2022 F1 car model, Silverstone, 2021

Formula 1 presents first full-size model of 2022-spec car

2021 British Grand Prix

Posted on

| Written by

Formula 1 has revealed a full-size model of a car designed to comply with its new regulations for the 2022 season.

Unveiled today at Silverstone, ahead of the British Grand Prix, the chassis has been built to show how cars could look within the constraints of next year’s regulations.

The most striking visual difference is the move to 18-inch wheel rims, as well as the introduction of wheel covers.

Other chassis changes concealed beneath the car’s body, where fins and aerodynamic tunnels underneath the 2022 cars will produce ground-effect downforce.

On its upper surfaces, bargeboards have completely ruled out and front wings substantially simplified to have a maximum of four elements, rather than the complex wings seen on the 2021 cars.

This article will be updated

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

2021 British Grand Prix

Browse all 2021 British Grand Prix articles

Author information

Hazel Southwell
Hazel is a freelance journalist who roams the paddocks of Formula E, covering the technical and emotional elements of electric racing. Usually found at...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

135 comments on “Formula 1 presents first full-size model of 2022-spec car”

  1. I do hope they put the car in the Fan Zone in Silverstone so that people can really look at it.

    Will be interesting to see how much different the teams interpret what is the best way to exploit all the nooks and crannies of the new ruless, I don’t expect any of the cars to actually look like this one, but overall it doesn’t look too bad – a bit of the same vibes of some of those IndyCar models that were competing to become the new car (when they chose the current car)

    1. Coventry Climax
      16th July 2021, 0:31

      Agree. To me, this ‘sample’ is a pointless exercise. There will be loopholes and the teams will find them. The cars will look different than this one, and we will have yet to see whether the goals the FIA set, will actually be met. But then there’s always the option of technical directives ofcourse, to punish the teams that were smarter than the FIA, or did not design in the ‘spirit’ of the intended regulations, which is a euphmism ofcourse for saying ‘we’ve been unable -again- to draw up regulations that leave no room for interpretation’.

      1. Coventry Climax
        16th July 2021, 0:34

        Darn, can’t you move the ‘report comment’-button more to the right?
        Just wanted to correct my typo to ‘euphemism’.

    2. Yes. Would be good in the fan zone.
      I must say though. The wheel covers don’t look too flash. Make it look like the car has 12 inch rims rather than 18 inch ones. Maybe ban or alter wheel covers?

      1. Pretty sure the visuals of the wheel covers will be done by each team to their liking – they are mandatory and it might even be that their shape is defined in the rules (to prevent anyone getting too creative here) though

    3. @bascb – Indeed it would. It would also be a help if there were some specs in the article – will there be a new Maximum Length, Maximum Width – a mandated minimum turning circle maybe?

      1. I think those were already published earlier @ahxshades, but it would be nice to get a link to those specs yeah @keithcollantine

        There were areas defined where parts may and may not be, the underfloor tunnels are defined to an extent and the maximum weight etc too.

  2. …it’s a Toyota, apparently.

    1. Would be cool if they actually put in a Toyota engine and one could drive the chassis (maybe they put an electrical motor in to make it move-able?)

      1. That would be very cool indeed. Sure looks like there is still room for some kind of motor in there.

    2. Is it based/built around on the old TF109 they used to use for tire testing?

  3. Good to see front wing narrower and the car certainly seems smaller than current gen F1 cars.

    1. I actually think the FW is not narrower, but rather far more massive so that it looks like it is narrower!

      1. Previous images that were shared by FOM(for original 2021 regs) that front wing was right at the edge of wheels while this wing shown is much narrower.

        1. If you look at the overhead studio picture, the front wing width is the same as the car from wheel to wheel.

  4. Looks like a render for a car made by Dallara for Indycar.

    I don’t think it looks particularly good, but once team gets their hand on the rulebook it’ll never look like that anyway, so I’ll wait until we see a real one on track.

    1. Looks like Indycar, indeed. And looks like a toy for 3-year old boy. It doesn’t look solid and serious. It doesn’t roar and scream – I am fastest car in the world. It’s just a cheap toy.

    2. Cars of 80’s did roar and scream even with engine off.

    3. +1, spot on calling that thing a Dallara Indycar

    4. Looks like an IndyCar with an airbox, halo and different rear wing. But with pimp my ride wheels, which really look stupid. Both were designed with CFD. Maybe that’s the best design.

  5. If the rear wing elements are from the same one piece as the sidewall, how will they incorporate DRS?

    1. they can just have RBR engineer a wing element that will be sturdy but flexible enough to be “opened up” with hinges in the wing pilons @hunocsi ;-)

    2. @hunocsi I had a similar thought that the rear wing doesn’t look very drs’ey. I’m guessing the middle portion of it will open. What I am hopeful for as well is as Domenicali suggested which is that drs will be able to be used by all drivers at all times in designated zones, independent of being behind a car within 1 second, with the leading car unable to open his. A fair to all system that is merely meant to reduce drag down the straights (the designated ones) for the sake of fuel saving, and sure, added speed, for they don’t need their downforce/drag on the straights. With all of them doing it in each zone on each lap no one driver has an unfair passing advantage from it. That is my hope. Or conversely, they do away with it completely, but I totally get the concept of everyone being able to reduce their drag down some designated straights, for the sake of speed/lower lap times, and fuel savings.

    3. When I was looking at the rear wing, I was seriously hoping that there would not be any DRS anymore, so please let that be true!!! I cannot see how any element of the rear wing can pivot in one or another way without the whole rear wing pivoting.

      1. @aegges66 I can see, let’s say, the middle 70% of the top element of the wing being made to open. I too have had huge issues with drs since it’s inception, but if it is used as SD has suggested it could, then I don’t think anybody should have an issue with it for it will mean no unfair advantage for a trailing driver using it. The leading driver would have his open too.

      2. @aegges66 Sorry to break the bad news, but when the regs were first announced in 2019 they said DRS would indeed be staying, at least for the first season of these regulations. They said back then that they would review it after the first season.

        1. @randommallard Thank you for rudely awakening me from my dreams! ;-) You are right that it was indeed not planned to be banned with the introduction of the 2022 regulation changes. I do wonder then how they will review racing without DRS if it is still going to be on the cars in 2022. Would they introduce a couple of DRS-less races like they introduced Sprint races in 2021?

          @robbie Agreed, if anyone can use the DRS in designated zones, then that is fine for me as well as it gives the defender the same ‘weapons’ as the attacker. I can live with that! :-)

    4. Jockey Ewing
      15th July 2021, 21:04

      If they allow to set a lower and a higher wing angle by some mechanism, then even the simplest wings (made of 1 major component) could have a DRS-like effect, are not they?

      IIRC next season will have DRS, as they are unsure how effective the new package will be. The wakes generated will have different characteristics, so probably catching a good tow maybe will not be easier, but the downforce produced likely will be more consistent, as the emphasis is on the reciever side of the wakes. Generally every car with complex aero generates a lot of turbulence, so it is present at F1 a long time ago, it just got worse and worse over time. The more complex is the aero the more it relies on clean air, thus if the reciever side (which generates the downforce on our poor heros’s car) is complex, then it will be badly affected.

      To me a Siemens blog and graphics is credible enough, when it is about visualizing how the turbulencies generated relates to formula car shapes of the different eras:
      https://blogs.sw.siemens.com/simcenter/a-cfd-story-the-brief-history-of-formula-one-aerodynamics/

      My conclusion is: they can change the characteristics of the wakes, but there is no way back to the cigar cars under the name of F1.

      To me these percentages are sounding good. Although the cars will remain big and heavy, so I dont’t expect F2 or F3 like moves, but I hope that it will be better.

    5. @hunocsi If the new formula works as intended ‘IF’…hopefully DRS can be ditched. Introduced as a temporary a sticking plaster because a previous formula’s aero rules made overtaking more difficult has now been in place for a decade and looks set to continue in the face of new rules that are intended to over come this issue. I’m confused!

  6. Ooo, such a nice IndyCar

  7. Oh here we go, another predominantly white livery…! Haha car looks awesome. Very IndyCar! Making me really REALLY excited for next year.

    Fingers crossed we can finally ditch the strange nose cones now. I’m done with finger front wings. Let’s have a nice traditional round front wing.

    Only slight criticism is that it looks a bit ‘spec’ series, but I’m sure once we see all different designs there will be a good variety.

    1. Don’t get too excited by the concept of variety. Very much a “Spec” design.
      The rules are very specific and restrictive. Newey was …. let’s just say, disappointed, at the total lack of design latitude.
      More than likely, the main variation between cars will be the paint schemes. Not much else.

    2. Fingers crossed we can finally ditch the strange nose cones now. I’m done with finger front wings. Let’s have a nice traditional round front wing.

      About time!

    3. @cduk_mugello I take it you have not seen how prescriptive the new regulations are – if you were to look at Article 3 in the 2022 regulation package, which dictates the bodywork of the cars, and include the text which in previous versions of the regulations was in the main text, but has now been shifted to appendices, the text on the bodywork alone contains 23,089 words.

      To put it into perspective, if you were to add together the word count of the same section in the previous three major regulation changes – 2017 (7303 words), 2014 (6031 words) and 2009 (4887 words) – those three sets of regulations combined have a word count of 18,221 words, or only 78% of the length of the 2022 regulation package.

      1. Thanks anon, nice insight as always. That is eye-opening, and what a nightmare for the engineers……on the upside more regulation might create more opportunity for bright creative minds to find get-around-loop holes…..

        1. @ju88sy it would be nice to think that, but they also made it clear that if any team found a loop hole that gave them an “advantage”, they would close it offf and ban said innovation so that no team can jump ahead of the others.

          The days of teams coming up with something innovative I’m afraid have we’ll and truly gone.

        2. @ju88sy Added to the previous post, the following is an image which the F1 Technical forums have produced which shows the areas within which all of the bodywork has to sit under the 2022 regulations. https://f1tcdn.net/images/features/2021/article3-2022.png

          As noted by @dbradock in his post, if teams do find loopholes, Brawn has made it clear that the intention is to stamp them out as soon as they are found. The intention is to reduce the scope for “innovation” to making small tweaks to a near standardised design.

  8. My biggest hangup with this rule-revolution is it just feels like style over function. which may be the worst break with F1’s DNA yet. I kinda hope even that teams will come up with something really ugly (like the stepped or the dong noses) just to prove that in F1 form still follows function.

    1. Gavin Campbell
      15th July 2021, 15:56

      I’d actually argue that versus the last couple of rule changes it is all function and style be damned.

      The current cars were made to look “more agressive” and all the talk was around F1 cars no longer looking right.

      I think these look nice – although there is still time for some designer to come up with some “innovation” to ruin the looks (I’m looking at you 2014 Toro Rosso and your Ann Summers nose!)

    2. pastaman (@)
      15th July 2021, 19:27

      It’s a good thing they design with data and not feelings

      1. @pastaman when the original rule changes were announced, altering the aesthetic appearance to give the cars a “striking new look” that “kids will want posters of on their bedroom walls” was stated to also be a major consideration.

        It is therefore not entirely true that “they design with data and not feelings” – the aesthetics of the final car was also included as a requirement in the design briefing in order to fit in with a particular image that Liberty Media wants to promote.

      2. @pastaman Oh come on, just look at the thing. It is meant to look futuristic for the sake of it. That is the Formula E way…

        1. pastaman (@)
          16th July 2021, 17:01

          @mrboerns that’s funny you think it looks futuristic, because honestly it looks pretty dated and simple. Like it was fitting to a specific function or form perhaps…

  9. It has shades of Indycar, shades of Formula e, and shades of Formula 1 from 2006. Overall, I think it looks good!

  10. Anyone know why they put what looks like cheap holographic wrapping paper on as the livery? Making it look about as bad as they could. Just put a decent livery on it, darker, so we can actually see the shape better. Or indeed just pick one of the teams and put their livery on it instead.

    1. @davidhunter13

      Perhaps to make it harder to create a 3D-model of the car, confusing software with the reflections.

      1. Very droll…

        Reply moderated
    2. I’m not too fussed with the livery as its the car I’m more interested in but i know what you mean. I think what they were going for is a subtle way of representing the F1 brand and the diversity aspect which has been a big push for them in the last year, so I guess they chose the holographic style because in the right lights it gives off the rainbow shine and the rainbow colours have been prominent in their diversity and “we race as one” communications. The checkers in the texture could just be a nod to the checkered flag.

  11. The nose is way too big, totally disproportionate compared to the rest of the car.

    1. Josh (@canadianjosh)
      15th July 2021, 21:11

      I have a big nose and small ears, the wife still takes me on some wild rides though;)

  12. The fact that a bulk of the downforce will be generated via ground effect of the new floors should be good news for racing, right? Surely the “dirty” air/wake from that will be considerably less than air that is forced over the top of the car and over various winglets??

    1. @joeypropane That’s the plan. These cars should make less wake than the current ones, and the wake they do make is going to be forced higher up with the shape of the diffuser and rear wings, such that trailing cars, already less sensitive to dirty air, will be in less dirty air. A double whammy effect for trailing drivers to have more confidence in attempting passes, as their cars will feel to still be performing quite solidly and more planted even in the wake.

      1. @robbie @joeypropane Supposedly tests have shown that this has 86% of the downforce when trailing another car, as opposed to 55% as it currently is. Which, yeah, is a huge leap.

        1. @hahostolze Thereabouts, yes. The general reference has been that presently and in the recent past, around 50% DF loss occurs at a two-car length distance, while the next car concept should lose 20 or even 10 % when two-car lengths behind, but yes, anything from 20 to 10 is a good improvement.

  13. That front and rear wing. I nearly vomited.

    1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
      15th July 2021, 16:08

      I dunno, man – the car’s looks are less important than my TV feed. I have Verizon FIOS in the US which broadcasts at 1080i and the compression brings it down to something between 480p and 720i. It’s a good thing that folks are investing in 70-80 inch 4k OLEDs to watch footage that looks worse than my $50 720p camera could capture 10 years ago.

      F1 should be working with Verizon to bump up the visual quality of the streams in the US. The way things are headed, it’s a matter of time before we’re all watching F1 in 20th century quality. That applies to all sports on cable.

      1. @freelittlebirds The F1 world feed has been produced in native 4K for a few years now & the quality of the 4K feed is fantastic on Sky.

        The 1080i HD feed looks great also & the 1080/50fps stream on F1TV looks really good now also.

        1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
          15th July 2021, 17:19

          @roger-ayles yeah, of course it’s captured at 4k with great cameras as it should and I wish I had access to that through my super-expensive cable provide. When the Sky feed comes through my cable on ESPN, it has the bit rate that Verizon offers, not the native 4k. Resolution is not as important because if the bitrate is 1mbps @ 4k, you’d be better off with 5mbps @1080p as it has 5 times more detail. So bit/rate is what matters.

          Verizon FIOS used to have the best quality of all cable providers which I could notice due to the fact that the DVR would fill up very quickly in the old days. The feeds were 1080i but the bit rate was pretty high – maybe 10-15mbps or something which is awesome since Blurays are 30mbps. As they added more channels, though, they’ve had to reduce the bit rate so now even Netflix’s HD streaming is way better than anything on Verizon FIOS unfortunately.

          This is not just limited to Verizon, it’s at least as bad or worse for Comcast and other cable providers in the US.

          I’ve noticed that F1 races look worse over time and the sound is also night and day especially in the V6 hybrid era.

          That link you sent me, that’s what it should look like!!! Crystal clear and very sharp!!! When there’s a lot of quick motion on the screen, the picture quality goes to hell as macroblocking takes over.

  14. Can I just post photographs of the Lotus 78 and Lotus 79 here, so that younger fans can see what a beautiful formula one race car looks like?

    1. No, you cannot. Liberty have an amazon of debt to service.

    2. Stop living in the past

      1. We can live temporally where ever we choose, as long as it’s now.

  15. I think there should be something to soften the turbulent air behind rear tyres in order to improve the posilibities of following cars to stay close, and something to help stop rear tyres cutting in track battles

    Reply moderated
  16. Abies de Wet
    15th July 2021, 15:53

    That Nose & FW look Horrible !!!!!!!!!!!

    Reply moderated
  17. I find the cars to be quite a bit as they had portrayed in previous iterations. Seems a bit underwhelming compared to some of the concepts the teams had put together but that was well in advance of the actual regs being finalized I believe. I also think they are a bit underwhelming just in relation to all the added bits and pieces of carbon fibre to which we had become accustomed.

    I can’t say I absolutely love it, nor do I hate it, and I have no doubt the teams iterations will look better, and that they will look better on track and racing together, and that as usual we will become accustomed to them and before long the current cars will look outdated by comparison.

    I just can’t say that these are the cars young kids will want to put posters of on their bedroom wall, as Brawn had said he wanted. But that’s these cars. Can’t wait to see what the teams bring, and of course it is far more important that they race well together.

    1. I agree it does look a bit like Concept 3 from the original press release but not quite as complex with the surface aero. One thing missing from this full-size model is an update to the halo design, which I think would actually make the car look much better. As it is now, the halo looks like an afterthought. Which it was for the current generation of cars and clearly form should follow function for a safety device like this, but I still feel like it could use a bit of work to make it look more like it had been designed to work with the car from the start.

    2. @robbie Agreed, as a commenter astutely observed above it looks like a Dallara spec chassis interpretation of the new rules (I’ll just add I have a lot of respect for Dallara!). I do like the classic side pods though without all the barge-board paraphernalia. *fingers crossed* for Feb 2022 and the start of the new seasons car reveals.

  18. Looks good except:

    Horrible holo graphics
    Front wing is WAY too big
    Why go for 18 inch wheels and then put horrible wheel covers on them that make them look a bit like the smaller wheels?

    1. @timpey I think the answer to that is so they make less wake.

    2. The thing I don’t understand about the 18 inch wheels is why they also made the tires even bigger. Is that to make the 18 inchers not seem as much bigger as they are? That just seems counter intuitive.

  19. Number 1 (not 44). White car…

  20. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
    15th July 2021, 16:01

    Is DRS going away in 2022? The rear wing looks a bit strange if it’s able to open up…

    1. @freelittlebirds Sadly not. DRS is here to stay because quantity is clearly more important than quality in this low attention span world.

      DRS, The Dumb Racing System that was meant to be around just a few years is going to pollute the sport for years to come unfortunately because real racing, real overtaking that makes you go ‘wow’ don’t matter those who want to turn it into Indycar+.

      1. @roger-ayles @freelittlebirds
        Initially, yes, but DRS will eventually go away.

      2. @roger-ayles Or your droll outlook is misguided, and they may use DRS as Domenicali has described, and as I have mentioned here on this page. SD described DRS as merely a way to do just as it is called…reduce drag on designated straights. He talked of all drivers being able to open their wing on every lap at every designated zone, and not meant as a tool to have an advantage over a leader car, but strictly for all cars to be able to reduce their drag and thus increase fuel economy. You should have no issue with drs if all drivers can use it in the designated zones, no matter their proximity to other cars. Used the way SD described, this would not be about passing at all, in the manner it has so unfortunately been used since it’s inception.

  21. I like it. Can’t wait to see what loophole has been left in the regulations that leads to something really ugly ending up on most of the cars…

  22. Like others, one of my first thoughts was Indycar. It would be interesting to compare this car to the cars at the beginning and end of the 2022 season. And if there was a way to compare the aero numbers from this car to cars at the end of the 2022 season to see how close the FIA got their predictions from the rule changes. My guess is they will be way off both in looks and performance.

  23. Looks like an Indycar & I don’t especially like that given how I think F1 should look far more extreme & technically advanced than an Indycar.

    I also fear that given how limited the regulations are F1 is just going to become a pseudo spec series where the rules are so tight that everything looks/performs the same, Again Indycar+ & not F1.

    This is supposed to be F1, The pinnacle of the sport & not Indycar+.

    I think it’s the wrong direction but if this is what the low attention span kids of today are after then I guess it’s time to just lay F1 to rest & let them have the watered down Americanised Indycar+.

    1. @roger-ayles With their trimmed down budgets and technology still massively higher than Indycar, I really doubt this will only be Indycar+. I think it is about bringing F1 back to where the driver matters more, and isn’t just sat their behind a slower car, stuck in his dirty air, or needing drs to get by. It is about more than just one driver dominating it all, and it should become more about the drivers, several of them, having a much better profile for being able to show much more, such that the word might get out there and young kids might get inspired. And us old-timer fans should have no problem with an increase in pass attempts and the return of the art of defending.

      Of course I get your point about spec etc etc, but the other side of the coin is the unsustainable money game it had become, and years of predictability of only one team winning the majority of the time, with lesser teams not even able to dream of growing themselves into something competitive. There needs be a balance and I am glad F1 is zeroing the scales and bringing F1 back to within reason. I also hope that it grows back in money and audience such that there can eventually be a little more loosening of the reins and little more return to more innovative freedom once F1 has it’s ducks in a row and is sustainable again, and exciting for new teams to enter.

      1. I’m in the @robbie camp of optimism here, time for a change. If the next ten years mirrors 2000-2009 with five different driver champions and four different constructor champions that will be job well done.

    2. Wait for IndyCar to unveil the “CART X”!

    3. I’ve been watching F1 for over 30 years but have no idea what are you on about? What has the shape of the car got to do with ‘low attention span kids’?
      Additionally I’d like to ask what would you like F1 to look like? What would you do to assure the future popularity of F1 and to promote good racing? What are the alternatives?
      The cars have evolved beyond all recognition since the 1950s and they will continue to change into the future. The regs are there to promote close racing, to ensure the financial sustainability of the sport, to address some of the environmental concerns and (new engine from 2025) to entice new entrants and to keep the F1 show on the road. It’s a formula series and that formula changes from time to time; us dinosaurs should know that more than anyone!

    4. @roger-ayles I don’t really mind it to be honest. There are three things F1 fans seem to want that almost form an incompatible triangle: speed, looks, and racing. In the 1980s, and even into the 1990s, we had cars that people liked the look of, but as the regs were quite loose you had a huge field spread (6+ seconds from 1st to last was not too uncommon from what I’m told, I’m too young to have experienced it myself). The other problem was that those cars produced some of the most ‘dirty air’ of any cars in F1 history (according to this study, credit to @gt-racer for finding this, I’m looking at the roughly late-80s car from which is second from bottom: https://blogs.sw.siemens.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2019/09/LineUp-1.png).

      And then we have the main issue of speed vs racing. The faster the cars, the more dirty air they’re going to produce. It doesn’t matter how the downforce is produced, that is just how aerodynamics works. Clearly ground effect seems to be the better solution, so it is implemented on this new generation. As a result the cars don’t look as nice as some people would want. Indycar has simpler wing aerodynamics, instead utilising ground effect, and has better racing than F1. That is likely why this new generation of cars look quite similar to the Indycars (but not worse. Not with the way Indycar implemented the Aeroscreen. It was necessary and I am delighted that they’re using it as it does save lives, but is by no means aesthetically pleasing. The Halo looks much better imo) People say (and stats show) that the 2014-16 cars produced better racing and more overtakes than the 2017+ cars, but many people thought they looked all wrong with their skinny rear wings.

      And then there is the debate about DRS and quality vs quantity. As someone who has only watched F1 during the DRS era (2017 to be precise), I personally don’t mind it too much, but I’m aware that your opinions are significantly in the other direction. The truth is that at least in the current generation (i.e. since 2017), it has probably been necessary. With cars losing 45% of their downforce while following, without the DRS there would be next to no passing. Without DRS we wouldn’t have experienced battles such as Verstappen vs Leclerc at Silverstone in 2019, or many of the late moves Ricciardo has become famed for. This thread does look at many of the statistics of overtaking in F1 since 1994, although unlike many other sources it does count a pass-repass as 2 overtakes, not 0.

      So what is my point? IMO DRS has made passing easier, but it still leaves potential for some great moves. Is it being overused a bit? Yes. Imola and Portimao in particular come to mind, but they’ve only had 2 races so it naturally will take some refining. And then there are the other factors that need to come into account. I recollect before having a friendly disagreement over the role of strategy in F1. Again, many of the ‘real overtaking’ you’ve mentioned above in a previous comment came as a result of strategy. Mansell on Piquet at Silverstone in 1987? Mansell had stopped for tires, Piquet hadn’t. Alonso on Schumacher at 130R at Suzuka 2005? Alonso had much less fuel in his car, hence why he pitted just a couple of laps later. There a 3 ways to get overtaking really: strategy (fuel and/or tires), assistance (e.g. DRS, push to pass etc.) or an artificially bunched up field (start/restart). Otherwise you get teams fall 2 by 2 into their natural order of running and no racing happens at all, or anyone who qualifies badly, or is involved in an incident, simply can’t recover because the dirty air effect is so bad.

      As aezy-doc says just above me, it is a formula and a formula changes from time to time. And it has to. Will Buxton, love him or loathe him, has a great push back to the “DNA” argument (in this instance he was probably a bit too extreme as he was talking about reverse grids, but it applies here just the same in my opinion). DNA changes. It’s how evolution works. If something doesn’t evolve, it gets left behind and dies out. For some, this may be the death of F1 as they know it, but it could equally be the start of a new era.

    5. Look back at the history or indycar and F1. There have been many years where they look nearly identical. Why you hating on Indycar anyway?? Watch it, it has better racing than F1. Some old F1 conservatives need to get over their pinnacle of racing garbage. Also F1 has never been about looks, it is about substance over style, it is about making a fast race car.

  24. I don’t really have an opinion about how it looks, as long as it works. My only question is how much do those front wheel covers block the (already minimal) driver’s view? It might be an impediment when it comes to sighting corners.

    1. So long as it works.
      The question is work for who. The teams want to win, the FIA want the cars to run close together.
      Will the regulations force the teams to adopt this design or they are free to come up with their own interpretation.
      In the end the FIA has designed a car that allows cars to follow each other but a team obsessed with performance, will not care what the wind coming out of their back en does to the car following.

      1. OOliver From all we’ve heard I think the cars will be quite similar to this, at least in terms of their main infrastructure which I believe will leave them no choice but to be making cars that make much less wake and that are also much less sensitive to what dirty air they do encounter. Of course you are right that teams don’t care about the trailing car, and surely they have been gladly making as much dirty air as they can under the current regs, without harming their own aero of course, but no by all accounts I think the regs are going to be pretty restrictive in terms of the lengths a team can go to make dirty air. Even if a team finds a way to make more than another, I still envision that it won’t be so much more that the trailing car would once again feel anywhere near the same disturbance as they currently do.

      2. As long as it works for us, of course. The point of the changes to the formula is to improve the race for us, the audience.

  25. They should’ve made 20 of those and run it as a Springt Show.
    The seem to have enough full geared background extra’s already who can drive those cars.

  26. They have somehow managed to describe what a Migraine is in Car form…

  27. Stephen Higgins
    15th July 2021, 16:46

    Well, I’m glad the bargeboard and boomerangs have gone ….

  28. Not the first time seeing the upcoming car concept since the original presentation, of course, occurred before the 2019 US GP, even if only a wind tunnel model, but everything counts.
    I like the aesthetics, but more importantly, I hope the intended target gets achieved ultimately.

  29. Neat to see the concept. Oddly enough, the wheel covers bother me. Not the first time we’ve seen it in the sport, obviously, but the fact they’ve come and gone kinda speaks to their impact. The fact they’re back now is strange.

    I’m excited to see the engineers get their hands on the regs and see the real versions for 2022. It’s interesting that they’re moving in the ground-effect direction given how the sport has historically responded to innovations in the past involving the technique.

    1. @treize131 Agree about the wheel covers. That is strange. Why is it back?

      1. To minimize wheel-wake and outwash airflow affecting the car behind.

  30. I neither love it or hate it because TBH for as interesting as it is to see I don’t think that any of the cars lined up the grid next year will look exactly like that (Unless the regulations wind up been more restrictive than I think they are).

    I do like the low nose as I was never especially fond of the raised noses, I don’t like how wide the front wing is but that’s been a complaint i’ve had since 2009 so it’s nothing new. I do like the style of the rear wing, Especially how it looks a little lower than what we have now. Not fond of the little flaps above the front wheels, Think they look a bit silly. The 18″ wheels were never something I was especially bothered by & the same is true now, I think they look fine.

  31. Will be interesting to see how much freedom the concept leaves and how different/similar the cars are going to look.

  32. The rear wing kinda looks like a mushroom.

  33. Love it, looks aggressive. Don’t know how so many of you think it looks like Indycar, not even close.

  34. Feels more and more like a spec car series. Will there be any individual form factor left?

    1. You get that from one concept car?

      1. No, I get it from the 2021 cars actually.

  35. The size of those wings gives me the impression that they didn’t add much ground effects. Or they wouldn’t need to be that large. Meaning it’s still gonna punch a big hole and leave the car behind with no air. From what I read, the cars a supposed to be able to drive under the turbulence. I thought the objective was to eliminate turbulence. The only air they had before was turbulent, but it was air. And now it goes over the top. Leaving what for the following car? Guess we will find out. I definitely expected smaller wings after ground effects have been added.

  36. Colonel_Blimp
    15th July 2021, 18:29

    Such an ugly car, it doesn’t look mean and aggressive at all and it certainly isn’t stylish or attractive.
    I think it’s that front wing, too wide and deep. Bring it inside of the wheels and shorten its reach.
    18″ wheels looked great in older mock ups until they put these bloody covers on them.

  37. Neil (@neilosjames)
    15th July 2021, 18:34

    I like it. It doesn’t look as aggressive or stylish as a 2021 car, but the main thing is that it’s more of a racing car and less of a carriage in a procession.

    Just hope the ‘correct’ images are the photos of the physical model, where the nose goes beyond the lower element of the front wing. The white background pictures of the ‘model’, with an element and a half stuck out beyond the front of the nose, look awful.

  38. Spec car for a spec car series, with visual cues from a decade-plus old even slower spec car design.

  39. It looks like a racing car to me so that’s fine but can someone enlighten me as to the reason for the front wheel covers please?
    Are they to with safety or downforce or what?

    1. @nullapax They are to tidy up the airflow as well as to direct it to where they want it to go.

      1. Ahhhh OK.
        If it helps a car behind to get closer in spite of dirty air then it has to be good.
        Thanks @stefmeister

  40. At least it looks very cool. I have this fear the teams are going to come up with weird interpretations of the rules and end up with ugly like we had in the early 2010s.

  41. Wow, everyone’s taste is different but to me it looks fantastic. A bit like the Dallara Indycar, which was to be expected since Indycars are so great at following each other, but better looking. 2022 is going to be legen – wait for it – dary !

  42. Not to shabby, apart from those awful wheel covers and ridiculous flaps on the side of front wing.

    But please, remove the wheel covers because they are worse than 2012 noses.

  43. Overall I like it. I wish the front and rear wings were a bit smaller but that’s not a big complaint. I don’t like the swan neck wing supports, I wish it didn’t have those.

    I’m hopeful that some teams will deliver better looking wings and a more narrow nose. This would look great with the simple drop down front wings from the early 2000’s that pushed the aero wake inboard of the front wheels. I’d love to see these designs evolve that direction in subsequent seasons. Getting rid of the super wide wings would allow more wheel to wheel action. I think we sill see a lot more wheel to wheel battles in 2022, but a lot of broken wings as a result. That said the wings have been super wide since 2009 at the suggestion of the Overtaking Working Group so the drivers are used to them and they seem a good solution still.

    It would have been a good opportunity to continue following IndyCar’s lead and introduce the aeroscreen as an update of the halo for increased driver protection, angry comments about it looking too much like IndyCar already be damned, it will still be F1 and we will finally have ground effect cars again. They originally planned them for 2014 and backed off once the turbo-hybrids proved so difficult. It’s a shame because we could have made a lot of progress in the intervening seven years.

    It’s an exciting new dawn for a sport that is no stranger to change. I hope it blows all our expectations out of the water and ends the 21st century trend of one team dominating at a time.

  44. Why do they make a model like this when we know one thing: the actual cars will not look like the FIA had in mind…

    1. Agreed. F1 had to reveal 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 and this model is it. I’ll guess there’s less than a 5% chance any of next year’s cars will resemble anything near this design

  45. I have to say I rather like it!

  46. So how much are the teams allowed to deviate from this design?

  47. Not very imposing, or even aggressive. It looks like F2 car or some feeder series car.

    1. Completely disagree. And don’t bash on some of the great feeder series cars.

  48. It looks like a spec series car. Hopefully the rules are not so strict that there will be little variation in appearance. I can’t really visualize the 3D surfaces control thing.

  49. Count me in with minority who likes the new wheels. The wheel covers remind me of a Porsche 962 or tarmac spec Sport Quattro. They help tone down jarring look of those hooptie style 18″ wheels.

  50. Scotty (@rockonscotty)
    16th July 2021, 4:35

    So I am going to choose to be positive here. I’m really not worried about how the car looks, even though I like it. The question is, will it race? A lot of smart people with access to some of the finest tools in history say it will. I say, bring it on! Who doesn’t want to see the best drivers in the world fighting for the win?! Game on, my friends, game on :)

  51. The proof of the pudding is in the on-track-action, as said the guy who went on to win Le-man Meringue 24.

    But as all we have are visuals at the moment – I like it! That rear wing is getting a bit of stick but I think it looks funky.
    The front wing looks big but I think it provides good opportunities for liveries.

  52. I am curious how big the front wings will really be. From studying cart cars for decades, the tunnels are much more effective than any front wing. I wonder if the front wings become trim wings of very small size to not hinder the workings of the tunnels. I really think this kind of large change will be best interpreted by Red Bull.

  53. Ugh. A Dallara Indy Champ Cart car.

    1. Steve (@machinesteve)
      16th July 2021, 9:27

      I totally agree that is EXACTLY what it looks like. Sorry I pressed the wrong button by accident and reported you by mistake – the mods will be scratching their heads.

  54. Anyone happen to know what the dimensions are of this model?

    1. That’s what I was thinking – if they had mandated maximum length and width and a minimum turning circle this whole exercise would have been more interesting.

  55. Not impressed. Looks like an Indycar.

  56. Steve (@machinesteve)
    16th July 2021, 9:25

    It isn’t that futuristic is it, in fact it looks far less futuristic than the current cars, lets hope it works and the racing improves because this certainly isn’t going to get many kids interested in its current form. Maybe the teams can make it look better.

  57. RocketTankski
    16th July 2021, 9:25

    Dale Coyne from 2017 called. They think you may have taken their car by mistake.

  58. I can bet it will look quite a bit different when teams will present their own versions next year. Because teams will push boundaries and may well find different solutions for different parts of the car. This one looks a bit “fat” through the coke bottle, but I hope teams will narrow it. I don’t like the rear wing as well, the curviness of it, but at least it’s not that high as on 2009-2016 spec and 2019-2021 spec cars.

  59. The rear square on looks like an early 2000’s car, big diffuser and low wing frankly this kind looks like a ferrari f2004-limousine, I wish cars were narrower shorter and lighter.

  60. I quite like the appearance of the car as per this version. There are parts I like more than others. I think the front wing looks huge and a bit ugly. I am sure its shape has a purpose though. I don’t like the wheels being covered either. I do like the curve of the body shape which make the car look more compact.

    Overall I think it is quite an improvement over the current cars. I think the current versions are really ugly and they have been becoming more so for the past 10 years or more. Too long, too heavy, too mainly vanes and winglets. So I am fairly pleased for now.

    The proof is in the ability to stay close and race of course.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.
If the person you're replying to is a registered user you can notify them of your reply using '@username'.