146 replies to this topic

[F1Fan4Ever]

Just to add: the rims are also one of the "standard supply components"

 

I'm pretty sure that at least some teams make their own wheels.

[Analog]

under weight because of tire wear

A kilo? If there is still a kilo to wear out after what would have been a normal stop, then they are stoping too early. In any case, they have the numbers so there's no excuse. Would be interesting to know how much rubber there is, in grams, between the surface of a new tire and the cord.

Edited by Analog, 23 March 2025 - 15:39.

[F1Fan4Ever]

I don’t think it would require any further controls than they have at the moment. All the tyres are supplied by Pirelli, so they’re not going to find heavier tyres out of nowhere. Pirelli fits the tyres to the wheels, and balances them, so they know how much the rims weigh too.

 

Yes, but then they give the wheels to the team, no?  How hard would it be to toss on a few weights to the wheels.  They arent going to race them, or even drive them under your idea.  

 

I hate to think teams would do something like this, but we have seen some pretty egregious rule breaking in the past.  

[Broekschaap]

I'm pretty sure that at least some teams make their own wheels.

From the technical regulations:

 

10.7.4 Supply of wheel rims
In accordance with the provisions of Article 17.4, the FIA will appoint a standard supplier for
wheel rims and the Competitors will be required to use these rims.

[PayasYouRace]

Yes, but then they give the wheels to the team, no?  How hard would it be to toss on a few weights to the wheels.  They arent going to race them, or even drive them under your idea.  

 

I hate to think teams would do something like this, but we have seen some pretty egregious rule breaking in the past.  

I suppose it might be the end of the world for the scrutineers to check that the wheels themselves are correct. No way that could be possible. /s

[Brian60]

Well rules is rules, however......... Just how much time does 0.4mm wear on a skid block gain you? I thought the after race scrutineering checks were supposed to be random car numbers generated by computer, funny how it managed to pcik both cars from one team! Its about time they changed this rule to check the first 3 positions at race finish, plus 1 other random car, at least that way those going for the win (currently Mc, RB,Merc,Fer) would know they have to be squeaky clean all the time.

[oli4]

Well rules is rules, however......... Just how much time does 0.4mm wear on a skid block gain you? I thought the after race scrutineering checks were supposed to be random car numbers generated by computer, funny how it managed to pcik both cars from one team! Its about time they changed this rule to check the first 3 positions at race finish, plus 1 other random car, at least that way those going for the win (currently Mc, RB,Merc,Fer) would know they have to be squeaky clean all the time.

 

Just check all cars that are in the points

[Myrvold]

Just check all cars that are in the points

 

Then check all cars that suddenly gets promoted in to the points? And then check another car after one that got promoted in to the points also turned out to be in breach of a rule?

 

Suddenly Bauer & Company will be doing scrutineering on Mondays.

[Broekschaap]

Well rules is rules, however......... Just how much time does 0.4mm wear on a skid block gain you? I thought the after race scrutineering checks were supposed to be random car numbers generated by computer, funny how it managed to pcik both cars from one team! Its about time they changed this rule to check the first 3 positions at race finish, plus 1 other random car, at least that way those going for the win (currently Mc, RB,Merc,Fer) would know they have to be squeaky clean all the time.

It must be a relief then that the drivers finishing 1,2,3 and 4 were checked for both weight and skid blocks?

Edited by Broekschaap, 23 March 2025 - 16:42.

[F1Fan4Ever]

From the technical regulations:

 

10.7.4 Supply of wheel rims
In accordance with the provisions of Article 17.4, the FIA will appoint a standard supplier for
wheel rims and the Competitors will be required to use these rims.

 

Thank you very much for this information. 

[John B]

Can’t think of the last time three cars were disqualified from the same Grand Prix, let alone all for technicalities.

And has any team managed to get both cars DQed for separate violations previously?

[scheivlak]

Well rules is rules, however......... ?

That must be one the most stupid counter arguments ever posted. Next one: just how much time does 0.5mm wear on a skid block gain you - etc etc.etc.....

[HP]

Sucks for me as a Ferrari fan. But well, in regards of the regs there is no other outcome to be expected.

 

So Ferrari please wake up and pay attention to these issues.

[chrcol]

https://www.fia.com/...rutineering.pdf

 

Some issues with their documentation, this doesnt state car 44 was checked.

[hollowstar]

https://www.fia.com/...rutineering.pdf

Some issues with their documentation, this doesnt state car 44 was checked.

Could Ferrari use this for an appeal?

[chrcol]

Could Ferrari use this for an appeal?

Guessing no, as the test clearly took place, looks like a typo.

[Clrnc]

Well rules is rules, however......... Just how much time does 0.4mm wear on a skid block gain you? I thought the after race scrutineering checks were supposed to be random car numbers generated by computer, funny how it managed to pcik both cars from one team! Its about time they changed this rule to check the first 3 positions at race finish, plus 1 other random car, at least that way those going for the win (currently Mc, RB,Merc,Fer) would know they have to be squeaky clean all the time.

Top 4 were checked

[kumo7]

wow
Hamilton won Sprint. He passed the test then.

[onemoresolo]

wow
Hamilton won Sprint. He passed the test then.

 

Shorter race, less time to wear the plank down. Plus they changed the cars setup between the two, perhaps those changes resulted in a lower ride height. Could be a number of factors.

[PlatenGlass]

I've never been convinced that the plank was a good idea. It's not like other things that the team can simply put in place correctly and assume it's going to pass. Cars go over kerbs etc. and there's going to be quite a lot of randomness in how much a plank actually wears. With the weight limit it's only if lumps fall off the car.

What's it for? People have said it's to stop cars bottoming out which can apparently be quite dangerous, but you often hear cars scraping along the ground anyway and it's just that the wear can't be more than a certain amount so it doesn't stop cars bottoming out.

[RedRabbit]

I've never been convinced that the plank was a good idea. It's not like other things that the team can simply put in place correctly and assume it's going to pass. Cars go over kerbs etc. and there's going to be quite a lot of randomness in how much a plank actually wears. With the weight limit it's only if lumps fall off the car.

What's it for? People have said it's to stop cars bottoming out which can apparently be quite dangerous, but you often hear cars scraping along the ground anyway and it's just that the wear can't be more than a certain amount so it doesn't stop cars bottoming out.

I honestly don't know what it's for anymore. It was introduced in the safety changes after 1994 to prevent the flat bottomed cars from completely choking the airflow and losing underfloor downforce when bottoming out.

A minimum ride height was also introduced, but that appears to be done away with in these regulations. Apart from the height of the plank.

Makes little sense, because these are tunnel cars, and wouldn't lose any downforce suddenly if the floor touched the road.

[arrysen]

I've never been convinced that the plank was a good idea.

What's it for? People have said it's to stop cars bottoming out which can apparently be quite dangerous, but you often hear cars scraping along the ground anyway and it's just that the wear can't be more than a certain amount so it doesn't stop cars bottoming out.

I honestly don't know what it's for anymore. It was introduced in the safety changes after 1994 to prevent the flat bottomed cars from completely choking the airflow and losing underfloor downforce when bottoming out.

A minimum ride height was also introduced, but that appears to be done away with in these regulations. Apart from the height of the plank.

Makes little sense, because these are tunnel cars, and wouldn't lose any downforce suddenly if the floor touched the road.

Plank is a simple and very effective way to control active ride height - static measurement can be "gamed" as Brabham ably demonstrated in the 80s. The minimum ride height needs to be set for a number of reasons, not least of which is the dreaded "porpoising", which was why the ride height was raised a couple of years ago.

[Autodromo]

I hope they checked Max's Planck to see if it was out of compliance by a constant amount.....

[Analog]

I hope they checked Max's Planck to see if it was out of compliance by a constant amount.....

 

Schrödinger was there and he said that it was, and that it wasn't.

[PlatenGlass]

It's only when you observe the plank that it's determined whether it's worn or not.

[Garagista]

I hope they checked Max's Planck to see if it was out of compliance by a constant amount.....

That one deserves a nice drum sting hehe

[kumo7]

It must be an one time issue. Not in Suzuka. If ir happens also in Suzuka, Ferrari may have serious issue. 

[Afterburner]

I suppose it might be the end of the world for the scrutineers to check that the wheels themselves are correct. No way that could be possible. /s

They’re taking the car to the scales, quick, give them the set we filled with radon!

Obviously in this case the FIA would have a single set they required the teams to fit to every car so it won’t be a variable.

[Stephane]

AT this point weight them without wheels

[Broekschaap]

Schrödinger was there and he said that it was, and that it wasn't.

How could he be sure? Did he look at it?

[balmybaldwin]

It must be an one time issue. Not in Suzuka. If ir happens also in Suzuka, Ferrari may have serious issue. 

I think it's obvious they do have abig issue. they raised their ride height in Aus to avoid this, so it's either slow or illegal at the moment

[jonklug]

I hope they checked Max's Planck to see if it was out of compliance by a constant amount.....

 

It was Lawson with the illegal car, he was flying out there. 

[kumo7]

I think it's obvious they do have abig issue. they raised their ride height in Aus to avoid this, so it's either slow or illegal at the moment

 

Hum... Ferrari is in a deeper problems than the most assumes.

RIsing ride height is not illegal, just that it reduces the performance of the car. Suspention is not working well, or the tunnel is producing too much of bouncing? Nevertheless the only solution is to rise the car, then Mercedss, RedBull, and McLaren can take one team out of its immediate competition.

[hollowstar]

Hum... Ferrari is in a deeper problems than the most assumes.
RIsing ride height is not illegal, just that it reduces the performance of the car. Suspention is not working well, or the tunnel is producing too much of bouncing? Nevertheless the only solution is to rise the car, then Mercedss, RedBull, and McLaren can take one team out of its immediate competition.

Is it impossible for Ferrari to change the rear suspension?

[Analog]

Anyways, seems like there's around 8-9kg of usable rubber when a F1 car rolls out on a new set so I must revisit my opinion that it was tire wear that caught Ferrari and Alpine. That is no excuse though, especially since Ferrari had Hamilton's tires and could have pretty easily predicted the wear for Charles.

[GlenWatkins]

It's only when you observe the plank that it's determined whether it's worn or not.

Superposition allows the plank to be worn and unworn at the same time

[MattK9]

Well rules is rules, however......... Just how much time does 0.4mm wear on a skid block gain you? I thought the after race scrutineering checks were supposed to be random car numbers generated by computer, funny how it managed to pcik both cars from one team! Its about time they changed this rule to check the first 3 positions at race finish, plus 1 other random car, at least that way those going for the win (currently Mc, RB,Merc,Fer) would know they have to be squeaky clean all the time.

 

The issue is how much would Ferrari need to raise the ride height of the car to not wear out the plank.

It was suggested in Oz that they had to raise the ride height due to excessive plank wear in FP1 & 2 which lead to an overall uncompetitive race. 

[7MGTEsup]

I have always been confused how drivers are allowed to breach parc ferme rules at the end of the race when they run up and hug their team. It's more than possible for mechanics to put lead in a drivers pocket, pour water on their suit or what not. I also don't understand why the car is weighed without fuel as unless they removed less than 1kg (1.3 litres) of fuel from Leclerc's car it was never under weight in race conditions.

 

Surly they should weigh each car as it rolls off the track on the scales like they do in qualifying so it's all as it was when on track. If you're above the min weight as you leave the track post race then you're good.

[pdac]

I have always been confused how drivers are allowed to breach parc ferme rules at the end of the race when they run up and hug their team. It's more than possible for mechanics to put lead in a drivers pocket, pour water on their suit or what not. I also don't understand why the car is weighed without fuel as unless they removed less than 1kg (1.3 litres) of fuel from Leclerc's car it was never under weight in race conditions.

 

Surly they should weigh each car as it rolls off the track on the scales like they do in qualifying so it's all as it was when on track. If you're above the min weight as you leave the track post race then you're good.

 

Isn't that just that the regulations give the minimum weight for the car without fuel? The only other way to operate it would be to specify that the teams must put an exact amount of fuel into the car at the start of the race, rather than leaving it up to them to decide how much is needed.

[MikeTekRacing]

I have always been confused how drivers are allowed to breach parc ferme rules at the end of the race when they run up and hug their team. It's more than possible for mechanics to put lead in a drivers pocket, pour water on their suit or what not. I also don't understand why the car is weighed without fuel as unless they removed less than 1kg (1.3 litres) of fuel from Leclerc's car it was never under weight in race conditions.

 

Surly they should weigh each car as it rolls off the track on the scales like they do in qualifying so it's all as it was when on track. If you're above the min weight as you leave the track post race then you're good.

a few points here.

There was a case of a jr driver where his dad poured water.

re: leclerc - yes it was. The rules say the minim weight WITHOUT fuel. You can't use fuel as balast, so illegal. 

[7MGTEsup]

a few points here.

There was a case of a jr driver where his dad poured water.

re: leclerc - yes it was. The rules say the minim weight WITHOUT fuel. You can't use fuel as balast, so illegal. 

 

I know the rules say the car is weighed without fuel but it seems odd to weigh it in a condition it will never be used in. Is it done this way because they are scared somone will do a BAR again? But that would only work with refuelling.

 

Another crazy thought that just entered my head. What do they do about foreign objects that may have entered the vehicle? For example on your cool down lap you go off into the gravel and now there are several kgs of gravel lodged in various places in the car. Do they then strip the car down and remove all the gravel that may be lodged in hard to get places before they weigh the car?

Edited by 7MGTEsup, 25 March 2025 - 16:36.

[Analog]

I know the rules say the car is weighed without fuel but it seems odd to weigh it in a condition it will never be used in. Is it done this way because they are scared somone will do a BAR again? But that would only work with refuelling.

Which amount of fuel should they use as reference instead of zero? 1.73kg? 9?

[7MGTEsup]

Which amount of fuel should they use as reference instead of zero? 1.73kg? 9?

 

Why do they need any set amount? If your car plus driver is 800kg as it leaves the track at the end of the race you are good.

[7MGTEsup]

And some other crazy thoughts.

 

Do different tyre compounds weigh different amounts?

 

What is the average weight of a tyre (new)?

 

What is the min max difference in tyre weight (new)?

 

I'm getting myself down a propper rabbit hole thinking about all sorts of components especially carbon composit parts and how tightly controlled the weights are in manufacturing. It doesn't take may components to be a few grams lighter before you are under weight.

 

What's the tollerence with weight? Do they measure down to 0.1kg 0.01kg? The report said 799kg for the vehicle weight so was it exactly 799kg or do they only measure to 1kg and at what point do the scales round up to the next kg?

Edited by 7MGTEsup, 25 March 2025 - 16:56.

[Sterzo]

Why do they need any set amount? If your car plus driver is 800kg as it leaves the track at the end of the race you are good.

At a guess, it's because teams need a predictable, measurable figure they can control. Otherwise they'd have to calculate the weight of fuel that will remain at the end - which is almost impossible to predict.

[MikeTekRacing]

And some other crazy thoughts.

 

Do different tyre compounds weigh different amounts?

 

What is the average weight of a tyre (new)?

 

What is the min max difference in tyre weight (new)?

 

I'm getting myself down a propper rabbit hole thinking about all sorts of components especially carbon composit parts and how tightly controlled the weights are in manufacturing. It doesn't take may components to be a few grams lighter before you are under weight.

 

What's the tollerence with weight? Do they measure down to 0.1kg 0.01kg? The report said 799kg for the vehicle weight so was it exactly 799kg or do they only measure to 1kg and at what point do the scales round up to the next kg?

I know drivers are instructed to pick up marbles on their cooldown lap to increase their weight.

 

Adding fuel won't change anything. It just moves the baseline and the teams will push against that. Using dry weight is a pretty clear measure. I don't care about your fuel. This is how much the car is dry

[MortenF1]

And some other crazy thoughts.

Do different tyre compounds weigh different amounts?

What is the average weight of a tyre (new)?

What is the min max difference in tyre weight (new)?

I'm getting myself down a propper rabbit hole thinking about all sorts of components especially carbon composit parts and how tightly controlled the weights are in manufacturing. It doesn't take may components to be a few grams lighter before you are under weight.

What's the tollerence with weight? Do they measure down to 0.1kg 0.01kg? The report said 799kg for the vehicle weight so was it exactly 799kg or do they only measure to 1kg and at what point do the scales round up to the next kg?

Apparently there’s no difference in density between the slicks compounds. A front tyre is 9,5 kg and a rear is 11,5.
I believe the weights they use display one decimal, so a 100 gram step.