Among the possible measures considered for cost reduction in F1, the teams suggested a few days ago a possible return to active suspensions and a switch to 18-inch wheels on the single-seaters. Nonetheless, some observers are questioning the interest of such a change in the cost-cutting policy.<\/p>\n
This is particularly the case for Martin Brundle, a consultant for Sky Sports<\/i> and former driver for Tyrrell, McLaren, and Jordan, who is a bit concerned about these potential developments: \u00ab This concept and the 18-inch rims mean that you start over with your suspension as well as with the aero, because a large part of the suspension arm is in the tire sidewall with the 13-inch rims. \u00bb<\/p>\n
He fears single-seaters too embedded in the trajectory: \u00ab If you switch to 18 inches, you must put a lot more flexibility in your suspension. It’s a dream for aerodynamicists. My concern is that we will return to cars that look like Scalextric cars [the small electric circuits made of rails, ed]: glued to the road. \u00bb<\/p>\n
From a technical standpoint, he believes that active suspensions would be an advancement: “It’s the best of all [systems] \u2013 control of dampers, handling control, bumps, aero \u2013 the car just runs at a perfect angle,” he told our British colleagues at Autosport<\/i>.<\/p>\n
He wonders, however, if they would really be the source of savings: \u00ab How on earth that would save money, I don’t know because you would have to start all over again. I would have thought you would have to completely redesign your car, given this immense advantage. \u00bb<\/p>\n
On the side of Paddy Lowe, executive technical director of Mercedes, there is no doubt about the cost reduction: \u00ab I think, in a certain way, it would be simpler than what we currently have. If you look at the complexity of damper systems, inertia, complex kinematics, it would certainly not be more expensive. \u00bb<\/p>\n
Martin Brundle doesn’t back down, however: Paddy obviously knows a million times better than me about this kind of thing, but I would have thought it just opens up a whole new avenue of development and opportunities. There are advantages for the spectacle, but not in the expenses: The cars could follow each other more easily by having more downforce from the underbody than from higher surfaces. But I see that as being extremely expensive.<\/p>\n
Remarks that could be corroborated by those of Paddy Lowe, whose statements suggest an open door to a technological war in the field of active suspensions: \u00ab I think a single system would be a very bad idea. The interest should be in developing the technology and pushing it forward. \u00bb *Autosport* explains that discussions around this issue would focus on establishing a standard system.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Martin Brundle expressed his doubts about active suspensions as a possible area for cost reduction in the future.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":29,"featured_media":40362,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1,1749],"tags":[1543],"class_list":["post-15630","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-f1","category-news","tag-technique"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n