FIA is committed in a perennial struggle to ensure F1 cars to remain cars, and that means banning a lot of things that makes sense only on a F1 track. So downforce is allowed, but a suspension whose entire goal was to take advantage of the kind of downforce that only a F1 car has, is not.

@@neutronalchemist3241 But that kind of suspension could easily be adapted to an everyday car, or truck of varying types. F1 should be moderately unrestricted. Imagine the technology we could gain for our everyday cars if they were allowed to push just a little more. Look what we have already gained from F1 innovations

@@DaysofKnight It's the contrary actually. F1 technology can be transferred to normal cars only as long as a certain device that makes sense ony in a F1 track (think for example of the Brabham BT46 "fan car") doesn't become dominant. When the performances af the cars depend almost entirely on that particular device, every effort to develop things that makes sense on a normal car is halted, to evolve only the "important" one.

@@neutronalchemist3241 Pretty much every track day car in existence would benefit from FRIC suspension. Keeping the suspension level has been a struggle for the automobile's entire existence. "Irrelevant" my ass

The teams: _FRIC_

Dance? As far as I know McLaren's could do more. Such as active stabilization.

@@avada0 when they tested it in the pits they made it dance... 40 years before tesla...

@@stevenlarratt3638 i know what you are referring to

Hyper active suspension? F1 fairies mandate Ritalin. Innovation crushed once again by the timid. Honestly, they are such Weakmen, I'm utterly shocked that they have not yet twigged to the idea of giving everyone trophies. We wouldn't want anyone's fillings to be hurt, right?

I think citroen did it best 😁😁

FRIC isn't new, the Citroen DS19 had it all the way back in 1957...

I think there are one or two general production carts that use this suspension. I wonder why more went made.

Pay for youtube premium... I initially was against it, but then I realised what 1 hour of my time is worth compared to how much time I was wasting with ads.

The problem with Adblock is that the content creator then doesn't get paid. It's the ads that pay their bills and allow them to create this content. If you get youtu.be premium however, you can avoid the ads, but also support your favorite channels.

@@ke6gwf i know. i often watch youtube on mobile without adblock but depending on the time of day the ads are too much. not even 2mins without interruption it also kinda doesnt work: if unskippable i just look away and if skippable i watch the lower right corner

@@richardtickler8555 I have not seen an ad on UKposts for years lol The reason I originally signed up for Premium was so I could do background play on mobile, but boy it's worth it to guiltlessly not have any ads!

@@ke6gwf also you can download songs/videos and it is not only one device where you have 0 ads, it's also for TV useful! So when you got a smartphone, pc and TV it's worth it a lot. Also you don't have the music stopping and UKposts asking you if you still there :D

Lol, that's what i was saying

High rake has the highest badass factor tho

Hey Otmar, check out this high-rake

Jus' talkin' 'bout FRIC.

potassium be like..

Not irrational at all, it's completely silly that left/right roll heave control is allowed, but passive front /back pitch control is banned, wtf is the difference here?! Under the "aero dynamic aid" argument, well ban all suspension control then, the remaining mechanical grip could be managed purely by tyre pressure probably...

@@Mr.NiceUK probably it was too expensive to develop for teams. All of them agreed to a ban

@@Mr.NiceUK The "aerodynamic aid" argument is quite frustrating because almost any change to the car will affect aerodynamics, even the amount of fuel in the car will change the ride height and therefore affect the aerodynamics

@@mrfreckles666 brakes are aero devices under the FIA's logic xD

@@1320crusier You mean the brake ducts

Yeah its basically like longitudinal and diagonal torsion bars. How do you even set that up haha

welcome to f1 :P

@@BlogVomMax you know they still have a compression chamber where they can then attach the tubes onto. Depending on the purpose it would be higher or lower in that chamber

There actually were mechanical and hydraulic solutions on road legal cars that did that: Swiss Sauerer 4 MH (and its brothers 6MH and 8MH) purely mechanically, the well known Citroen DS 19 with Hydropneumatic and english car maker Austin with its Hydrolastic by electromachanical controlled hydraulic systems. Of course, electronic control gives more ways of active control and add even more complexity.

@@genius1a Was the hydropneumatic suspension on the ds 19 intertwined? Didnt know that

Are you an expert in not letting others do cool stuff (aka griefing)? :-P

@@ivan_pozdeev_u Do they have kids?

Good grief, WHY? FIA sucks. They turned a once interesting event into BORING. They are yet another embodiment of the communist mindset - uniformity dull and snooze-inspiring. They quell innovation through bans and drum up their own lame requirements like hybridization and so forth. Yuck.

1:10 bottom right

@@jacobbroughton6565 good fucking eyes m8

Room acoustics probably

@@rabmccudden683 Nope, that's clearly active noise cancellation trying to cancel all sounds but it voice thus make a strange digital noise whenever his voice is getting lower in amplitude ;)

@@Liace159 nope its an untreated room, flutter echo can sound like the effect you're talking about.

If my channel was as good as his I'd be dancing on boris Johnsons head

FRICing finally

bmc 1100. nuff said. 1100s were terrible

Can you share more information?

@@beardedginger3401 ukposts.info/have/v-deo/jZibhY6BbY-WyKc.html a good watch, guy really knows his stuff. And Engineering Explained has videos on it.

Yes but there are some serious trade-offs, especially up front. The geometry needed to get a significant amount of geometric anti-dive up front makes for very poor bump response, bad bump and roll caster change and a host of other problems. It's still useful, but only in moderation.

no problem! he already covered this a few years back so I am not surprised you couldn't find it. here's the link:ukposts.info/have/v-deo/nIGoaK1wjp2JxIU.html

@@alistairwhite8575 that was uncalled for

I knew it, I knew what I was going to hear and I still did it...

@@the_luggage but you needed to know for sure didn't you?

@@alistairwhite8575 I know that link too well... Not getting me

Aw crap, I broke my FRIC'ing drum! *tss

Aw fric, the banned FRIC suspension!

YEEEEEEES

bmc 1100. nuff said. 1100s were terrible

@@raymondo162 Terrible because of Hydrolastic, or something else?

It's 8mins. You don't need to skip anything.

The cars would probably look a lot more like LMP1 cars.

Returning to active suspension would go a long way in aiding overtaking. As the following car could dynamically adapt it's aero platform the leading's turbulent wake. TBH, while "fric" is banned POU is another answer to ride control. My favourite thing about F1 is watching brilliant engineer concocting ways around stringent regulations. Turns out blown diffusors, flexy bodywork and aero elasticity were being employed way back in the 70's and 80's. Designers have just developed every more elaborate ways of reengineering similar effects. Which is frustrating when people keep saying we're going back to ground effect cars, as if current aren't ground effect cars.😑

F1 probably wouldn't exist because the cars would be much more complex and therefore prohibitively expensive to develop.

@@Elbuarto like $400m annual budget expensive?

@@Elbuarto Going active now would be cheaper. The amount of money teams spend on passive systems today is staggering. With active, you have upfront costs for the system itself but after that, development consists of a software update.

I thought the same lol

Yes, the sound quality isn´t great

His voice doesn’t help either

I prefer the wall and wish you were here

This was introduced in road cars in the 50s

FIA is committed in a perennial struggle to ensure F1 cars to remain cars, and that means banning a lot of things that makes sense only on a F1 track. So downforce is allowed, but a suspension whose entire goal was to take advantage of the kind of downforce that only a F1 car has, is not.

FIA is committed in a perennial struggle to ensure F1 cars to remain cars, and that means banning a lot of things that makes sense only on a F1 track. So downforce is allowed, but a suspension whose entire goal was to take advantage of the kind of downforce that only a F1 car has, is not.

They get their glory for 1 or at most 2 seasons. Then they are banned because now other teams who might research their own innovative technologies now have to put money into that new successful tech of another team. By frequently banning such technologies, every team is even more eager to innovate to be able to surprise their competition with new tech, since they know that not many other teams will be able to utilize it. If anything this increases innovation overall since teams aren't just jumping to that one technology which works best and disregarding all others. The FIA decreases the bar such that more technologies are actually viable.

@@djhokage1 There's no reason that these innovations preclude other innovations. Teams would try to replicate other technologies that other teams do while making their own. There are still advantages for the team that first comes up with it.

@@illegitimate0 Some argue the creativity is not born out freedom but of trying to escape restrictions.

FSAE is amazing

Yaw controll would be fun in f1

@@guanweihe7614 it is, it's great fun and super interesting to designs and build your car. And drooling at the top euro teams ofc

@@WhiteThunder121 to be clear, it's not active control, just spring rate and dampness, and depending on what they are attaching to the idraulcs, some sort of high/low speed compression adjustment

@@salmiakki5638 It wouldn't be rocket science to put a device in the middle that can pressurise the fluid when needed, but it is certainly a major design decision

AND GEORGE!!!

I think its more like having a chassis mounted to a gyroscope which is in turn mounted to a single shock and spring.

Lol

More like "f1 team throws more money than everyone else put together can afford at R&D killing the competition" which is what mercedes keeps doing. Everyone is good at winning when they can just spend more, instead of coming up with clever and less expensive solutions (which is the other point FIA wants to keep, because motorsports drive innovation in city cars as well). We'll see how they will do next year with the budget limit.

Yeah - a Citroen DS21 Safari kitted out to be an ambo. Oh wait, those cars were in production from 1955. pffft

Do you have any examples of this system being used in a rally car? I'm not doubting you I'd just like to read more into it.

@@n111254789 Citroen used it in Loeb's all conqueuering Xsara/C4 WRC cars in the mid 2000s. They used it in their Dakar cars as well. It was banned soon after. www.invetr.com/chassis/citron-xsara-wrc-withkinetic-rfs www.autosport.com/general/news/citroens-kinetic-rfs-suspension-system-5020326/5020326/

Thus increasing innovation. So why are people complaining about the bans?

@@djhokage1 hey, that actually makes more sense. Prohibition encourages more ingenuity and creativity. Don't people tend to complain about freedom limitation though it ain't theirs to begin with? Please, don't take this politically, cheers.

Nah, it's Ferrari that says that

@@alaeriia01 *any team that tried and failed to copy that so call it cheating

@@wacesferpit true. I mostly said Ferrari because they get riled up so easily

1:11 lower right corner

It's not really all that good a system. Just hysteresis alone would be horrible with this and there are far more problems than that. There are far better ways to do what this does, the only problem is that they are all banned as well. The obvious and far superior way to do it is active suspension. The banning of active suspension made a lot of sense at the time. Only a couple of teams had access to such systems and the cost of developing them made it impossible for any other teams to compete. But it no longer makes sense. The big teams can spend millions developing passive systems to a level the smaller teams can't match but they could all eliminate that by going active. With active if you need to make a significant change to your suspension, you don't need to redesign the whole back half of the car and gearbox, you just need a software update.