Lotus Caterham on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Banned Lotus 88 F1 car explained by Colin Chapman's son

Racing teams are always looking for ways to gain speed through creative interpretations of the rule book, but speed-obsessed engineers were a little too clever with the twin-chassis design for the Lotus 88 Formula One car. Colin Chapman's son, Clive, gave Goodwood the racer's fascinating story and why the organizers banned it. Lotus' innovation with the 88 was a novel twin-chassis layout. The outer chassis supported the aerodynamic elements and the body, and the inner one held the driver, engine, and transmission. The separate pieces allowed the car to meet the rules in the pits, but the outer chassis would create a seal with the track at speed to preserve the ground effect downforce. The organizers decided this ingenious solution went contrary to the rules against side skirts, and they banned the 88. However, this Lotus was important for a second reason. The inner chassis was F1's first carbon fiber monocoque. The lightweight material is common in racing and performance cars today, but it was a cutting-edge innovation for 1981. Get the full story from Clive Chapman in this clip. Related Video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings.

Lotus Evija's wild aero setup is detailed by chief aerodynamicist

The Lotus Evija is a car of firsts for Lotus. To that end, the company has spent a lot of time talking over the details. Today, we get to learn about the wild shape’s aerodynamics and what Lotus engineers were trying to accomplish. Richard Hill, chief aerodynamicist for Lotus takes a dive into all the details, and the video at the top of this post offers a great visual. “Most cars have to punch a hole in the air, to get through using brute force, but the Evija is unique because of its porosity,” Hill says. “The car literally ‘breathesÂ’ the air. The front acts like a mouth; it ingests the air, sucks every kilogram of value from it – in this case, the downforce – then exhales it through that dramatic rear end.” We can see what Hill means as we look at the Evija in photos. Instead of a regular front bumper, this one has pass-throughs that direct the air back into the side of the car. Lotus hasnÂ’t released the all-important coefficient of drag figure yet, but we have to imagine itÂ’s very low. The front splitter (below, left) is responsible for a few different things. The opening in the center takes in air to cool the battery pack that is mounted behind the seats. Then, the outer section of the splitter channels the air to the “e-axle” for cooling of the electrical components. And finally, it also produces downforce.  There are a couple more tunnels for air to pass through in the rear. These “holes” are likely the most distinctive design feature, especially when accentuated with the LED taillights. Hill says that these are also fully functional and help to reduce drag. “They feed the wake rearward to help cut drag,” Hill says. “Think of it this way; without them the Evija would be like a parachute but with them itÂ’s a butterfly net, and they make the car unique in the hypercar world.” On top of all these porous body structures, there are pieces that move. The rear wing can elevate upward from its flush body position and deploy into clean air above, creating more downforce. And then thereÂ’s an F1-style drag reduction system. This uses a horizontal plane that deploys from the car to make it slipperier through air. The final big piece of this puzzle is the underbody sculpting that directs air into the massive rear diffuser. This causes an upwash of air, in turn creating a massive amount of downforce. Hill sums it up quite nicely.

European commission investigating F1 finances and anti-competitive accusations

The Kingdom of Formula One reminds us of renaissance Florence - ruled by a singular chieftan behind a mask of representative involvement, rife with spectacularly convoluted machinations, awash in innovations that help define our world and far-flung, vindictive misery. If we found out Bernie Ecclestone's real last name was de Medici, well, it would explain a lot. Now after a bit of back-and-forth, the European Commission (EC) has taken aim at the kingdom, investigating whether F1 is anti-competitive and if the FIA has abused its antitrust agreement. The reason for EC scrutiny is that a British member of the European Parliament who represents an area in southwest England, Anneliese Dodds, has fielded complaints from engineering companies in her constituency that recent moves in F1 have put them out of business. She wrote to the EC to question why the FIA now has a stake in F1 when it signed an agreement in 2001 to be solely a governing body and abdicate any stakeholding in the sport. She also questioned the F1 Strategy Group, a group of the six top teams in F1 that makes decisions about the direction of the sport; she says that the Strategy Group not only appears to be a case of the F1 shirking its rule-making duty, it has resulted in unfair treatment of the small teams that aren't in the group. Dodds has a bit of a point. In 2001, the FIA sold F1's commercial rights to Ecclestone for 100 years for a sum of $313.7 million. That was done to placate European regulators who insisted that "the role of FIA will be limited to that of a sports regulator, with no commercial conflicts of interest." Although the rights are ultimately owned by the FIA and bring in a $10M fee every year from Formula One, those rights bring in $1.6 billion each year to Formula One Management (FOM), the company that owns F1. When Ecclestone was trying to get the new Concorde Agreement signed in 2013 that governs the running of the sport, the FIA wouldn't sign, saying it wanted F1 to share a larger slice of its revenue – the FIA has been losing money for years, see. To the get the FIA to sign, Ecclestone sold it a one-percent stake in F1 for $460,000 and gave the FIA a $5M signing 'bonus;' whenever F1 has its IPO, that stake is estimated to be worth about $120 million - not a bad return. Yet, according to the aforementioned 2001 agreement, the FIA can't have that equity stake.