Which did you think was the ugliest car? I really enjoyed looking back on these *questionable* Formula 1 designs! Do drop a sub, and have you checked out our NEW CHANNEL?? th-cam.com/channels/T5kqSGPJF8aFTyO_4bxN3Q.html
One of the ugliest, which I came across in the F1 Encyclopedia from 2000, was the unraced Cosworth 4WD prototype F1 car from 1969. Powered by the iconic Ford Cosworth DFV V8, it was intended to prove the viability of 4 wheel drive, hence 4WD. It had little in the way of bodywork to speak of, but the ones it did have were such that made you wish you had eye bleach, it was ghastly. To make matters worse, the very problems the prototype sought to solve, heavy steering and wild wheelspin, were limiting factors in the potential of the prototype. Even Cosworth engineers didn't what they were thinking when they look back on the 4WD prototype
I really want to know what the current technology would be able to do without any restrictions or safety concerns. Like how big or wide would be the perfect balance between weight and handling, how many tires for grip and weight balance
My aerospsace professor kind of hinted at the opposite. Basically, engineers don't often care about looks, but winning contracts and money will inevitably be partially won on looks. So engineers have to incorporate looks as another factor. That's why the bad looking cars created legislation to make them less ugly. This also had a probable role in why the Northrop YF-23 lost to the Lockheed Martin F-22. So essentially the rule of cool has some bearing on engineering design and shouldn't be discounted. Anything seen public is not immune from this, even in the military.
@@windunursetyadi FIA: Alright, we're gonna make looser restrictions on aero this year Toyota: Puts a buzz saw blade shaped front wing on their Yaris FIA: Alright, we're gonna HEAVILY restrict front aero design
Back in the Nascar 2 and 3 days, the best and most intense online racing took place in the wee hours of the morn. Most the drivers came fully loaded. I know I was. Usually pound a bucket or 2 of Peppermint Schnapps and puff a bowl while looking for the next good 'Dega run. In spite of most of the drivers being tanked up fuller than the cars, the racing was clean and close as all the sober wreckers went to bed. Just for the record, I won my share of races like that. Great times!
I'm so looking forward to see how the teams manage to abuse the 2022 rules to come up with something completely different from the idealised prototype presented at Silverstone.
I get a bit why regulations are closed but I much preferred the more open regs of the 70-80's. For me this was the golden era of motorsports, even if the racing wasn't so close like today. I like that at least sports cars like WEC, SRO and Rally are allowing some open platform even if the cars get balanced in post.
I would like to see an FIA sanctioned series where the engineers can go full balls to the wall and get the absolute fastest lap times and racing possible. No restrictions, just lap times.
What we need is a ruleset similar to the old Can-Am series, but with modern safety and driving regulations instead. Basically: as long as there are your basic driving rules and the driver can survive a crash, you are free to do whatever you want with the cars you design
4:04 That ratio also means you’re growing faster than most, a lot new eyes on every vid! 👍🏻 Congrats, hands down one of the few channels I fully enjoy every vid.
Great content as usual, but I can't believe you didn't mention the ligier JS5 teapot, the march 711 tea tray, the tyrrell 012 boomerang wing nor the williams fw26 walrus nose, there's a lot more examples of f1 designs that are crazy!
@Driver61 The reason McLaren MP4/10 had the third wing wasn't to do with downforce, but rather to recover the air pressure lost from the opening of the airbox Engine intake, who is behind the driver's helmet. this was really ingenious as it allowed to have extra pressure, so basically bending the regulations who wanted to limit air pressure to the engine - for those who don't remember the 1995 cars weren't turbo boosted, they had normal aspirated 8, 10 or 12 cylinders engines, so air pressure was used to give the engine boost and FIA tried to limit this. this to my knowledge of course, they removed the third wing later as I believe made the airflow to the back wing less efficient, but I might be wrong on this one
Great vid as usual! A interesting thing I would like to see, basically the lap times from the first F1 cars, every year to todays car on the same track. The progress/evolution would be very interesting. Know there is no such data, but estimations could be done..
I made a spreadsheet some time ago (can't seem to find it now, hah) comparing current F1 times with the first time each track layout was used - since many of them went through changes. The oldest layout currently in use is that of the Interlagos circuit, the same since 1991. Just to have an idea, the pole position in that year was clocked by Ayrton Senna, a 1:16.392, while in 2019 Max Verstappen clocked 1:07.508 to set the pole position for the race. And that's less than 30 years!
Brings me back to the old days of F1 in school's, my favourite exploit we found was the restriction on the body having be at least 3mm think in all places, the penilty for brakeinf it however was only point which you could easily make back from timesavings. The best part was they could only apply the penilty once.
Can someone explain why 80.3% of viewers are NOT subscribed, despite the host asking every episode? I mean - it's free, you only have to do it once, it takes about 5 nanoseconds, the channel you're watching gets benefits from those numbers - and they're asking you to do so... I just don't get it. Thanks Scott. Always informative and entertaining. (And I subbed - after the first episode I watched. D'uh.)
There should be a league for pure engineering. Yearly budget is 1/10th of F1. Each car is handed 30kg of the same fuel before start (or equivalent in electrical energy) to complete a 300km race. So something like 1/3 of what F1 gets. So not crazy fast on average. Other than basic safety rules... there are no restrictions on the design... After a few iterations the designs will be out of this world.
@@sureyeah3678 Really? Here's every title-winning car from 1950 - 2016. www.foxsports.com/motor/gallery/images-f1-cars-championship-winning-022717. I'd rather see any title-winning car from 1968 - 2008.
I remember hating the 07/08 cars for having just too many wings, so I really liked the 09 cars, but over time my opinion has swapped lol. In the same vain I hope all the 2022 cars will look better than this last generation of cars!
You missed one. The Ferrari at Long Beach in 1982, when they ran two offset rear wings. While there was a limit on how wide a rear wing could be, there was no rule that limited how many rear wings could be used...
I have a very intriguing video idea. What if the old F1 teams had access to today's many technological innovations (drs kers turbo hybrid engines and the halo)
Subjective as hell question How about everything post about 2016ish when the fetish for dozens of bargeboards, strakes, slots, vanes and airguides became endemic? I KNOW that form follows function and these are the most aerodynamically efficient race cars ever but Scotts theme of the day IS aesthetics and I'm a sucker for sleek. To flip the question, the Brabham BT52 is the most beautiful F1 car ever conceived. Fight me!
I really wish we could get back to this. I wish the rules were “make sure it’s open wheel and comply with this list of safety regulations, and other than that go nuts.” Today every team is trying to figure out loopholes within the rules and ways to bend the rules without breaking them and that just seems strange to me. Instead of the FIA dictating (largely) the look of the cars I really wish they would let anyone design and run anything as long as it’s safe.
God that Caterham was hideous. I'd like to know about the Williams tusk nose from a few years earlier than the Lotus - I assume it's for a similar benefit, but I don't know what regulations inspired it.
A similar problem has occurred in motogp the moment Ducati fucked the whole thing years ago by adding wings to their bikes to turn the racing to drag racing...now almost every manufacturer's bike looks like an ugly spaceship...hope FIM bans this, which I know they wont cuz hey...they're FIM......such a shame
I'm born in 2007 but the F1 in the old days were all about engineering marvels a lot of new discoveries, and some crazy cars like the fan powered, the invention of ground effects etc That is F1 is supposed to be, a place for the best engineers in the world to make new inventions and stuff.
🏎🏁 I don't understand why the FIA doesn't realize that if they would lift at least 50% of the stupid rules it would pull in a shit ton more viewers, they could make a unlimitedcll$ class. People want to see the fastest, the craziest ,and the best car's that a human can make. Every fan on earth complains about the rules And how strict they are on the F1 cars. 🏁🏎 Make an unlimited class, that's what the people want. Stop holding back engineers, drivers etc.
@@h.f1093 Because no one would watch F1 if 1 car just decimated every other car during a race, it would spread the cars way too much. Regulation is required because viewers are money and viewers don't care so much about the car as they do the driver in a race and aren't keen on seeing a race where nothing happens or seeing drivers dying regularly for entertainment. There is a reason Pikes peak is not as huge as F1. F1 has to balance peak engineering with entertainment and drama to get viewers and hence money. Otherwise only enthusiests would care, which is a much smaller portion of people than companies and teams are willing to spend or advertise on, simple as that. Money spent on useful R&D for companies and viewer recognition is the name of the game, otherwise teams would leave. So F1 has to strike a balance between the want's of the viewers with the want's of the teams, and F1 regulates it well enough to be the most popular motorsport.
It's very difficult to find now but there was one race in the early 2000s where a car had giant tall planks in front of the driver for aero. They had to remove these before the race because there were concerns that the drivers couldn't see where they were going.
Looking at all the downforce enhancing contraptions getting strapped to the modern F1 cars I can't help but wonder why modern aircraft don't come out as much disfigured either... You could probably flip an F1 car upside-down, give it a propeller or something, attach some control surfaces... and get a functioning airplane mostly in the dimensions of the said car.
Most f1 aero features are incredibly inefficient and wouldn't exist if they weren't trying to workaround rules. Aeroplane design is very much purer because the regulations allow them to be. An example of conflicting requirements is found in stealth aircraft, which are terrible aerodynamically compared to say a gen 4 fighter.
I am seeing a lot of comments saying "I wish I can see what the engineers can do with no restrictions" but... if I am not mistaken, the regulations were put there because the cars were getting way too fast and a lot of the drivers were dying. I'm a total F1 noob but I do remember that it was some ridiculous number of driver deaths per year, back in the no regulations era.
By the time Pikes Peak banned motorcycles in 2021, only 7 drivers died, 4 of them were on bikes. Over the span of 101 years (at the time). And keep in mind Pikes Peak has FAR LESS regulations than any FIA-sanctioned bodies. I wonder why. 🤔
There was. Don't remember who and when, but a team managed with a flexible rear wing, meaning it was a bit flattened at high speed, reducing the drag. Needless to say it was banned shortly after but birthed the DRS.
I feel like there should also be an Ugly Clause. Like, “hey these x wings are technically legal but look stupid and we don’t want to be associated with this.” It could go to a vote to keep it fair.
The FIA's restrictions are getting stupid. What's even racing anymore? What are we racing for? For the fastest car? The fastest driver? Because that question alone puts in question the entire rulebook
I didnt always watch F1 but I was always a car guy, and i remember hearing/seeing about the F1 2014 "noses" thinking what in the hell is that thing lol now im glad i know the reasoning and its always funny too look back
I personally find that the modern F1 regulations have 1 major issue. The strictness of the body regulations means that every car basically looks the same, leaving only liveries to express some design creativity. The sameness of the cars isn't a huge deal to most, but I cannot get over it, and I don't know why.
I'm not even a racecar designer and yet I get a magnificent swindler's delight just thinking about how they come up with clever ways to get around the rules without cheating.
![30 ชั่วโมงคนเดียว บนรถไฟชั้น 3 โซเวียต [Around The World Ep. 2]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/MlE9boAVqDA/mqdefault.jpg)
Which did you think was the ugliest car? I really enjoyed looking back on these *questionable* Formula 1 designs!
Do drop a sub, and have you checked out our NEW CHANNEL?? th-cam.com/channels/T5kqSGPJF8aFTyO_4bxN3Q.html
The...... 2014 caterham and the 2014 lotus ofc
Please make clip about keeping temperature and cooling engine rules and tricks.
@@fightingfalcon826 true
I think they all look cool! :) Or maybe not the x-wing.. Uuuuuhhhhh...
One of the ugliest, which I came across in the F1 Encyclopedia from 2000, was the unraced Cosworth 4WD prototype F1 car from 1969. Powered by the iconic Ford Cosworth DFV V8, it was intended to prove the viability of 4 wheel drive, hence 4WD. It had little in the way of bodywork to speak of, but the ones it did have were such that made you wish you had eye bleach, it was ghastly. To make matters worse, the very problems the prototype sought to solve, heavy steering and wild wheelspin, were limiting factors in the potential of the prototype.
Even Cosworth engineers didn't what they were thinking when they look back on the 4WD prototype
I really want to know what the current technology would be able to do without any restrictions or safety concerns. Like how big or wide would be the perfect balance between weight and handling, how many tires for grip and weight balance
Red Bull made the X2010 concept car for a video game
The porsche 919 hybrid is somewhat your answer.
@@SilkCutJaguarXJR- that car was a decade ago
@@edgiestofcars well yes
@@oreofudgeman Still slower than current F1.
My professor always thought us "function first, looks can be tenth"
My aerospsace professor kind of hinted at the opposite. Basically, engineers don't often care about looks, but winning contracts and money will inevitably be partially won on looks. So engineers have to incorporate looks as another factor. That's why the bad looking cars created legislation to make them less ugly. This also had a probable role in why the Northrop YF-23 lost to the Lockheed Martin F-22. So essentially the rule of cool has some bearing on engineering design and shouldn't be discounted. Anything seen public is not immune from this, even in the military.
I like my cars as I like my women, functional and good looking.
@@sirmounted8499 LEGENDARY COMMENT!
taught*
Looks are EVERYTHING
FIA just playing whack-a-mole with where designers can mount a wing.
Pretty much every racing series had had this problem
The bargeboard and the front wing is pretty battered at this point
@@windunursetyadi FIA: Alright, we're gonna make looser restrictions on aero this year
Toyota: Puts a buzz saw blade shaped front wing on their Yaris
FIA: Alright, we're gonna HEAVILY restrict front aero design
Take a shot every time the term "downforce" is said in the video, and then go in the sim to do a few laps around a track of your choosing.
Great idea!
Back in the Nascar 2 and 3 days, the best and most intense online racing took place in the wee hours of the morn. Most the drivers came fully loaded. I know I was. Usually pound a bucket or 2 of Peppermint Schnapps and puff a bowl while looking for the next good 'Dega run.
In spite of most of the drivers being tanked up fuller than the cars, the racing was clean and close as all the sober wreckers went to bed.
Just for the record, I won my share of races like that. Great times!
@@Driver61 Maybe you can lap Martinsville at NASCAR HEAT 5
@@thomasgoodwin2648 sounds like one of my dirt races.
Shocked that that caterham wasn’t censored
18+ F1 car
McLaren and Toro Rosso had the worse nose cone imo. And the later nice from Caterham looks great, the streamlined shape looks aggressive.
F1 2014, sponsored by Durex. One the plus side, it did lead to some of the funniest edits in F1 history.
It kind of looked like they were literally trying to give the finger to the regulations.
in japan gp they add mosaic over the nose
I'm so looking forward to see how the teams manage to abuse the 2022 rules to come up with something completely different from the idealised prototype presented at Silverstone.
For realsies, can't wait man, I'm willing to bet none of the cars will look like the reference, except maybe haas
@@chiefdenis what’s the shot at haas for?
@@caydenshoe2407 for my own personal amusement
Well merc removed thier side pods
@@chiefdenis your comment aged like milk under summer sun KEKW
I get a bit why regulations are closed but I much preferred the more open regs of the 70-80's. For me this was the golden era of motorsports, even if the racing wasn't so close like today. I like that at least sports cars like WEC, SRO and Rally are allowing some open platform even if the cars get balanced in post.
WEC is more open rn, you can do whatever you want...but you're gonna be BOP'd anyway, what we got?
Freaking Wingless Peugot 9X8
I just love this channel despite not being a racing fan.
I would like to see an FIA sanctioned series where the engineers can go full balls to the wall and get the absolute fastest lap times and racing possible. No restrictions, just lap times.
A lot more drivers might be killed, so it's unlikely to happen.
What we need is a ruleset similar to the old Can-Am series, but with modern safety and driving regulations instead.
Basically: as long as there are your basic driving rules and the driver can survive a crash, you are free to do whatever you want with the cars you design
I love y’all’s coverage and explanations. Thank you for not being one of the youtube tabloid F1 channels with misleading clickbaity thumbnails!
7:54
Seeing theese cars when you said this made me sick. KEKW
Nice video btw
4:04 That ratio also means you’re growing faster than most, a lot new eyes on every vid! 👍🏻
Congrats, hands down one of the few channels I fully enjoy every vid.
Great content as usual, but I can't believe you didn't mention the ligier JS5 teapot, the march 711 tea tray, the tyrrell 012 boomerang wing nor the williams fw26 walrus nose, there's a lot more examples of f1 designs that are crazy!
I had to look up these cars but your short description of their weird features are hilariously perfect
He can add that and make part 2.
@Driver61 The reason McLaren MP4/10 had the third wing wasn't to do with downforce, but rather to recover the air pressure lost from the opening of the airbox Engine intake, who is behind the driver's helmet. this was really ingenious as it allowed to have extra pressure, so basically bending the regulations who wanted to limit air pressure to the engine - for those who don't remember the 1995 cars weren't turbo boosted, they had normal aspirated 8, 10 or 12 cylinders engines, so air pressure was used to give the engine boost and FIA tried to limit this. this to my knowledge of course, they removed the third wing later as I believe made the airflow to the back wing less efficient, but I might be wrong on this one
The Caterham looks like it has a, uh, qp shape on the front
Thanks for the great content scott!!
the title went from ugly, to mad, to creative
X-wing cars are invalid, none has ever destroyed a death star.
hear me out,death star cars
Remember: The engineers don't focus on what the regulations say. Instead, they always focus on what the regulations DOESN'T say
Great vid as usual! A interesting thing I would like to see, basically the lap times from the first F1 cars, every year to todays car on the same track. The progress/evolution would be very interesting. Know there is no such data, but estimations could be done..
I made a spreadsheet some time ago (can't seem to find it now, hah) comparing current F1 times with the first time each track layout was used - since many of them went through changes. The oldest layout currently in use is that of the Interlagos circuit, the same since 1991. Just to have an idea, the pole position in that year was clocked by Ayrton Senna, a 1:16.392, while in 2019 Max Verstappen clocked 1:07.508 to set the pole position for the race. And that's less than 30 years!
@@rafleggy2fast526 Nice! Interesting! :) Thx
love these vids man keep making them
That Brabham looked awesome! Oh and I think you meant he put the radiators in front of the rear wheels, not the front wheels, lol.
You beat me to it. 🙂
2:14 ay yo that dealership is like 2 mins from my house the Ferrari f1 thing I see it like everyday
Good contents as always👍🏼 For me I think the mass damper from Renault is the smartest and most creative one, just simple and effective.
Your videos are excellent!!! Would like to see a video on how pneumatic engine valve springs work on a F1 car.
Did I miss it or was there no mention of the Williams FW26?
The BT52 is one of the most beautiful of that era. Iconic.
Great content as usual. Good job!!
Nice video, I enjoyed as always 🏎
Keep it up man👍
Brings me back to the old days of F1 in school's, my favourite exploit we found was the restriction on the body having be at least 3mm think in all places, the penilty for brakeinf it however was only point which you could easily make back from timesavings. The best part was they could only apply the penilty once.
'This was caterham's way of satisfying the regulations', a pretty well suited line for such a 'radical' design.
Still waiting for a racing league where it’s anything goes for the cars.
Can someone explain why 80.3% of viewers are NOT subscribed, despite the host asking every episode? I mean - it's free, you only have to do it once, it takes about 5 nanoseconds, the channel you're watching gets benefits from those numbers - and they're asking you to do so... I just don't get it.
Thanks Scott. Always informative and entertaining.
(And I subbed - after the first episode I watched. D'uh.)
Great work really enjoy your content you have a new subscriber 👏
the 2014's just the world's most expensive p*rn ever filmed
7:33 I honestly really like how these cars look other than the weird pokey thing on the front.
There should be a league for pure engineering. Yearly budget is 1/10th of F1. Each car is handed 30kg of the same fuel before start (or equivalent in electrical energy) to complete a 300km race. So something like 1/3 of what F1 gets. So not crazy fast on average. Other than basic safety rules... there are no restrictions on the design... After a few iterations the designs will be out of this world.
First
I'm curious what kids have now to say
Hey! Only 1st 'cause insider information. That's cheating isn't it? 😉
The high and narrow rear wing from 2009 on was one of the ugliest periods in F1.
despite that i think that the bgp001 is one of the best looking f1 cars ever
I agree. They were ugly as hell. I also hated the wheel covers. And sadly, they’ll be coming back in 2022.
But one of the most beautiful f1 car ever was from that period hmmm
@@sureyeah3678 Really? Here's every title-winning car from 1950 - 2016. www.foxsports.com/motor/gallery/images-f1-cars-championship-winning-022717. I'd rather see any title-winning car from 1968 - 2008.
I remember hating the 07/08 cars for having just too many wings, so I really liked the 09 cars, but over time my opinion has swapped lol. In the same vain I hope all the 2022 cars will look better than this last generation of cars!
Awesome video as always
You're doing a great job!
always very professional
They are works of art to me.
You missed one. The Ferrari at Long Beach in 1982, when they ran two offset rear wings. While there was a limit on how wide a rear wing could be, there was no rule that limited how many rear wings could be used...
Saying they have "drop noses", is a very polite way of putting it.
Flip thanks for the sub reminder man
Otherwise you would have just remained in my reccomendations forever
When the yt works as intended
I have a very intriguing video idea. What if the old F1 teams had access to today's many technological innovations (drs kers turbo hybrid engines and the halo)
I saw that title changing 👀
Subjective as hell question
How about everything post about 2016ish when the fetish for dozens of bargeboards, strakes, slots, vanes and airguides became endemic? I KNOW that form follows function and these are the most aerodynamically efficient race cars ever but Scotts theme of the day IS aesthetics and I'm a sucker for sleek.
To flip the question, the Brabham BT52 is the most beautiful F1 car ever conceived. Fight me!
2:33 best looking f1 ferrari ever
That 2014 lotus reminds me Porche's LMP1 car cos of the twin tusk disign and the black livery.
C'mon Scott, you can't title the video "Designers GO MAD" and not have the Tyrrell P34. :)
I really wish we could get back to this. I wish the rules were “make sure it’s open wheel and comply with this list of safety regulations, and other than that go nuts.”
Today every team is trying to figure out loopholes within the rules and ways to bend the rules without breaking them and that just seems strange to me. Instead of the FIA dictating (largely) the look of the cars I really wish they would let anyone design and run anything as long as it’s safe.
I love the simple sleek cars of the 80s
God that Caterham was hideous. I'd like to know about the Williams tusk nose from a few years earlier than the Lotus - I assume it's for a similar benefit, but I don't know what regulations inspired it.
the 2008 season had some interesting designs with the bridge wing
I'm a little surprised that you didn't mention the Williams FW26.
A similar problem has occurred in motogp the moment Ducati fucked the whole thing years ago by adding wings to their bikes to turn the racing to drag racing...now almost every manufacturer's bike looks like an ugly spaceship...hope FIM bans this, which I know they wont cuz hey...they're FIM......such a shame
I'm born in 2007 but the F1 in the old days were all about engineering marvels
a lot of new discoveries, and some crazy cars like the fan powered, the invention of ground effects etc
That is F1 is supposed to be, a place for the best engineers in the world to make new inventions and stuff.
Driver61 making me love F1 even more
3:49 “meaning the car is less willing to rotate” *Disappointed Mazepin noises*
Changed the title, didn't ya!?😂
Got to play the TH-cam game!
Favorite design era has to be early 2000's to mid 2000's!
Man of culture
Mine is early to mid 90s
I love your Videos!
🏎🏁 I don't understand why the FIA doesn't realize that if they would lift at least 50% of the stupid rules it would pull in a shit ton more viewers, they could make a unlimitedcll$ class. People want to see the fastest, the craziest ,and the best car's that a human can make. Every fan on earth complains about the rules And how strict they are on the F1 cars. 🏁🏎
Make an unlimited class, that's what the people want. Stop holding back engineers, drivers etc.
Can't believe the platypus Williams is not on this list :D
I think the regulations are too strict. There wouldn't be so many loopholes if there weren't so many restrictions.
why even regulate it. imagine f1 but its handled like pikes peak. would be fun and even i would watch it
@@h.f1093 Just call it Formula Fun.
@@h.f1093 Because no one would watch F1 if 1 car just decimated every other car during a race, it would spread the cars way too much. Regulation is required because viewers are money and viewers don't care so much about the car as they do the driver in a race and aren't keen on seeing a race where nothing happens or seeing drivers dying regularly for entertainment. There is a reason Pikes peak is not as huge as F1.
F1 has to balance peak engineering with entertainment and drama to get viewers and hence money. Otherwise only enthusiests would care, which is a much smaller portion of people than companies and teams are willing to spend or advertise on, simple as that. Money spent on useful R&D for companies and viewer recognition is the name of the game, otherwise teams would leave. So F1 has to strike a balance between the want's of the viewers with the want's of the teams, and F1 regulates it well enough to be the most popular motorsport.
Who is driving the Ferrari at 4:50? Was that from a race - awesome driving looks like it would be a good race.
i love the design of the Ferrari 126C3, i'd love to see a modern rendition of that wing
WHAT IS THE NAME OF THE GREY CHAIR HE IS SITTING ON? pls
Great vid ohh and im subscribed.
These x things are like just slapping lights in the hood of rally cars
A few too many "insane"s for my liking but a great showcase of the weird metal that F1 has produced. Thanks.
It's very difficult to find now but there was one race in the early 2000s where a car had giant tall planks in front of the driver for aero. They had to remove these before the race because there were concerns that the drivers couldn't see where they were going.
Found it! 2006 French Grand Prix BMW had "twin towers".
I personally wouldn't fall these cars ugly since they're designed to perfection and as a wannabe designer that's true beauty to me
Alright, I'll subscribe. You convinced me.
I'm surprised that no "experiments" from 2008 landed here.
Looking tired Scott, some special little thing keeping you awake a night....😉🤣
Looking at all the downforce enhancing contraptions getting strapped to the modern F1 cars I can't help but wonder why modern aircraft don't come out as much disfigured either... You could probably flip an F1 car upside-down, give it a propeller or something, attach some control surfaces... and get a functioning airplane mostly in the dimensions of the said car.
Most f1 aero features are incredibly inefficient and wouldn't exist if they weren't trying to workaround rules.
Aeroplane design is very much purer because the regulations allow them to be.
An example of conflicting requirements is found in stealth aircraft, which are terrible aerodynamically compared to say a gen 4 fighter.
I am seeing a lot of comments saying "I wish I can see what the engineers can do with no restrictions" but... if I am not mistaken, the regulations were put there because the cars were getting way too fast and a lot of the drivers were dying. I'm a total F1 noob but I do remember that it was some ridiculous number of driver deaths per year, back in the no regulations era.
By the time Pikes Peak banned motorcycles in 2021, only 7 drivers died, 4 of them were on bikes. Over the span of 101 years (at the time).
And keep in mind Pikes Peak has FAR LESS regulations than any FIA-sanctioned bodies. I wonder why. 🤔
SO MAD INSANE COOL UNIQUE CARS = DESIGNED BY GORDON MURRAY
.
Anyone disagree?
Just curious if at some points rules on the rear wing wasn't clear enough for anyone to think of it, to make a DRS like system?
There was.
Don't remember who and when, but a team managed with a flexible rear wing, meaning it was a bit flattened at high speed, reducing the drag.
Needless to say it was banned shortly after but birthed the DRS.
8:00 im sorry none of them look weird to me. Like the cars aren't supposed to look a certain way, I like speed and tight turns.
F1 is just teams saying "hmmmm... this helps us go faster legally" then the FiA saying "understood, we'll ban that as soon as possible."
I feel like there should also be an Ugly Clause. Like, “hey these x wings are technically legal but look stupid and we don’t want to be associated with this.” It could go to a vote to keep it fair.
"...and we're all glad about that."😆
The FIA's restrictions are getting stupid. What's even racing anymore? What are we racing for? For the fastest car? The fastest driver? Because that question alone puts in question the entire rulebook
"if this wing were to break off during a race and hit a car, it could cause a massive accident"
the driver with no halo: -_-
True efficient and pure function IS beautiful
Oh! I was waiting for the 'Walrus nose' of the FW26! It was weird. Not ugly.... just weird (and fast).
that caterham could satisfy a lot more than just the regulations
The 2014 cars were hideous, not only because of the nose, but those narrow rear wings too.
I didnt always watch F1 but I was always a car guy, and i remember hearing/seeing about the F1 2014 "noses" thinking what in the hell is that thing lol now im glad i know the reasoning and its always funny too look back
I personally find that the modern F1 regulations have 1 major issue. The strictness of the body regulations means that every car basically looks the same, leaving only liveries to express some design creativity. The sameness of the cars isn't a huge deal to most, but I cannot get over it, and I don't know why.
2014: enter the squidward car
Why did you change the title D: It used to be why are these F1 cars so ugly D:
I'm not even a racecar designer and yet I get a magnificent swindler's delight just thinking about how they come up with clever ways to get around the rules without cheating.
One minute ago? Yes please.