The Illegal Formula One Car Thread!

[Craig HP]

Many F1 cars have been banned over the sports years, and others haven't, but have still been the subject of massive controversy. And all because they were not legal. However, usually these banned machines were infact the most intresting. So how many can we find. Here's one to start of...

Benetton-Ford B194- 1994

Now this is one of those illegal cars that never got banned. After 1993, all driver aids were banned, and in 1994 all the teams started without them, well most of them anyway. Some rival teams claimed that Benetton had found a way to violate the FIA-imposed ban on electronic aids, including Traction Control and Launch Control. On investagtion, the FIA did not manage to find the banned "Traction Control" system in the cars software. However, they did manage to find "Start Sequence" (Launch Control) which had also been banned. But since the FIA did not have enough evidence to prove that the software in question had been used, the case had to be dropped. Though a couple of years ago, someone brought a Benetton B194 directly from Benetton. And when they drove it, they said it was "very similar a modern day F1 car, as it has TRACTION CONTROL". Obviously the FIA didn't look closley enough!

Edit: The Benneton B194 that Schumacher was driving got disqualified from the Belgain GP in 1994 for having an illegal skidblock!

 

[Roo]

It was disqualified, yes, but that was only Schumacher's car; the team didn't raise the car enough to clear the kerbs sufficiently. Jos Verstappen in the sister Benetton was classifed third.

 

[daan]

Here. Have a car that was properly banned.

Brabham BT46 "fan car". Won a race. Got banned.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brabham_BT46

 

[wfooshee]

Dang, the fan car was gonna be my entry when I saw the thread title.

So . . . . Lotus 88 double-chassis. The tub, carrying the driver, engine, and suspension was softly sprung to reduce the car's sensitivity to pitch and roll. The visible bodywork, carrying the wings and ground effects, was actually a shell around the tub, connected to the suspension arms by very stiff springs, to minimize its motion relative to the ground, allowing the underbody tunnels to keep their ground effects working no matter the car's actual attitude.

The car was entered at Long Beach in 1981, approved by the stewards, but DQ'd during Saturday practice with a rules "clarification." The second chassis was ruled to be a movable aerodynamic device acting directly on the suspension, which had been illegal since the high-wing failures in 1968. Just as much of a stretch as the ruling a couple of years ago that the Renault inertial damper constituted a movable aero device.

Legal at the time, but would not be legal now, the Tyrrell P-34 6-wheeler. Ken Tyrrell had Goodyear make a special small front tire which he could enclose within the bodywork for better aero. the width allowed by the rules made for handling similar to a tricycle, so later cars had wider front track, negating some of the aero advantage.

And the illegal skid plate wasn't a ban, it was a DQ, from Schumacher's judicious use of kerbs wearing the plate down below the allowance. A spin across the kerbs didn't help.

 

[Motominded]

wow he took mine ^ *looking*

 

[Craig HP]

Dang, the fan car was gonna be my entry when I saw the thread title.

So . . . . Lotus 88 double-chassis. The tub, carrying the driver, engine, and suspension was softly sprung to reduce the car's sensitivity to pitch and roll. The visible bodywork, carrying the wings and ground effects, was actually a shell around the tub, connected to the suspension arms by very stiff springs, to minimize its motion relative to the ground, allowing the underbody tunnels to keep their ground effects working no matter the car's actual attitude.

The car was entered at Long Beach in 1981, approved by the stewards, but DQ'd during Saturday practice with a rules "clarification." The second chassis was ruled to be a movable aerodynamic device acting directly on the suspension, which had been illegal since the high-wing failures in 1968. Just as much of a stretch as the ruling a couple of years ago that the Renault inertial damper constituted a movable aero device.

Legal at the time, but would not be legal now, the Tyrrell P-34 6-wheeler. Ken Tyrrell had Goodyear make a special small front tire which he could enclose within the bodywork for better aero. the width allowed by the rules made for handling similar to a tricycle, so later cars had wider front track, negating some of the aero advantage.

And the illegal skid plate wasn't a ban, it was a DQ, from Schumacher's judicious use of kerbs wearing the plate down below the allowance. A spin across the kerbs didn't help.

Cool, nice explantion there to! 👍 Though can we only have cars that were Illegal during their time please. The Tyrell was perfectly legal then, and there was never any controversy over it from what I know, so please only use ones that were illegal!

 

[Blake]

Customer car much?

 

[daan]

The Tyrrell was allowed to have 6 wheels, but this one was banned.

Williams FW08B

 

[Metar]

And another Williams experiment banned before seeing a Grand Prix: the experimental Williams CVT transmission, tested in an FW15C chassis.

 

[Craig HP]

Thank Lord it was banned. Drivers have been aided enough until now with Traction Control, Launch Control, ABS Braking, Active Suspension, and then imagine CVT been added on to all of them. It would be an absouloute disastar for Formula One!

 

[GT4 genius]

Another car that was banned, or rather technology, was Mclaren's in 1998 for the use of a normal braking system aswell as a rear wheel one.

Also it isnt a car but a trye that was banned and effected all Michelan runners in I think it was 2003. When the trye became warm the contact patch widened and therefore greatly increased the level of grip, but when it cooled it went back to normal size so it never failed an FIA measurment test. However Ferrari noticed, or heard, about it and informed the FIA.

 

[Metar]

Thank Lord it was banned. Drivers have been aided enough until now with Traction Control, Launch Control, ABS Braking, Active Suspension, and then imagine CVT been added on to all of them. It would be an absolute disaster for Formula One!

CVT is no aid at all. As this particular one was built at the height of technology (ABS, LC, TC, Active Everythings, semi-automatic gearboxes) for F1 cars, it wouldn't have made a difference as a driver-aid.

It would make a difference in speed. A regular gearbox forces the engine to operate at less-than-optimal power-ranges. A CVT-equipped car could cruise the whole race at the optimal RPM - modern ones would enjoy acceleration at a constant 19k RPMs. It is rumored that Coulthard's testing-laps were over a second quicker than his own in the regular car.

Also, it wouldn't spell disaster for F1 - it would mean a revolution. Engines would be built completely different. Usability of the engine would be skipped, and engines would've achieved even higher horsepower-figures and maximum revs, far earlier - because all you'd need is a bitchload of power somewhere in the upper ranges.

 

[Blake]

IMO it would spell disaster for F1. I don’t think many people could be excited by an engine that sits in the power band all the way down the straight. The most evocative sound in racing is as the engine note changes going up and down through the gears. It’s hard to inspire a sense of speed and passion with a monotone engine.

 

[Metar]

That's the point - it's only a problem for the fans. Driver-wise, the only change is a faster car - and not necessarily easier to drive. Though, if you look at NASCAR and IRL, they cruise at the same RPM for a whole race, and nobody cares.

Wait, people care. That's the one thing that boggled me about NASCAR and IRL fans - they speak so highly of their big V8s and how wonderful they sound - but that constant 11kRPM noise just sounds like a chainsaw, not a "song" like a regular, non-oval vehicle's sound. I guess if F1 went the CVT way, people would leave F1 massively - there really doesn't seem to be a thrill in watching a car at constant revs. Even the longer straights in F1 are becoming boring, now that everyone stops at 19kRPM...

 

[peterjford]

That's the one thing that boggled me about NASCAR and IRL fans - they speak so highly of their big V8s and how wonderful they sound - but that constant 11kRPM noise just sounds like a chainsaw, not a "song" like a regular, non-oval vehicle's sound.

I am not a big fan of NASCAR, but you need to watch, or actually hear a race on a shorter track. There is a lot of change in speed, and therefore engine note on the shorter tracks.

 

[superberkut]

Other than those nominated already, not many cars remain. The 1981 Brabham BT49 should have been banned, but it was not really the superiority of the car as it was the tactics of the Brabham race crews, often running underweight on various occasions, hydropneumatic suspension aside (I lied). The commissioner did not see what was really the advantage of the suspension and water tanks aboard the Brabham for 'brake cooling' (they served no purpose other than ballast to meet the minimum weight requirements and were emptied after inspection) Nelson Piquet was thus able to beat Gilles Villeneuve for pole position at Monaco that year and defeat Carlos Reutemann for the championship.

Here is a picture for those unfamiliar with its appearance:

Edit: If the water tanks described belong to the BT50, please let me know.

 

[tigermoth737]

I'm pretty sure the 'water cooled brakes' idea was only used in 1982. When Piquet won the Brazilian Grand prix in 1982 from Keke Rosberg they were both disqualified for having the illegal ballast as you say. Therefore third placed man Alain Prost was declared the winner upon exclusion of Piquet and Rosberg. You are correct about the suspension, but the Brabham wasn't the only example of this, many other teams were using the same system. They would raise their cars up to clear 'parc-ferme' and would then lower them once back on the track.

One last thing, I wouldn't call the BT49 superior, it was challenged by the Williams team all the way to the last race in Las Vegas.

 

[Ja5on]

Edit: The Benneton B194 that Schumacher was driving got disqualified from the Belgain GP in 1994 for having an illegal skidblock!

the skidblock was damaged due to him spinning and running over kerbs this made the skidblock worn in an uneven way. FIA deemed that the wear was due to illegal ride height.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ggo9bcGlzr8

 

[wrcsti]

That's the point - it's only a problem for the fans. Driver-wise, the only change is a faster car - and not necessarily easier to drive. Though, if you look at NASCAR and IRL, they cruise at the same RPM for a whole race, and nobody cares.

Wait, people care. That's the one thing that boggled me about NASCAR and IRL fans - they speak so highly of their big V8s and how wonderful they sound - but that constant 11kRPM noise just sounds like a chainsaw, not a "song" like a regular, non-oval vehicle's sound. I guess if F1 went the CVT way, people would leave F1 massively - there really doesn't seem to be a thrill in watching a car at constant revs. Even the longer straights in F1 are becoming boring, now that everyone stops at 19kRPM...

NASCAR slow down from about 200mph in most speedways to about 140-170mph in the turns. depending on track that is about from 9200rpm to about 6700rpm. Very big change for just driving in circles

 

[wfooshee]

the skidblock was damaged due to him spinning and running over kerbs this made the skidblock worn in an uneven way. FIA deemed that the wear was due to illegal ride height.

Of course they did. That's what the skid block is there for, to enforce a minimum ride height. If it's worn, the car got too low, they don't care how.

I know you were differentiating between "illegal" and "worn" skid plate, but it sounded like you were saying the FIA made an unsubstantiated claim. Maybe they did, but their only requirement is that the plate have a certain thickness after the race. It didn't, he was out. To them, the kerb-climbing was irrelevant.

 

[Metar]

You are correct about the suspension, but the Brabham wasn't the only example of this, many other teams were using the same system. They would raise their cars up to clear 'parc-ferme' and would then lower them once back on the track.

The Brabham suspension was perhaps the most legal one of them all. While most teams used a simple switch to lower the car, the Brabham suspension was designed to lower the car automatically because of the aerodynamic forces.

 

[superberkut]

I'm pretty sure the 'water cooled brakes' idea was only used in 1982. When Piquet won the Brazilian Grand prix in 1982 from Keke Rosberg they were both disqualified for having the illegal ballast as you say. Therefore third placed man Alain Prost was declared the winner upon exclusion of Piquet and Rosberg. You are correct about the suspension, but the Brabham wasn't the only example of this, many other teams were using the same system. They would raise their cars up to clear 'parc-ferme' and would then lower them once back on the track.

One last thing, I wouldn't call the BT49 superior, it was challenged by the Williams team all the way to the last race in Las Vegas.

Thank you for the clarification.

Does anybody remember the Lotus Formula One car that used, 'Ferguson Formula'? (it was a 60s-era car, I believe) That car may have been banned...

 

[Metar]

The Ferguson P99 4WD?

There was the Lotus 63 which used a 4WD system, but it wasn't banned - just abandoned, because it was so darn slow. Others - Brabham, McLaren, even Cosworth (though they never raced it) - experimented with the idea, but it never caught on. It was just too slow, in those days.

However, in these days, when 4WD has the chance to be very competitive, it is outlawed. I believe BAR experimented with a front differential of sorts in their 006... Link.

 

[superberkut]

Thank you. Four-wheel drive in F1 had come quite a bit from this car to the Lotus 56B, apparently.