You know, taking that into account, and if we remove the steering system from the front wheels, and what activates the steering wheel are the brakes on both the left and right sides of the car, as if it were some kind of track system
Weird choice by the fia to say it was illegal, since it wasn't really a 4 wheel steering system. They should have changed the rules during the off season to explicitly say it was illegal, not deeming it legal for then banning it in a span of 2 races Ferrari international assistance was how people called the fia back in the day, and i like how it sounds 😂
@@Yousuck00 apparently it was a grey zone technology, so they did the right thing by banning it for the next season. But if it was illegal, then they shouldn't have let them run with it What i don't like is how the fia banned the mass damper during mid 2006 (in the middle of the title fight), after letting renault, and other teams too, using it for 2005 and half 06 You either ban things immediately, or say they're legal for 1 season only, if you don't like the solution they came up with, but it still is within the rules
@@AJZulu i wouldn't be surprised Ferrari already was the most important team back then, and they had a rather young star in schumacher driving for them. Ecclestone said that him and the fia helped ferrari winning multiple times, and that everyone was interested in having a competitive Ferrari since it was good for the sport And said that merc 2014-16 dominance was also due to the fact that brawn switched from ferrari to merc and carried very important infos about the new engines regs with him, that others didn't know
"Rulesmithing" is a term used in tabletop gaming (and probably lots of other places), and I think it fits F1 to a tee. Give engineers and physics nerds a set of rules and let them figure out ways to follow those rules creatively. All the teams do it when they think they can get away with it, and all of them whine like schoolchildren when their rival team does it too.
There was an interview with Steve Nichols where he said that ironically, weeks after Ferrari got it banned, they presented the exact same system to the FIA McLaren had devised. Brawn and Co. Left red-faced... As they discovered they banned the very system they were developing and were now arguing its legality.
This is probably the real reason it was banned... if it's legal, eventually everyone is going to have to develop it, and anyone not running it might as well be racing F1.5.
Brilliant video here. Appreciate it. 1 question here though... Were FIA Stewards not checking the car post race everytime ? As I know, FIA checks weight, underbody plank etc after each race. Why it was only uncovered when photographer took photo of retired car.
It was uncovered to the public and other teams. As far as I know, the FIA will have deemed it legal privately with no obligation to make Mclaren’s design public
@@TheSnaveeelPlaysGames Yep, it passed all the rules about "the driver must pilot the car alone, unaided" and whatnot at the time since it was just a simple mechanical connection. There were no rules about having a brake pedal only connected to one wheel XD
Tractors and other large farm machinery have had split brakes for over 50 years, one break pedal for each of the 2 drive wheels that were close enough so you could use them both at the same time. When using a rear wheel steering vehicle you can turn on one wheel.
This was an interesting bit of design and engineering, but not cheating under the rules of the time. While it was truly amazing to see it used in F1, it was being used off road quite a bit before F1. My Dad and many of his friends build “sand rails” or “dune buggies” with steel tube hand-made frames powered by air cooled VW power trains. Most of these buggies had steering brakes, separate activators for the rear brakes. Our buggies used hand levers instead of an extra pedal or so, but they accomplished the same thing. They allowed the buggy to make tighter turns (sometimes we used them to steer when we could manage to get the front end in the air).
All they had to do was get a cutter brake from a sand rail. It is on tractors and sandrails. It is alongside regular brakes and hand operation or foot operation. In Michigan that is what sandrails use to avoid trees on tight trails at high speed.
If you haven't done it already, I'd be curious to see a video on the short-lived four wheel steering system used by Benetton on the B193, the races in Japan and Australia I believe.
Another reason brake steer should be brought back is to provide a greater challenge to the drivers. It's not a driver aid as it gives them more to do. It will make the sport slightly more about the driver than the car.
I was so fed up they seemingly banned that recent Mercedes front wing. Really wanted to see what it could do. This is what F1 is about, those cheeky innovations. Atleast let them run it for the rest o the season and not ban them immediately, and not mask them as cheating.
I have a 'Hot Wheel' of this car...I am a 'H W' lunatic, with boxes and bags of oened and un opened cars....Specifically, American only street and race cars, but some forign monsters...But this car appeared ,as if I went shopping in my sleep. Very possible. Great tech and detail, history....Great videos.
i think the system fall to the "passive 4 wheel steering" some cars nowadays have traction control to limit the inner wheelspin to make the car better at cornering, i even think diffs could be called passive 4 wheel steering to some extent
Mazda does use this brake steer method on the mx-5. They call it Kinematic Posture Control (KPC). It’s computer controlled so no second brake pedal but it does the same general thing.
Sports cars use this now (although its automatic), on Chevy cars its called torque vectoring, that use the abs system to independently control the speed and braking of other 4 wheels while turning.
I don't understand... I've always heard that one of the selling points of F1 was that it wholeheartedly embraces technological innovation, how most of the really huge improvements in safety and performance technology on the road originated in F1. But they don't allow electronic driving aids, which weren't all that uncommon even in the late 90's when this happened, and are basically ubiquitous today?
As with all of the cockpit operated variables, it makes racing harder so it's strange to consider it cheating. There's an alternate timeline where sideways cockpit operated brake balance became a thing. I have a hard enough time thinking about moving front and rear.
F1, being a constructors series, rather than a spec series like Indy and NASCAR, should be anything goes save for a set of safety regs and maybe a max. size/weight limit. May the best design and execution win.
I mean slowing the rotation of the inner wheels is a form of steering. Because tanks with 2 tracks going at speed just reduce the speed of one of the tracks to turn.
Hey @Driver61 could you maybe do a video on F1 running 4 cylinder engines. I know that might not be everyone's cup of tea and the chances of running v10's 12's or even 8's being so slim, if you look at how powerful bmw's 4 cylinder f1 engine was that brabham and Benetton used and how successful the Japan Super Formula series is with their 4 cylinders I'm sure F1 could make a success out of it. Sure the engines that is used in the Japan Super Formula series doesn't rev as high as F1 today but in my opinion they sound better. With the planned removal of the mgu-h and an inline 4 cylinder being slimmer than a V6 it could possibly mean slimmer and shorter as well as lighter cars. The Japan Super Formula cars weigh only 660kg with the driver included. Also manufacturers like Mercedes, Redbull with Honda and Renault for Alpine all have big experience and great success with 4 cylinders, I'm not sure of Ferrari but even the new comer Audi or at least VW has experience and success with 4 cylinders so that would mean no team would have a major advantage by being more experienced with those engines and it would be something fresh for F1. Also there were talks of increasing the power output of the mgu-k so with a 2l turbo 4 cylinder engine that makes about 600hp (not impossible the super gt cars make 600- 650hp and uses the same engine as the super formula) with the mgu-k you could be looking at 800 - 900hp.
I know weight is critical in these cars but they could have designed a valve apparatus to switch between the 2 rear wheels when the steering wheel was turned but it would probably weigh too much
But.. you could of had it left or right.. if the master cylinder.. active left or right for terms of angle of the steering wheel.. set sensor on the wheel.. so it then sets which side is then inside because of the turn..
Even agreeing that the system helps "steer" the car, wouldn't it be a 3 wheel steering, instead of 4 as the rules say? Was a very clever solution to "hook" the car around the corner acting like an amplified differential's force. Anyway, happy Mclaren won that championship anyway. 1998 and 1999 Mclarens are still my favourites F1 cars!!!
Tractors have been using steering brakes since the 1930's. They were to both help manoeuvring and also performed the roll of a limited slip diff before diff lock became standard in the 1960's. The FIA in their wisdom seem to love banning cheap and simple devices only for them to be replaced by less effective, more expensive versions. To ban this system on the grounds on the grounds of it amounting to 4 wheel steering is bs, but really if that is their interpretation then they should also ban limited slip diffs and the drivers options to make adjustments.
01:17 Understeer is bad at the exit, because of the rear tyres? At the exit it's basically going out of the corner, accelerating. Turning in sharply is important without understeer. 🤔
I think it was very clever and legal. It's another brake pedal, that drove 'em mad (that's funny). It's called innovation and adaptation. It's how those cars got to where they are today. I don't like banning, the mentality from either side...I don't see how it's like active suspension, especially computer controlled.
It's a shame it was banned, I would have loved to see a version that had one brake pedal for each side and requiring both feet for full braking. That would make trail braking impossible ( i think) and would make for an interesting choice.
Regarding the last part about naming it brakesteer: Imagine Mercedes arguing DAS was installed only so the drivers could move their sore elbows a little bit.
They called it brake-steer themselves? How can that not be seen as four wheel steering (thereby cheating) even if it's not what the usual idea of four wheel steering is, it did certainly achieve that result effectively enough to taint results.
Let F1 engineers go at it with the brakes no regs.. they will probaply in the modern day make the brakes all operate on their own. Depending on which tire has the most load going into the corner
Literally just watched a 2 Year Old Merc video yesterday. The Engineer mentioned braking individual wheels would be a system he would love to increase performance. Neither Video was algorithm
If only the FIA never banned any F1 tech. We could've witnessed a monster car that can lap Nurburgring in under 4 minutes unleashed in the world of motorsport.
I wonder if a similair systems woild be possible in formula E. As in put a different amount of torque on the wheels while cornering. Also would be really cool to see a formula race with no rules
Sounds to me like the judges were not impartial. Imagine that. I know nothing about F1 that I didn't learn from this channel but I swear this isn't the first time I've heard of Ferrari benefitting from an adjudication.
People saying: "this is why exactly I watch F1", so you mean you like other teams getting genius ideas like this banned just because they can't copy them? That's just bullshit
I've been following F1 for a few years and this "rule book loophole" seems to make things spicy and that's probably why it's not addressed in addition to leaving room for creativity. If this is to be solved, "cheating" needs to be CLEARLY defined in page 1 of FIA rule book. e.g CHEATING: any development, design, engineering, or other form of activities that are not mentioned in the followed rules are considered cheating. Any claims, actions, or systems that aim to go round the rules by stating "this was not in the rules" is considered invalid. This would make it clear that what is allowed and everything else should be submitted for review and for fair practice all teams notified if accepted.
While it's clearly not 4 wheel steering, you could argue that it is three wheel steering. I really don't see why it should have been banned. Everyone else could have implemented it, once they knew about it, and since the wheels aren't changing direction, just one of the rear wheels is changing speed, I think it's just a really clever innovation. It seems like the FIA bans technologies simply because it gave one team a very big advantage.
Cheating is doing something that breaks the rules. Abusing an inaccuracy or flaw is not cheating. I would still argue that Abusing an inaccuracy is not fair. Everyone knew what the rules meant, so they didn't look into that. McLaren pushed it to the border of the rules. Nevertheless I love seeing such genius ideas work.
I think it was perfectly legal, but "steering" needed to be better defined, and the name gave wimpy decision makers an out. And why couldn't Ferrari duplicate it? Sounds like a case of NIH (Not Invented Here). It is all about keeping the race close and safe. Close is more exciting for the consumer fans. That being said, how close? A half second doesn't sound like a blow out season while the other guys figure it out. If it was 2 seconds a lap the racing could get boring. If F1 brake hydraulics are anything like normal road car brakes (on steroids for sure), there really shouldn't be a fail-safe problem with a check valve or two, and as you said, cost isn't a factor for this mod. Like a lot of people say below, I am here for the engineering. I don't like outlawing any tech that doesn't affect safety or make a race a blowout (cost can be another factor, but that isn't the case here).
