Will be interesting to see which of the schnoz configurations pays off
Ugly is fine as long as it actually works!
F1 does have to be careful with how ugly they let these get. The difference in sound going from the V10 era to the V8 era to the new turbo 6 is a significant loss to the allure. If they get too ugly and sound too boring, that's a bad combo.
It's not like it sounds awful, but the otherworldly howl of the old engines was worth the price of admission. The lower RPMs and the muffling from the turbo isn't exactly hair raising.
I'd go with the Red Bull, Adrian Newey has had everyone's number. They keep changing the rules but he keeps designing brilliant cars. I do think the sound is going to be a letdown, the v-10's had it right but I remember the 1976 Ligier Matra v-12 it could make your ears bleed.
This is one of those rare situations where you wish form did not follow function.
That is the truth aesthetically they are being hit with the ugly stick! Funny how pre wind tunnel rolling road the cars were more pleasing to the eye. It's great engineering with no beauty.
Winning idea might revert to a single element (front and rear) wing, open tire spec, no electronic aids and a (large) variety of NA (multi-cylinder, multi-manufacturer) engines. The 'technology transfer' (to production) argument has gotten way out of hand cost-to-benefit. If/when the subject technologies finally make it to production, I'll be dead.
IMO - Way too much spend and little real competition.
After the Monaco race while sitting in the airport I had the chance to talk to two mechanics on Mark Webbers car and an engineer on Vettels. They loved the technology (electronics) and spoke highly of the tech transfer tie in with Infinty. The KERs system, no refueling, looking forward to hybrid tech... I am one that leans to your point of view but they sure didn't agree with my view! One thing we agreed on they do all love COTA and hope for more races in NA. They also said the drivers like it partly because of the anonymity.
