an entire 'Story Scenario' for this car (think daniel simons Timeless Racer), so there will be more of an explanation in that, so stay tuned on my Behance Page for more on that!

[Radoye]

I like the concept, the only thing it's missing is full ground effects. Then the wings can be made even slimmer and used only for trimming the car out, while the downforce is all generated under the car.

 

[senna da silva]

I wonder why anyone would think Bugatti are a good choice for a F1 entry?  Apparently their cars cost more to build than they sell them for, so VAG make a stonking LOSS on every Bugatti they sell.  Why then pay out a lot more cash in order to encourage more people to buy Bugattis and lose even more money??

 

The same reason they build the cars, marketing!

[Silverstone96]

Where is the roll hoop though? Don't see how this could pass the safety tests

[KnucklesAgain]

It depends on what regulations Sean's fantasy car is racing under. That's obviously been a feature of the flat floor regulations since the beginning. If you had more design freedom you'd undoutably go with a ground effect design.

 

Exactly my point and question
 

[BRG]

The same reason they build the cars, marketing!

Exactly.  Marketing Bugatti, so that they lose more money on the increased sales of loss-making Bugattis.  That isn't a great marketing plan.  Will anyone buy a VW Polo, or a Skoda Fabia or an Audi Q3 because there is a Bugatti racing car?

[Wuzak]

Exactly.  Marketing Bugatti, so that they lose more money on the increased sales of loss-making Bugattis.  That isn't a great marketing plan.  Will anyone buy a VW Polo, or a Skoda Fabia or an Audi Q3 because there is a Bugatti racing car?

 

Surely the decide how many they are going to make, so if there is more demand they can ramp the prices up even higher and make less of a loss?

[mistareno]

I view Bugatti as VAG's 'F1'.

 

Mercedes invests in F1 to prove their technical and engineering prowess to the world. The loss is amortised as 'marketing' for the Mercedes group.

 

Bugatti's are the Road Car equivalent of F1. They are technological and engineering masterpieces that show VAG's engineering and technological prowress to the world. It could be argued that having a road car that annihilates all others is perhap a better investment as it also allows engineers to remain within the VAG group while pushing their boundaries.

 

The Veyron (and the new Chiron) was a quantum leap that single-handedly redefined what was possible for a road car. It allowed speeds thought unattainable in a road car whilst doing it in a car comfortable enough to drive across continents.  Just as in F1 the the loss is amortised both as 'marketing' ...

Edited by mistareno, 21 October 2016 - 04:47.

[Mat13]

I would have thought the Audi and Porsche LMPs are VAG's F1?

[BRG]

Surely the decide how many they are going to make, so if there is more demand they can ramp the prices up even higher and make less of a loss?

Ramp up the prices?  Do you know how much a Veyron cost and the new Chiron will cost?  Over a million. Even the super-rich might blanch at paying even more than that.  If ramping up the price was feasible, wouldn't they have already done it to avoid the current loss-making scenario?

[OO7]

That's a very pretty design bullystoke.  I really like the curves and elegant profiles.  I don't like the long wheelbase (the lack of a tall engine cover with roll hoop accentuates the wheelbase) or the wide front tyres though.

 

I believe the length of the front floor/splitter (extending towards the front wheels) is a legitimate design under the current technical regulations (and has been for a very long time (since the introduction of the flat bottom rules in the early/mid 80's)).  It isn't a solution teams would use however as the wake from the front tyres would be directed into the underbody and the car would lose significant levels of downforce.

[TF110]

I like some of it. I question why the nose cone is so high up when it meets the cockpit. It should be lower with a small roll hoop to protect from front impact strikes and that way aid in the driver's view. And another thing, why the 13" wheels still? The super skinny bodywork with the empty space over the floor gives it a weird look proportionately, but other than that it's nice.