Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 1 votes

Flexi Front Wings again [split topic]


  • Please log in to reply
768 replies to this topic

#551 Timorous

Timorous
  • Member

  • 2,476 posts
  • Joined: June 12

Posted 18 September 2024 - 11:42

chrcol, on 18 Sept 2024 - 10:08, said:

What is article 3.8?

 

A load test isnt a way to know if something is moving, as I said weird rules.

 

Googling seems to show front wing is 3.9.  Its a lot to read in there though so I didnt.

 

I found this quote on a website, I dont know if its word for word accurate.

 

 

That is just is too vague, and open to exploitation.  It needs to be a simple movement less than XX mm whilst the car is in motion, which can be measured by onboard camera easy enough.

 

Taking into account Gareth's reply above, I will speculate the rules are deliberately open to interpretation so the FIA can use them as a tool to manipulate a season, so e.g. if they want a close championship they allow or disallow things on the car to help them achieve that, so its good e.g. to right now allow Mclaren to keep the wing.

 

It is not vague at all. It is just physically impossible hence deflection tests for conformity.

 

By the written rules any amount of flex = illegal so if the FIA decide to update the static load tests to test for this kind of deflection they can and they are allowed to per the rules even mid season. They don't tend to because it costs time and money to build these parts and with the budget cap suddenly changing the test can have knock on effects but if the FIA feel they can't allow this then they will change the test after a notice period. Teams can then make the judgement call as to if developing this is worth it and the team that has been running it had an advantage for a while.



Advertisement

#552 Nobody

Nobody
  • Member

  • 3,425 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 18 September 2024 - 13:09

Timorous, on 18 Sept 2024 - 11:42, said:

It is not vague at all. It is just physically impossible hence deflection tests for conformity.

By the written rules any amount of flex = illegal so if the FIA decide to update the static load tests to test for this kind of deflection they can and they are allowed to per the rules even mid season. They don't tend to because it costs time and money to build these parts and with the budget cap suddenly changing the test can have knock on effects but if the FIA feel they can't allow this then they will change the test after a notice period. Teams can then make the judgement call as to if developing this is worth it and the team that has been running it had an advantage for a while.

There is the very real possibility that others or all of the wings react the same way if FIA decides to load test that particular section (lower corner edges of DRS flap), it's just the aero characteristics of the McLaren that causes a particular deflection in that area, by design or otherwise.

Edited by Nobody, 18 September 2024 - 13:10.


#553 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 31,353 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 18 September 2024 - 15:32

Gareth, on 18 Sept 2024 - 08:19, said:

and I agree with those saying low res photos taken on a straight where the sun was causing all sorts of difficulties seeing stuff is tricky to say it's conclusive),

 

lol


Edited by ARTGP, 18 September 2024 - 15:33.


#554 brucewayne

brucewayne
  • Member

  • 1,721 posts
  • Joined: June 23

Posted 18 September 2024 - 18:35

https://x.com/daniel...Osfp9l5bhDKm2ug

It seems that the last RW flex test after the race was in Japan, Leclercs Ferrari

#555 Ferrari2183

Ferrari2183
  • Member

  • 11,854 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 18 September 2024 - 18:58

brucewayne, on 18 Sept 2024 - 18:35, said:

https://x.com/daniel...Osfp9l5bhDKm2ug

It seems that the last RW flex test after the race was in Japan, Leclercs Ferrari


Must be fake… The header says Chinese GP but text says Japanese GP.

#556 MikeTekRacing

MikeTekRacing
  • Member

  • 14,429 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 18 September 2024 - 20:22

ARTGP, on 18 Sept 2024 - 15:32, said:

lol

yeah, but...and...

inconclusive



#557 pup

pup
  • Member

  • 3,134 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 18 September 2024 - 20:35

Monza is probably right but I think that video from Spa must be practice because I think they tested the wing there but ran a higher downforce in the race.



#558 TheAviator

TheAviator
  • Member

  • 3,151 posts
  • Joined: October 20

Posted 18 September 2024 - 20:49

Probably this is their "high speed" package they introduced in Spa.

Wings flexing all around...

#559 Yoshi

Yoshi
  • Member

  • 4,011 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 19 September 2024 - 08:50

https://www.motorspo...rigue/10655564/

 

FIA made a statement - full news above.

If you pass, you are save to proceed.

 

 

Quote

The FIA is closely monitoring the flexibility of bodywork on all cars and reserves the right to request teams to make modifications at any point during the season.

However, if a team successfully passes all deflection tests and adheres to the regulations and technical directives, they are deemed to be in full compliance, and no further action will be taken.


Edited by Yoshi, 19 September 2024 - 09:02.


Advertisement

#560 SparkPlug86

SparkPlug86
  • Member

  • 2,243 posts
  • Joined: March 18

Posted 19 September 2024 - 09:07

Yoshi, on 19 Sept 2024 - 08:50, said:

https://www.motorspo...rigue/10655564/

 

FIA made a statement - full news above.

If you pass, you are save to proceed.

 

It's fair enough.



#561 Ivanhoe

Ivanhoe
  • RC Forum Host

  • 18,220 posts
  • Joined: November 15

Posted 19 September 2024 - 09:08

Yeah, but it also says:

 

Quote

The FIA is currently reviewing data and any additional evidence that has emerged from the Baku GP and is considering any mitigating measures for future implementation.This is part of the standard process when scrutineering technical legality, and the FIA retains the authority to introduce regulatory changes during the season if required

So nothing new, the teams are subject to the whims of FIA.



#562 jonklug

jonklug
  • Member

  • 3,273 posts
  • Joined: November 22

Posted 19 September 2024 - 11:56

To me this the significant part:
 

Quote

 

The FIA is currently reviewing data and any additional evidence that has emerged from the Baku GP and is considering any mitigating measures for future implementation.

 

Ultimately, whatever they decide, I hope it's swift. 



#563 Bliman

Bliman
  • Member

  • 11,004 posts
  • Joined: April 16

Posted 19 September 2024 - 12:01



#564 Bliman

Bliman
  • Member

  • 11,004 posts
  • Joined: April 16

Posted 19 September 2024 - 12:02

jonklug, on 19 Sept 2024 - 11:56, said:

To me this the significant part:
 

 

Ultimately, whatever they decide, I hope it's swift. 

I hope it is for next season. That would be the most fair.



#565 brucewayne

brucewayne
  • Member

  • 1,721 posts
  • Joined: June 23

Posted 19 September 2024 - 12:17

Bliman, on 19 Sept 2024 - 12:02, said:

I hope it is for next season. That would be the most fair.


FIA with their eyes closed, if they only react next year. Subjective behavior and favoritism. Not a good look.

#566 catent

catent
  • Member

  • 869 posts
  • Joined: July 22

Posted 19 September 2024 - 12:18

Bliman, on 19 Sept 2024 - 12:02, said:

I hope it is for next season. That would be the most fair.

Changes only during the following season would be the most fair approach? According to principle, in a vacuum, sure.

According to previous precedents, and how such “passes scrutineering but violates the intention of a rule” situations were previously handled (Red Bull 2021; Ferrari 2022;
Aston 2023), it’s not at all fair … or at the very least, it’s not at all consistent with how previous similar circumstances were addressed/handled by the FIA, and that is inherently unfair.

Edited by catent, 19 September 2024 - 12:31.


#567 Bliman

Bliman
  • Member

  • 11,004 posts
  • Joined: April 16

Posted 19 September 2024 - 12:31

catent, on 19 Sept 2024 - 12:18, said:

Changes only during the following season would be the most fair approach? According to principle, in a vacuum, sure.

According to previous precedents, and how such “passes scrutineering but violates the intention of a rule” situations were previously handled (Red Bull 2021; Ferrari 2022), it’s not at all fair … or at the very least, it’s not at all consistent with how previous similar circumstances were addressed/handled by the FIA, and that is inherently unfair.

Yes it is the most fair approach. All the teams go through the tests so they are good now and all the teams can do that as well. Also you talk about the intention rule but Mercedes had the DAS system for a whole year while they were in communication with the FIA and they had no problem with it at all till the FIA got pressured but they still could use it for a whole season. They didn't have a rule change in the mid season. So yes it is the most fair. The FIA is just inconsistent all the time.



#568 Ali_G

Ali_G
  • Member

  • 34,674 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 19 September 2024 - 12:31

catent, on 19 Sept 2024 - 12:18, said:

Changes only during the following season would be the most fair approach? According to principle, in a vacuum, sure.

According to previous precedents, and how such “passes scrutineering but violates the intention of a rule” situations were previously handled (Red Bull 2021; Ferrari 2022), it’s not at all fair … or at the very least, it’s not at all consistent with how previous similar circumstances were addressed/handled by the FIA, and that is inherently unfair.



FIA clearly need to follow both previous precedents. Otherwise it looks like outright bias.

#569 catent

catent
  • Member

  • 869 posts
  • Joined: July 22

Posted 19 September 2024 - 12:34

Ali_G, on 19 Sept 2024 - 12:31, said:

FIA clearly need to follow both previous precedents. Otherwise it looks like outright bias.

I completely forgot the situation with Aston in 2023, so I edited my post to reflect that as well. The FIA have THREE consistent, established precedents to follow, one in each of the three preceding seasons (2021-2023), where in each instance they acted quickly, during the season, to address a perceived rule violation (even with teams passing scrutiny) by changing the scrutiny methods … and they’ve thrown that all out the window in 2024.

Edited by catent, 19 September 2024 - 12:37.


#570 Bliman

Bliman
  • Member

  • 11,004 posts
  • Joined: April 16

Posted 19 September 2024 - 12:38

catent, on 19 Sept 2024 - 12:34, said:

I completely forgot the situation with Aston in 2023, so I edited my post to reflect that as well. The FIA have THREE consistent, established precedents to follow, one in each of the three preceding seasons (2021-2023), where in each instance they acted quickly, during the season, to address a perceived rule violation (even with teams passing scrutiny) by changing the scrutiny methods … and they’ve thrown that all out the window in 2024.

Quickly? Didn't they use the summer break in one of those?



#571 catent

catent
  • Member

  • 869 posts
  • Joined: July 22

Posted 19 September 2024 - 12:43

Bliman, on 19 Sept 2024 - 12:38, said:

Quickly? Didn't they use the summer break in one of those?

McLaren’s (and Mercedes’) flexing wings have been apparent since June (if not earlier). There’s no reason the same approach you’re referencing from past seasons couldn’t have been applied here.

Edited by catent, 19 September 2024 - 12:44.


#572 Bliman

Bliman
  • Member

  • 11,004 posts
  • Joined: April 16

Posted 19 September 2024 - 12:50

catent, on 19 Sept 2024 - 12:43, said:

McLaren’s (and Mercedes’) flexing wings have been apparent since June (if not earlier). There’s no reason the same approach you’re referencing from past seasons couldn’t have been applied here.

And how quickly did the FIA know that? Because before it seems that the FIA acted under pressure from the other teams and not on their own. The problem is also that all the front wings flex quite a bit. Isn't the one with the Red Bull that the whole structure of the rearwing cantilevered back. I think that is easier to police.



#573 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 30,237 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 19 September 2024 - 12:54

catent, on 19 Sept 2024 - 12:18, said:

Changes only during the following season would be the most fair approach? According to principle, in a vacuum, sure.

According to previous precedents, and how such “passes scrutineering but violates the intention of a rule” situations were previously handled (Red Bull 2021; Ferrari 2022;
Aston 2023), it’s not at all fair … or at the very least, it’s not at all consistent with how previous similar circumstances were addressed/handled by the FIA, and that is inherently unfair.

Or they could follow the various "precedents" (I think "examples" is a better word tbh) where they have let things go.

 

The idea there's been any kind of consistent approach previously isn't right imo.



#574 mclara

mclara
  • Member

  • 2,608 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 19 September 2024 - 12:56

brucewayne, on 19 Sept 2024 - 12:17, said:

FIA with their eyes closed, if they only react next year. Subjective behavior and favoritism. Not a good look.

thats nothing new



#575 Ali_G

Ali_G
  • Member

  • 34,674 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 19 September 2024 - 13:01

Gareth, on 19 Sept 2024 - 12:54, said:

Or they could follow the various "precedents" (I think "examples" is a better word tbh) where they have let things go.

The idea there's been any kind of consistent approach previously isn't right imo.


Which occurrences of movable aero parts have been let go recently. We have 3 in a row as mentioned which have resulted in scrutinising changes to have them outlawed.

While not explicitly stated in the technical or sporting regulations, surely consistent application of the rules is a must. Otherwise it just turns into a farce.

Edited by Ali_G, 19 September 2024 - 13:03.


#576 P123

P123
  • Member

  • 25,317 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 19 September 2024 - 13:04

catent, on 19 Sept 2024 - 12:34, said:

I completely forgot the situation with Aston in 2023, so I edited my post to reflect that as well. The FIA have THREE consistent, established precedents to follow, one in each of the three preceding seasons (2021-2023), where in each instance they acted quickly, during the season, to address a perceived rule violation (even with teams passing scrutiny) by changing the scrutiny methods … and they’ve thrown that all out the window in 2024.

 

They didn't act quickly.  Perhaps in comparison to the lax apprach at present, but those teams enjoyed the performance benefits of their flexi bodywork for multiple race before having to implement changes.  They weren't unfairly treated in any way.



#577 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 30,237 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 19 September 2024 - 13:15

Ali_G, on 19 Sept 2024 - 13:01, said:

Which occurrences of movable aero parts have been let go recently. We have 3 in a row as mentioned which have resulted in scrutinising changes to have them outlawed.

For flexi aero, in 2021 Red Bull got I think something like 9 races out of theirs (new tests came in on 15 June, but with a 20% tolerance until 15 July). In other words: about the same as if McLaren get Baku plus the remainder of the season.

 

There are other, non-flexi aero, issues recently where the FIA have ignored not merely pushing the rules to their boundaries, but going beyond them, for the sake of the "show".

 

Inconsistency is their watch word.

 

Quote

While not explicitly stated in the technical or sporting regulations, surely consistent application of the rules is a must. Otherwise it just turns into a farce.

Completely agree. Which is why I would advocate the bodypart flex tests being what they are for a whole season, with no ability to change mid-season. Flex is always going on, "that's too much flex/the sort of flex we don't like" will always be a subjective decision, and it is just best to not have that decision in the hands of the FIA mid-season. That way it's always consistent, and there can't be these charges of favouritism.



#578 rodlamas

rodlamas
  • Member

  • 12,145 posts
  • Joined: February 04

Posted 19 September 2024 - 13:17

pup, on 18 Sept 2024 - 20:35, said:

Monza is probably right but I think that video from Spa must be practice because I think they tested the wing there but ran a higher downforce in the race.

NO. They raced in Spa with the low DF RW.


Edited by rodlamas, 19 September 2024 - 13:17.


#579 jonklug

jonklug
  • Member

  • 3,273 posts
  • Joined: November 22

Posted 19 September 2024 - 13:20

Max:

Quote

"It's up to FIA to decide"
 
"I've seen the footage, that's the beautiful side of social media, right? Everyone has the video ready, and then, of course, a lot of discussion is made. It's quite clear that it's moving at speed. Smart or not, it's up to the FIA to decide if it's legal.
 
Baku was not the first time that it was used. It's important to come with a clarification, not only on the rear wing, the front wing too, about what is allowed, how much is it allowed to bend? We just have to wait and see from our side."

 

 

Checo:

 

Quote

"It’s clear that it’s out of the regulation. It’s an illegal car. But it seems like, it is allowed. I'm very surprised."

 

 

Lol Checo how do you really feel?  :rotfl:


Edited by jonklug, 19 September 2024 - 13:35.


Advertisement

#580 Muppetmad

Muppetmad
  • Member

  • 12,922 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 19 September 2024 - 15:45

https://www.motorspo...-baku/10655784/

 

We've certainly not heard the last of this.



#581 F1 Mike

F1 Mike
  • Member

  • 2,657 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 19 September 2024 - 15:54

The way I see it, the bodywork passes all physical FIA deflection tests.
It is therefore compliant with the regulations.

If the FIA wants to increase or change the forces of the wing tests for next season based on data and observations noted this season, then that's fair enough and the teams will have to then comply with the new tests.

Seems like a bit of a hoohaa about not a lot to me. Red Bull will no doubt be developing something similar.

If DRS didn't exist, would everyone be so quick to say it's cheating? I just think it's a very clever way of making the car more slippery in a straight line

#582 Ivanhoe

Ivanhoe
  • RC Forum Host

  • 18,220 posts
  • Joined: November 15

Posted 19 September 2024 - 16:00

F1 Mike, on 19 Sept 2024 - 15:54, said:

The way I see it, the bodywork passes all physical FIA deflection tests.
It is therefore compliant with the regulations.

If the FIA wants to increase or change the forces of the wing tests for next season based on data and observations noted this season, then that's fair enough and the teams will have to then comply with the new tests.

Seems like a bit of a hoohaa about not a lot to me. Red Bull will no doubt be developing something similar.

If DRS didn't exist, would everyone be so quick to say it's cheating? I just think it's a very clever way of making the car more slippery in a straight line

Yeah, that’s what people argued with Red Bull’s rear wing in 2021, Ferrari’s floor in 2022 and Aston Martin’s wing in 2023. Yet FIA decided to issue TD’s to ban them. The arbitrariness is the problem. Just stop issuing in season rule changes, unless there’s a safety issue. If this is the start of a new line, fine, but don’t come with in season rule changes in the future.



#583 GlenWatkins

GlenWatkins
  • Member

  • 2,409 posts
  • Joined: March 20

Posted 19 September 2024 - 16:02

brucewayne, on 19 Sept 2024 - 12:17, said:

FIA with their eyes closed, if they only react next year. Subjective behavior and favoritism. Not a good look.

This from a Ferrari fan, LOL.

#584 F1 Mike

F1 Mike
  • Member

  • 2,657 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 19 September 2024 - 16:18

Ivanhoe, on 19 Sept 2024 - 16:00, said:

Yeah, that’s what people argued with Red Bull’s rear wing in 2021, Ferrari’s floor in 2022 and Aston Martin’s wing in 2023. Yet FIA decided to issue TD’s to ban them. The arbitrariness is the problem. Just stop issuing in season rule changes, unless there’s a safety issue. If this is the start of a new line, fine, but don’t come with in season rule changes in the future.


I completely agree

#585 SophieB

SophieB
  • RC Forum Host

  • 27,018 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 19 September 2024 - 16:20

Lol! :

 

@tgruener

Red Bull now says that I have misquoted Checo:

‘When asked about the McLaren RW he said “it’s clear their RW is out of regs and it’s a legal car.” Not illegal. In his accent that could be heard as illegal.’
Hope you get a chance to hear it yourself on Sky F1 TV.

 



#586 Muppetmad

Muppetmad
  • Member

  • 12,922 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 19 September 2024 - 16:29

...but surely "out of regs" is simply another way of saying illegal? Or am I missing something?



#587 Flyingfinn

Flyingfinn
  • Member

  • 416 posts
  • Joined: July 24

Posted 19 September 2024 - 16:31

SophieB, on 19 Sept 2024 - 16:20, said:



Lol! :

@tgruener
Red Bull now says that I have misquoted Checo:
‘When asked about the McLaren RW he said “it’s clear their RW is out of regs and it’s a legal car.” Not illegal. In his accent that could be heard as illegal.’
Hope you get a chance to hear it yourself on Sky F1 TV.


If he claims that the wing is out of regs then that implies that he's calling it illegal. There is no evidence that the wing is contravening the regulations but people are taking pot shots. Let's see what FIA does. Until then, it's business as usual. Meanwhile checo should focus on maximising his legal car rather than overcompensating to show Horner about his loyalty to Red Bull.

#588 Mc_Silver

Mc_Silver
  • Member

  • 6,488 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 19 September 2024 - 16:36

Complaints from Red Bull about legality of other cars could be one of the most hilarious things in F1.

#589 DJH63

DJH63
  • Member

  • 1,069 posts
  • Joined: July 24

Posted 19 September 2024 - 16:38

Mc_Silver, on 19 Sept 2024 - 16:36, said:

Complaints from Red Bull about legality of other cars could be one of the most hilarious things in F1.

It isn’t RB or Ferrari who asked the FIA to provide clarity.



#590 pup

pup
  • Member

  • 3,134 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 19 September 2024 - 16:39

Since when have Red Bull been concerned about walking back controversial comments? That’s more sus than anything McLaren are doing, lol.

#591 Flyingfinn

Flyingfinn
  • Member

  • 416 posts
  • Joined: July 24

Posted 19 September 2024 - 16:40

Mc_Silver, on 19 Sept 2024 - 16:36, said:

Complaints from Red Bull about legality of other cars could be one of the most hilarious things in F1.


They're all just sulking. And I don't blame them. What is so funny is Red Bull and Ferrari people suddenly becoming experts on FIA regulations. If people think that outlawing McLaren's rear wing will slow them down then all the best!

#592 MikeTekRacing

MikeTekRacing
  • Member

  • 14,429 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 19 September 2024 - 16:41

Mc_Silver, on 19 Sept 2024 - 16:36, said:

Complaints from Red Bull about legality of other cars could be one of the most hilarious things in F1.

care to expand with some facts?



#593 Flyingfinn

Flyingfinn
  • Member

  • 416 posts
  • Joined: July 24

Posted 19 September 2024 - 16:42

MikeTekRacing, on 19 Sept 2024 - 16:41, said:

care to expand with some facts?


It's an opinion, doesn't need to be backed with "facts". But since you asked, please refer to the 2010 Red Bull flexi wing saga.

#594 DW46

DW46
  • Member

  • 3,338 posts
  • Joined: December 21

Posted 19 September 2024 - 17:19

It is kinda funny that the two teams losing their sh*t are Ferrari whose 19 sealed engine is fresh in the memory and the Bulls whose challengers are powered by overpriced sandwiches.

#595 MikeTekRacing

MikeTekRacing
  • Member

  • 14,429 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 19 September 2024 - 17:31

Flyingfinn, on 19 Sept 2024 - 16:42, said:

It's an opinion, doesn't need to be backed with "facts". But since you asked, please refer to the 2010 Red Bull flexi wing saga.

it's not an opinion. It's a statement. I am interested in what drove that statement. 

2010 is 14 years ago. I know the story, but don't remember the outcome. 

Were the tests updated or not? How long did it take FiA to react? Or did they say it's good for this year, see you next year?



#596 MikeTekRacing

MikeTekRacing
  • Member

  • 14,429 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 19 September 2024 - 17:33

DW46, on 19 Sept 2024 - 17:19, said:

It is kinda funny that the two teams losing their sh*t are Ferrari whose 19 sealed engine is fresh in the memory and the Bulls whose challengers are powered by overpriced sandwiches.

totally agree with this kind of BS from all the teams. That's why I said it's fair game from Mclaren to try it.

The failure is, as usually it is, with the FiA for not reacting. Mclaren is cool, they all try to get outside the rules and get away with it. Them being allowed to continue doing it is not their problem.

 

The FiA want a close title. So they will leave it as it is most probably



#597 GlenWatkins

GlenWatkins
  • Member

  • 2,409 posts
  • Joined: March 20

Posted 19 September 2024 - 17:37

MikeTekRacing, on 19 Sept 2024 - 17:31, said:

it's not an opinion. It's a statement. I am interested in what drove that statement.
2010 is 14 years ago. I know the story,

but don't remember the outcome.
Were the tests updated or not? How long did it take FiA to react? Or did they say it's good for this year, see you next year?

All you need to do is Google '2010 redbull flexi wing ban'

#598 MikeTekRacing

MikeTekRacing
  • Member

  • 14,429 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 19 September 2024 - 17:48

Google gives different results to different people. Can you please give me a link to the article that is relevant?



#599 MikeTekRacing

MikeTekRacing
  • Member

  • 14,429 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 19 September 2024 - 18:04

nevermind. I found this.

So tests were updated mid season

https://www.theguard...ed-bull-ferrari



Advertisement

#600 sterlingfan2000

sterlingfan2000
  • Member

  • 521 posts
  • Joined: April 15

Posted 19 September 2024 - 18:33

https://www.auto-mot...ari-verbiegung/


Alle Teams are using flexible Rear Wings according to AMS. Just different concepts, they explained how Ferrari is using their bending in the Rear