BBC Home

Explore the BBC

41 comments

user rating: 3 star

Red Bull Ride Height Adjuster?

Formula One
by Jack Roberts (U2733038) 27 March 2010
comment on the article

There are noises coming from the paddock (notably from Martin Whitmarsh and James Allen) that Red Bull and maybe Ferrari and some others are using ride height adjusters, which would explain their dominance in qualifying.

Links:

news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/mot...

www.jamesallenonf1.com/2010/...

Apparently, the Ferrari system is obvious and manual, but Red Bull have something more sophisticated that means the height changes when fuel is put in the car during qualifying as well as lowering during the race as fuel is used.

Martin Whitmarsh seems to be under the impression that such systems were illegal, but says that McLaren are now working on something and hope to have it on the car in time for the Chinese GP.

The 1st design controversy went to McLaren's rear wing, now we have this. I wonder if there's anything else to come?

UPDATE: Ross Brawn joins the party: www.autosport.com/news/repor...

Latest 10 comments

Read members' comments or add your own
comment by LV (U14418189)

posted Apr 11, 2010

Think on this - a cleverly designed spring/damper system can maintain a CONSTANT ride height. So, arguably, the ride height is not being 'adjusted', it is being 'maintained' and would require no input from the driver or mechanics.
A subtle interpretation of the rules.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 13, 2010

I presume adjustments can be made up until the end of qually? So is it feasible to run low height, set a fast lap, increase the height, go out for a circuit and then into parc ferme?
I think only the tyres from the fastest lap have to be used, or does the whole setup?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 13, 2010

and Hamilton, he was a british champion? or do you support Jenson more between the two?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 13, 2010

by cilurnum (U5564602)
Well, yes it almost certainly is because no one is anywhere near the car to adjust it. {NOT LEGAL}

It can also be adjusted on the grid before the race.{NOT LEGAL}
-----
This is going to be fascinating, the FIA have effectively stopped McLaren developing a system, but say what RB are doing is OK. It's a conundrum.
The options are
1 hidden illegal device
2 illegal procedure
3 genius circumvention
4 just tyre pressure

So will the RBs still speed up by 1/2sec in qualifying on saturday? And when do Ferrari tweak their ride height without starting from the pit lane?

Oh for the good old days when hidden Launch Control was triggered by the 'jump start' circuit in the grid. At least we knew where we stood then (30 metres behind the Benetton)...

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by me (U13892378)

posted Apr 13, 2010

Hmmm. So let me ask this. If your suspension setting is linked to ..and I use the term loosely.. the 'fuel gauge', (ie. the more fuel in, automatically the electrics raise the ride height), is that legal or illegal? You haven't so much as touched the car - other than to put the fuel in - so have you broken parc ferme rules - seems not. Yet the more fuel, the higher the ride height. Simple really, don't know why none of them have thought of that... winkeye

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 13, 2010

I dont understand why on one point such as brakes they are all shouting "oh we cant possibly use steel discs. This is the pinnacle of engineering and motorsport and to shackle it in such a crude way would be unthinkable!!", even though it would hugely increase stopping distances and provide a lot more overtaking into corners and yet they are quite happy to not allow active ride adjustment. Does the system on the Audi R8 among others use something that could be tweaked to perform exactly the automatic ride height control that these F1 fragilities seem to require to perform. The MagneRide system can tweak the suspension up to 1,000 times a second. Not just do it once before qually and change it for the race, but have it change 1,000 times/second continuously throughout qualifying and the race. Id rather they allowed that and gave them shoddy brakes myself. Faster cars that take longer to slow down. That has to mean more opportunity for the overtake.

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by me (U13892378)

posted Apr 13, 2010

OK...Well let's take that argument to its logical conclusion then - no brakes at all, but they can have a hole in the floor they can stick their feet through winkeye

Methinks the brakes issue might just have something to do with safety and not slamming into another car at 180mph if avoidable, rather than how far before a corner they have to hit the things....

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 13, 2010

The steel brakes still work. They just add 50m to the stopping distance. The point was though if it is so essential that the latest technology is used, why doesnt that stand for active suspension too?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 14, 2010

I have driven Citroens for much of the past twenty years and they all have automatic ride height adjustment to 'maintain' ride height that works for fuel, luggage and aerodynamic loads, without manual intervention. How about a Citroen Diesel GO car?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 18, 2010

It took me 10 minutes to read and understand the rules concerning ride hight adjustment, and concluded that a manual/mechanical system used while the car is stationary to adjust ride hight is legal. The issue of park ferme conditions being irrelevant for those cars in the top 10 shootout as they are qualifying with race fuel, and obviously starting the race with the same fuel load, negating the need for adjustment between Q3 and race day.

add comment | complain about this comment

Comment on this article

Sorry, you can only contribute to 606 during opening hours. These are 0900-2300 UK time, seven days a week, but may vary to accommodate sporting events and UK public holidays.

RATE THIS ARTICLE

Rate Breakdown

  • 5 31.25%
    5 votes
  • 4 6.25%
    1 votes
  • 3 12.50%
    2 votes
  • 2
    0 votes
  • 1 50.00%
    8 votes

average rating:
2.69 from 16 votes