Red Bull accuse Ferrari of having a manually adjustable ride height system
- Thread starter Brogan
- Start date
I remember it making a hell of difference to the lap time of the car though, once it was removed though and in a way it is a bit like adjusting the ride height as if memory serves it stabilized the car in the corners make the car more aerodynamically efficient under braking or something like that...
The Brawn was completely legal and it wasn't the only car with that type of diffuser at the start of the season, Button didn't win more races is because Brawn didn't have any money to develop the car and so lost any advantage mid season not because of any changes forced on them through legality of design....
It certainly did make a big difference. It worked by eliminating the short-period "chatter" in the suspension travel (actually, most likely the undamped movement in the tyre wall) and kept the body of the car (and hence the wings) at a much more constant height above the road surface. That improved both suspension control and the efficacy of the wings, improving cornering performance. Renault argued that its role was principally related to the suspension dynamics, the FIA disagreed and "decided" that the primary action was aerodynamic.
I never really understood that ruling, as surely the whole of the job of the suspension is to keep the car off the road. If you are going to argue that well-controlled suspension travel is primarily an aerodynamic feature the surely you need to be running fixed wheels and solid tyres. Yet another bizarre and illogical ruling from the FIA, but hey, we're used to that.
I never really understood that ruling, as surely the whole of the job of the suspension is to keep the car off the road. If you are going to argue that well-controlled suspension travel is primarily an aerodynamic feature the surely you need to be running fixed wheels and solid tyres. Yet another bizarre and illogical ruling from the FIA, but hey, we're used to that.
My argument wasn't really to judge whether the mass damper was legal or not just that it made a big difference to lap time and rightly or wrongly the FIA told them to get rid and my main point is that no championship points were removed and so sets a precedent for not deducting championship points under similar circumstances in the future.
I only point this out because some people feel that if Red Bull or Ferrari are found guilty then championship points should be removed...
I only point this out because some people feel that if Red Bull or Ferrari are found guilty then championship points should be removed...
The difference is though Mephistopheles, the mass damper required a rule change to make it illegal.
There has been no rule change with regards to this - the rule has always stated a tool must be used to change it.
There has been no rule change with regards to this - the rule has always stated a tool must be used to change it.
I didn't know that, In fact I didn't know they could do that mid season, I have heard of clarification of a rule but not a completely new rule to make something illegal I must admit to being slightly shocked to hear it so in that case I will recant my argument..
It would be good to know which ever way it happened 
I know one year they made outboard rear view mirrors illegal after the season had started and cars with them had to change them but I think that was done on safety grounds...
I know one year they made outboard rear view mirrors illegal after the season had started and cars with them had to change them but I think that was done on safety grounds...
Just looking through my 2006 FIA archive now - there are some fascinating documents there.
It's surprising how much you forget.
Edit: What I will say though is that the FIA were consulted before the season started and passed the mass damper system as legal, so for the FIA to ban it later made no sense. Evidence of the infamous Ferrari technical veto at work?
It's surprising how much you forget.
Edit: What I will say though is that the FIA were consulted before the season started and passed the mass damper system as legal, so for the FIA to ban it later made no sense. Evidence of the infamous Ferrari technical veto at work?
landogeorgelewis1
Champion Elect
Red Bull need to be careful when it comes to complaining about another team. They've not exactly been the legal team themselves. IMHO Red Bull should be given either a grid drop for both drivers and both starting on the back row or the whole team should be excluded from the 2012 calendar. Can't see this happening as RED BULL are now the new Ferrari in F1 IMHO.
There was a very good reason for the mass damper being declared illegal. Ferrari, and others, had tried to make it work but couldn't. Since it was in the days when Ferrari were allowed to decide what was or was not legal it had to go.
To be honest I think the mass damper was a brilliant piece of technology and a master class in engineering I do not think it should have been banned it should have been developed further so it could be used on road cars to stabilize them under braking and possibly make the roads safer, after all isn't that what F1 is partly about? to develop new innovations to be passed down to the car industry for the road user.
When was the last time any F1 tech enhanced a road car? even KERS was first postulated in the 1950's for goodness sake....
When was the last time any F1 tech enhanced a road car? even KERS was first postulated in the 1950's for goodness sake....
How do you know they were illegal at those races? It is possible it was instituted and discovered all at the same race. Are you privy to information I don't have?
I find that position interesting. Excluding the entire team from 2012 would include excluding the drivers. Yet when McLaren were caught in the biggest cheat in F1 history in 2007, the constructor points were eradicated, yet the drivers got to keep all of their points, even though they were earned in illegal cars. Do you now advocate eliminating Alonso and Hamilton from the 2007 results?
