Motorsports Trivia Thread!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cap'n Jack
  • 7,210 comments
  • 390,823 views
Ryk
View attachment 549089

Pretty simple but what was the purpose of this step on the side of the 1983 Brabham BT52 (Picture shows the BT52B as it stands out better.)
It wasn't on the initial version of the car then after the first (few?) races it mysteriously appeared... but why?

It was the first post-ground-effect car, but as @Dotini has already suggested vortex generation (apparently incorrectly) I'll go with something more obvious... was it a little step for a little driver to get in comfortably?
 
Was there a rule in place that stated the underside of the car had to be X wide at that section, so the pieces were used just to satisfy this rule?
 
Ryk
View attachment 549089

Pretty simple but what was the purpose of this step on the side of the 1983 Brabham BT52 (Picture shows the BT52B as it stands out better.)
It wasn't on the initial version of the car then after the first (few?) races it mysteriously appeared... but why?


Has it anything to do with minimum width regulations?
 
bra83.jpg

Vortex generation device - No.
Little step for little drivers - No.
Car Width - No.

(Hey good tries!)

picture above (Rio 1983) was before they fixed the car...
 
A very, very wild guess, looking at the exact positioning of the steps, was there a rule along the lines of "mirrors may not protrude outside the bodywork when viewed from above" or something? It can't be a coincidence that they're lined up with such precision.
 
A very, very wild guess, looking at the exact positioning of the steps, was there a rule along the lines of "mirrors may not protrude outside the bodywork when viewed from above" or something? It can't be a coincidence that they're lined up with such precision.

This is it.
Flat bottom rules dictated no part of the car may protrude outside of the flat bottom of the car to prevent any attempt to get any ground effect.
The mirrors protruded over the shadow of the flat bottom... Obviously these mirrors didn't generate any aero effect, but rules are rules so they had to put these little steps on the flat floor in case some other team protested the Brabham was, by the rules, illegal.
 
If someone has a good question, be my guest. I just had to voice my findings as the positioning of the steps seemed to be too perfect to be anything even remotely random.
 
I have been a teammate of Jo Winkelhock, Stefano Modena, Tom Kristensen and Eric van de Poele. Who am I?

Question covers more than one discipline.
 
I'm relying on you to provide your own seasons and series. It's not the person I have. :)

Ah. I just pulled a name out of the air that raced around that time and I thought could be correct :)
 
Tarquini? Partnered Winkelhock at AGS in F1 and teammate of Modena at JAS in old DTM.

Very well thought out!

Gabriele Tarquini did partner Winkelhock at AGS (F1, 1989) and Modena at JAS Alfa Romeo (ITC, 1996) as well as Eric van de Poele at Fondmetal (F1, 1992) and Tom Kristensen at Honda (BTCC, 2000).
 
I think he won Le Mans before even starting in F1... so Alex Wurz? Probably not but it's all I got :D

Got it in one. Not many can say that they won Le Mans before coming anywhere near to starting their F1 career but Wurz won the 1996 Le Mans at the young age of 22 before getting a few races with Benetton in F1 a year later.
 
Got it in one. Not many can say that they won Le Mans before coming anywhere near to starting their F1 career but Wurz won the 1996 Le Mans at the young age of 22 before getting a few races with Benetton in F1 a year later.

Bur-limey, I got one :D :D

You go again, I'm caught by surprise :)
 
Just another to tick you over then. @SagarisGTB still has a turn.

I have been the teammate of Elio de Angelis, Andrea de Cesaris and Michael Andretti. Who am I?
 
Back