a passenger jet doesnt need mere 200 kph, but around 400 depending on all SORTS OF CONDITIONS.. and a F1 CAR DOESNT HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY PUT IN A PLANE, they are different materials, speeds, forces, variables, etc.etc. its obvious its a completely different thing! its not just a matter of speed.
@kaiserdragon33 AND even if it were possible for a car, i said a car wouldnt stick to the ceiling at THAT speed shown : 400 kph, it'd surely need more , OR else a whole different constitution in chasis and aerodynamics and whatnot , it would be a lot more different and more complex.
one last thing, you really need to insult people? and you really think they wouldnt have tried if it were as easy as you say? dumbnuts..
@kaiserdragon33 Ah STFU dumbass. Don't try & turn this into an argument with your SHIT to cover-up how stupid I made you look by writing 3 (stupid) comments on top of mine. Everything you write is SHIT. You're too fucking stupid to even figure out how to reply to a comment. Replying to yourself, lol. Fully loaded 747s and similar take-off at about 260kph retard. Don't believe me? Then google it. "F1 CAR DOESNT HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY.." LOL! Fuck, why do I bother replying to the mentally challenged?
@SexualStrat because maybe you are more mentally challenged.. if it had not happened means it is impossible with the current technology , you cant deny that.. it could happen but it wont for now. go do it then, show us a video of the way you drive on the ceiling and fucking crash and die. end of story.
@kaiserdragon33 Okay dickhead.. you want to start a fucking war, you got one. 1) "If it had not happened means it is impossible.."? Really?? a) So 5 days before men first landed on the moon.. then it was impossible to do so, just because they hadn't done it yet? That's exactly what you're saying. b) Ever think -maybe- that doing this, would cost millions of dollars and would be a huge hassle? Imagine building a huge suitable tunnel miles long. If it's so easy - then fund/organize/build them one.
@kaiserdragon33 (of course - laptop had to fuck up) 1.c) Ever think -maybe- that no man capable of driving an F1 car has volunteered for this, or is brave enough? 2) "show us a video of the way you drive on the ceiling and fucking crash and die" a) Are you 12? b) My car isn't able to drive upside down + I don't have access to a huge long smooth tunnel. 3) There is NO reason why an F1 car CAN'T drive upside down. They produce more downforce than what they weigh and the engine wouldn't have any...
@kaiserdragon33 ...problems too. It would suck in air the same way, receive spark/electricity the same way, receive petrol the same way, water would cool it down the same way, oil would lubricate it the same way, and the fucking wheels would spin the same way. The water is under constant pressure, along with the fuel + oil. F1 cars don't have carbys and wet sump systems these days, dumbcunt. If a plane can fly upside down, then WHY THE FUCK WOULDN'T A CAR BE ABLE TO DRIVE UPSIDE DOWN??!!!
@SexualStrat and to WHO exactly you made me look like a stupid? hehe because i dont see anyone backing you up yet. and you have changed the subject completely and have failed to understand what i've been saying. you fail to impress me and whoever reads this.. i'll go have som fun in my ride, you keep wasting time here commenting insults to pretend you are cooler, and make yourself feel better. you fail to me. dont bother replying please.
@kaiserdragon33 4) You wrote (in your broken, so called - english) "i said a car wouldn't stick to the ceiling at THAT speed shown : 400 kph, it surely need more".. what the FUCK are you trying to say there? That an F1 car would need to travel at over 400kph to travel upside down? "it'd surely need more"? According to who, you? Who the fuck are you to argue with engineers who do this for a living and say it's possible for an F1 car to travel upside down at about 200kph?! Do you know exactly...
@kaiserdragon33 ... how much downforce an F1 car produces with its downforce adjustments set at max? Do you know exactly how much an F1 car weighs fully loaded with driver? Have you made any calculations whatsoever, or are you just ASSUMING an F1 car can't drive upside down at about 200kph because you're TOO FUCKING NARROW MINDED!? Yeh.. I think (KNOW) so. You must also believe in "god" too, right? You sound like it. Anything else you'd like to bring up, you fucking waste of oxygen??
@kaiserdragon33 Oh yeah, & I made u look stupid to EVERYONE who will eventually read these comments.. THAT'S WHO. You don't see anyone backing me up yet? Ever think -maybe- again MAYBE that this video is over 3 fucking years old with only 46,000 views, so it doesn't get many hits a day + not everybody reads these comments? You fucking dumb mother fucker! Making me waste my fucking time on you.. u fucking piece of shit! Go on dickhead, reply.. get cocky & talk more shit so I can destroy u again.
you show here that you have absolutely no fucking clue what you are talking about.
if you knew physics you would know that the only vertical forces acting are weight and downforce. And if there is more downforce than weight, the car will stick to whatever surface regardless of any "sorts of conditions"
i would say go back to school but im almost 100% sure you still are in school. If not, you are mentally inable.
@baretings1 then again why hasnt anyone done that? come on go call and make that crazy travis pastrana to do it he likes doing suicide stuff, he could help.
what money is to be made from building a long enough tunnel and risking someones life just to test out a basic physics principle, known for probably 200+ years?
@baretings1 there is always people crazy enough to do it, if we can travel to the moon and return and test a vehicle on a dessert that travels over 500 km/h where a single error could end the testers life, there should be someone willing to test this.
there is crazy people everywere, and with the technology advancements of today, if there is a possibility, everything happens.. i believe there is everything you need to test something like this.
yes, but we already know it works. We dont need to test it.
Also, flying to the moon is a little differnt to driving a car on a celing dont you think?
inputting mathematical / physics formulae to create a mechanical representation of a car using our knowledge of the laws of physics is as effective as building a tunnel and trying it.
Without wasting time.
Accept that its possible and move on.
let me just tell you something.
Im 18 and i know that. So your either 12 or retarded.
i understand that this is totally possible, but wouldnt there be a severe loss of acceleration when you go onto the roof as what used to be 9.8 m/s/s downwards toward the surface you are driving on suddenly turn into an acceleration pulling away from the surface you're driving on?
I watched a video, some kind of commercial of ferrari F1 on my ex girlfriend's mobile. The phone came with the video in it.. I Can't find it anywhere... if someone can help me, please PM :)
@virgoshaka9 show me a video i cant believe that , i think weight and gravity wins over THAT speed and whatever downforce setting u put. has anyone tried that already??
@kaiserdragon33 How can you (and others) be so ignorant and stupid? Look outside your window. You see that plane FLYING through the air above you carrying hundreds of people? Yeh well that weighs about 400,000kgs. You know how much speed it takes for that 400,000kg plane to take-off and FLY? Only about 200kph. So why the fuck do you (and others) find it so hard to believe a little 600kg car with wings can DRIVE upside down at 200kph?? Seriously WTF! Don't people have any common sense these days?
@bombersander you do not get, it's not just the speed, it's also the down force generated by the cars aerodynamics, and if a car is simply upside down, its down would be up.
@bombersander no, because the regular or everyday car is not as light as these F1s or R1s the only way a everyday car could drive upside down is maybe in a loop, but even that is just for a little bit.
@SuperJImTeam - Yes, thank you for pointing out the obvious there Sherlock. The point of the video is to show that in theory, physics suggests that a F1 car could stick to the ceiling, which at a high enough speed, a speed an F1 can attain, would do just as the video shows.
Okay... in order to stick upside down you need downforce equal to weight of the car. Then you need more downforce to ensure traction. Then you need a driver to do it. Then you better hope you don't stay up there long enough for all the oil to flood the top end of the motor. Theoretically possible but highly unlikely.
I dont know why anyone wouldnt try it. the physics of the theory are sound. the downforce of an F1 car is well documented along with dry and wet weights. Really it should be well beyond doubt that it would work. Ill volenteer to test it.
@0Zolrender0 I remember they asked a Toro Rosso engineer in an interview and he said they thought it was impossible due to the low downforce when the car goes to 90 degrees. Don't quite get it but I doubt any F1 driver is game enough!
What kind of a comment is that? At what point did I even mention production figures?
Also, I think you'll find they do pump them out on an assembly line of sorts. An assembly line is a line of production processes where something is assembled. If you're trying to say that F1 cars aren't assembled, then you're living on a different planet.
the ceiling would have to be flat not curved or you'll lose the downforce created under the car. awesome tho i'm still waiting for some team to do it :-) I will happen one day.
@vtecintegra9 you would lose a part of the downforce of the diffusers and underbody sucking it down but i think if u go fast enough there enough left and generated by the wing and other components that it might be okay just like in this simulation
I think the problem is getting a long straight enough tunnel to try this out in....and then risk millions on a single car, and more millions on a pro f1 driver....lol.
you can not have centrifugal force going in that direction, you could be upside down but only for a slit second if you went around the tunnel. like a loopty loop, because you would be traveling around the center of axis. you are not pulling y axis g's like it is showing on the video, but if you kept accelerating you would be pulling x axis g's
@ondamountain those cars have a lot of down force, that means that the faster it is going the more car is pushed downward or upward if the car is upside down making it possible to drive upside down for as long as he likes, unless the car does not have a gas tank or engine that do not work upside down
@lazynutbag you'd have to be insane to do it lol i dont believe its ever been done, and the Mercedes SLS commercial with michael schumacher is fake lol
Stock F1 is the cars that most drivers use in the racing series Formula One. Gravity feeding issues is bullshit. The downward force on a Formula 1 car to stick to a track that is completly upsidedown. Think the fins, it is going so fast, that the air is sucking it to the wall. 2gs fast, 8 f/s/s *2. 3-4g is 3-4 * 8f/s/s
Stock F1 Cars? I've never heard something so rediculous.
F1 cars are F1 cars. They are built for a purpose and built to regulation. To say that 'most drivers' use 'Stock F1' cars in F1 is bullshit. They ALL use cars built to the same F1 regulations, and if they weren't, they wouldn't be in an F1 car, would they?
There is no exception. It's either an F1 car, or it isn't. None of that 'Stock' bullshit...
technically you can't have negative g's as every particle has its own gravitational field, so what that really means is that if you lose one gravitational field from one particle, you just move into another one depending on the distance between the fields, in physics we call the distance "r". And an F1 car in THEORY should be able to do this as the downforce created by wind moving over the rear and frontal wings still pushes the car down, though it will be harder due to gravity, g,
@ishaan14 g`s is the unit for g-force, being the acceleration relative to free-fall. and, being a relative vector it can be negative. in SI units 1g is about 9.11m/s^2
and sorry for the long explanation, and please don't think of me as one of those physics geeks, im just looking to take up mechanical engineering once I get into Uni, after me last year of secondary school, god the IB diploma makes you a nerd :D
they said, the gumpert could do it, so can an F1 car, what they said was on the lines of, it creates as much downforce as an F1 car so should be able to do the same thing.
ya all they have to do is get a tunnle, put a path on the roof and a the god darm car going... i mean, hwo hard can it be?. lolz famous last words or 1 jermicus carksonious... 4th centry BC
uh it hit my eraser now we buy another 10$ peace of junk
isslaamabbassi 1 week ago
If I was a f1 driver I'd jump at the chance to do this in RL
atomman45 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
kaiserdragon33 2 months ago
Any F1 teams out there looking for a driver to test this out, please message me.
SexualStrat 2 months ago
stupid you
kaiserdragon33 2 months ago
@kaiserdragon33
a passenger jet doesnt need mere 200 kph, but around 400 depending on all SORTS OF CONDITIONS.. and a F1 CAR DOESNT HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY PUT IN A PLANE, they are different materials, speeds, forces, variables, etc.etc. its obvious its a completely different thing! its not just a matter of speed.
kaiserdragon33 2 months ago
@kaiserdragon33 AND even if it were possible for a car, i said a car wouldnt stick to the ceiling at THAT speed shown : 400 kph, it'd surely need more , OR else a whole different constitution in chasis and aerodynamics and whatnot , it would be a lot more different and more complex.
one last thing, you really need to insult people? and you really think they wouldnt have tried if it were as easy as you say? dumbnuts..
kaiserdragon33 2 months ago
@kaiserdragon33 Ah STFU dumbass. Don't try & turn this into an argument with your SHIT to cover-up how stupid I made you look by writing 3 (stupid) comments on top of mine. Everything you write is SHIT. You're too fucking stupid to even figure out how to reply to a comment. Replying to yourself, lol. Fully loaded 747s and similar take-off at about 260kph retard. Don't believe me? Then google it. "F1 CAR DOESNT HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY.." LOL! Fuck, why do I bother replying to the mentally challenged?
SexualStrat 2 months ago
@SexualStrat because maybe you are more mentally challenged.. if it had not happened means it is impossible with the current technology , you cant deny that.. it could happen but it wont for now. go do it then, show us a video of the way you drive on the ceiling and fucking crash and die. end of story.
kaiserdragon33 2 months ago
@kaiserdragon33 Okay dickhead.. you want to start a fucking war, you got one. 1) "If it had not happened means it is impossible.."? Really?? a) So 5 days before men first landed on the moon.. then it was impossible to do so, just because they hadn't done it yet? That's exactly what you're saying. b) Ever think -maybe- that doing this, would cost millions of dollars and would be a huge hassle? Imagine building a huge suitable tunnel miles long. If it's so easy - then fund/organize/build them one.
SexualStrat 2 months ago
@kaiserdragon33 (of course - laptop had to fuck up) 1.c) Ever think -maybe- that no man capable of driving an F1 car has volunteered for this, or is brave enough? 2) "show us a video of the way you drive on the ceiling and fucking crash and die" a) Are you 12? b) My car isn't able to drive upside down + I don't have access to a huge long smooth tunnel. 3) There is NO reason why an F1 car CAN'T drive upside down. They produce more downforce than what they weigh and the engine wouldn't have any...
SexualStrat 2 months ago
@kaiserdragon33 ...problems too. It would suck in air the same way, receive spark/electricity the same way, receive petrol the same way, water would cool it down the same way, oil would lubricate it the same way, and the fucking wheels would spin the same way. The water is under constant pressure, along with the fuel + oil. F1 cars don't have carbys and wet sump systems these days, dumbcunt. If a plane can fly upside down, then WHY THE FUCK WOULDN'T A CAR BE ABLE TO DRIVE UPSIDE DOWN??!!!
SexualStrat 2 months ago
@SexualStrat and to WHO exactly you made me look like a stupid? hehe because i dont see anyone backing you up yet. and you have changed the subject completely and have failed to understand what i've been saying. you fail to impress me and whoever reads this.. i'll go have som fun in my ride, you keep wasting time here commenting insults to pretend you are cooler, and make yourself feel better. you fail to me. dont bother replying please.
kaiserdragon33 2 months ago
@kaiserdragon33 4) You wrote (in your broken, so called - english) "i said a car wouldn't stick to the ceiling at THAT speed shown : 400 kph, it surely need more".. what the FUCK are you trying to say there? That an F1 car would need to travel at over 400kph to travel upside down? "it'd surely need more"? According to who, you? Who the fuck are you to argue with engineers who do this for a living and say it's possible for an F1 car to travel upside down at about 200kph?! Do you know exactly...
SexualStrat 2 months ago
@kaiserdragon33 ... how much downforce an F1 car produces with its downforce adjustments set at max? Do you know exactly how much an F1 car weighs fully loaded with driver? Have you made any calculations whatsoever, or are you just ASSUMING an F1 car can't drive upside down at about 200kph because you're TOO FUCKING NARROW MINDED!? Yeh.. I think (KNOW) so. You must also believe in "god" too, right? You sound like it. Anything else you'd like to bring up, you fucking waste of oxygen??
SexualStrat 2 months ago
@kaiserdragon33 Oh yeah, & I made u look stupid to EVERYONE who will eventually read these comments.. THAT'S WHO. You don't see anyone backing me up yet? Ever think -maybe- again MAYBE that this video is over 3 fucking years old with only 46,000 views, so it doesn't get many hits a day + not everybody reads these comments? You fucking dumb mother fucker! Making me waste my fucking time on you.. u fucking piece of shit! Go on dickhead, reply.. get cocky & talk more shit so I can destroy u again.
SexualStrat 2 months ago
@kaiserdragon33
no dude, you clearly are the retard here.
enough said.
baretings1 1 week ago
@kaiserdragon33
you show here that you have absolutely no fucking clue what you are talking about.
if you knew physics you would know that the only vertical forces acting are weight and downforce. And if there is more downforce than weight, the car will stick to whatever surface regardless of any "sorts of conditions"
i would say go back to school but im almost 100% sure you still are in school. If not, you are mentally inable.
baretings1 1 week ago
@baretings1 then again why hasnt anyone done that? come on go call and make that crazy travis pastrana to do it he likes doing suicide stuff, he could help.
kaiserdragon33 1 week ago
@kaiserdragon33
isnt it pretty obvious why?
what money is to be made from building a long enough tunnel and risking someones life just to test out a basic physics principle, known for probably 200+ years?
what idiot would invest in that?
baretings1 6 days ago
@baretings1 there is always people crazy enough to do it, if we can travel to the moon and return and test a vehicle on a dessert that travels over 500 km/h where a single error could end the testers life, there should be someone willing to test this.
there is crazy people everywere, and with the technology advancements of today, if there is a possibility, everything happens.. i believe there is everything you need to test something like this.
kaiserdragon33 6 days ago
@kaiserdragon33
yes, but we already know it works. We dont need to test it.
Also, flying to the moon is a little differnt to driving a car on a celing dont you think?
inputting mathematical / physics formulae to create a mechanical representation of a car using our knowledge of the laws of physics is as effective as building a tunnel and trying it.
Without wasting time.
Accept that its possible and move on.
let me just tell you something.
Im 18 and i know that. So your either 12 or retarded.
baretings1 5 days ago
@baretings1 oh you are boring i was having a lot of fun making that muscle dude waste his time but now i got bored of this hehehe
kaiserdragon33 5 days ago
Comment removed
Rapforthelife777 2 days ago
@kaiserdragon33 why dont u go test it!
Rapforthelife777 2 days ago
i understand that this is totally possible, but wouldnt there be a severe loss of acceleration when you go onto the roof as what used to be 9.8 m/s/s downwards toward the surface you are driving on suddenly turn into an acceleration pulling away from the surface you're driving on?
TheOBomb 2 months ago
@ElGringoPana has anyone done that? i want a video
kaiserdragon33 3 months ago
I watched a video, some kind of commercial of ferrari F1 on my ex girlfriend's mobile. The phone came with the video in it.. I Can't find it anywhere... if someone can help me, please PM :)
wompaper 4 months ago
A F1 car driving on a tunnel at 180+ mph can drive upside down due to so much downforce beign generated by the aerodynamics, speed and lightweight.
virgoshaka9 5 months ago
@virgoshaka9 show me a video i cant believe that , i think weight and gravity wins over THAT speed and whatever downforce setting u put. has anyone tried that already??
kaiserdragon33 3 months ago
@kaiserdragon33 How can you (and others) be so ignorant and stupid? Look outside your window. You see that plane FLYING through the air above you carrying hundreds of people? Yeh well that weighs about 400,000kgs. You know how much speed it takes for that 400,000kg plane to take-off and FLY? Only about 200kph. So why the fuck do you (and others) find it so hard to believe a little 600kg car with wings can DRIVE upside down at 200kph?? Seriously WTF! Don't people have any common sense these days?
SexualStrat 2 months ago
Comment removed
virgoshaka9 5 months ago
going fast forward doesnt mean you can suddenly difine the force of gravity..
bombersander 6 months ago
@bombersander you do not get, it's not just the speed, it's also the down force generated by the cars aerodynamics, and if a car is simply upside down, its down would be up.
AlcoholicSyrup 6 months ago
@AlcoholicSyrup k thnx but does that mean that if a regular car with no spoiler (so no downforce) could drive upside down?
bombersander 5 months ago
@bombersander no, because the regular or everyday car is not as light as these F1s or R1s the only way a everyday car could drive upside down is maybe in a loop, but even that is just for a little bit.
AlcoholicSyrup 5 months ago
Surely 85mph, as I've heard often as the minimum speed needed, is way too low, right?
clayguy33 7 months ago
a jet fighter's take off speed is near the max speed of an f1. with the wings on the f1, the aerodynamic force should stick it on the ceiling
xkakashix12 8 months ago
That's fake. You can tell it was a computer.
SuperJImTeam 8 months ago
@SuperJImTeam ??? no shit
Michaelation08 8 months ago
@SuperJImTeam
really?
I could swear it was happening right here in my bedroom
SPDaDTBR 8 months ago
@SPDaDTBR
Haha you fool.
It's so obvious that it is fake and not in your bedroom.
SuperJImTeam 8 months ago
@SuperJImTeam - Yes, thank you for pointing out the obvious there Sherlock. The point of the video is to show that in theory, physics suggests that a F1 car could stick to the ceiling, which at a high enough speed, a speed an F1 can attain, would do just as the video shows.
doomsd46 7 months ago
theoretically it is possible since at some speeds the F1 car produces twice the downforce of its weight... so i SHOULD be possible even in RL :)
weetnietgeen 8 months ago
now do it for real
sh0507 9 months ago
this is only theoretical, if you wanna prove it, i suggest you apply for a test drive
Majestic005 9 months ago
pint of stella and im game
kernie86 10 months ago 2
Is'nt there cars driven by computers now?
slitherhead 10 months ago
i could do this in MS Paint. Cunt.
Gazzz87 11 months ago
Okay... in order to stick upside down you need downforce equal to weight of the car. Then you need more downforce to ensure traction. Then you need a driver to do it. Then you better hope you don't stay up there long enough for all the oil to flood the top end of the motor. Theoretically possible but highly unlikely.
ihateyoujeffy 11 months ago
How about commissioning a teenager?
TheGuyRightBehindYou 1 year ago
completely possible at 150 km/hr due to the downforce being generated on the car :)
Kegath 1 year ago
On an all new excited season of F-ZERO RACING!!!!!!!
CelticArchangel 1 year ago 2
Don't brake, Don't brake, Don't brake, Don't brake, Don't brake, Don't brake, Don't brake, Don't brake, Don't brake, Don't brake, Don't brake, Don't brake, Don't brake, Don't brake, Don't brake, Don't brake, Don't brake, Don't brake, Don't brake, Don't brake, Don't brake, Don't brake, Don't brake!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Nickomfacc 1 year ago 6
Quick! Somebody get a petition together for Red Bull to have this tested in real life. It would make great television, anyways.
ricktor002 1 year ago 5
in soviet russia man restrains gravity!
coolL9457 1 year ago 2
poor Ralf! too much speed!
MrRfantor 1 year ago
Great video!!!
F1Podcast 1 year ago
I dont know why anyone wouldnt try it. the physics of the theory are sound. the downforce of an F1 car is well documented along with dry and wet weights. Really it should be well beyond doubt that it would work. Ill volenteer to test it.
0Zolrender0 1 year ago
@0Zolrender0 I remember they asked a Toro Rosso engineer in an interview and he said they thought it was impossible due to the low downforce when the car goes to 90 degrees. Don't quite get it but I doubt any F1 driver is game enough!
gnarkillkicksass 1 year ago
Nice video!
F1Podcast 1 year ago
Lol. Lrn2Internet. I was making a reference to an internet meme. You guys fail.
SuranthianH3 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mateo1994 Ignorance for the loss. I was making a reference to an internet meme. You guys fail.
P.S. - It's spelled "retarded"
SuranthianH3 1 year ago
Comment removed
SuranthianH3 1 year ago
This looks shopped. I can tell from some of the pixels and from the fact that I've seen quite a few shops in my time.
SuranthianH3 1 year ago
@SuranthianH3 geez....ya think?
newbiefromnewbie 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SuranthianH3 geez...ya think ?
newbiefromnewbie 1 year ago
@SuranthianH3 god your retarted
mateo1994 1 year ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
@mateo1994 Ignorance for the loss. I was making a reference to an internet meme. You guys fail.
P.S. - It's spelled "retarded". You might want to check your "speeling" before you call someone a "retart"
SuranthianH3 1 year ago
@SuranthianH3 wow, u THINKS?! >.>
4epblogadmin 1 year ago
@SuranthianH3 no shit shirlock!
Liberty2431 1 year ago
@Therearenogoodsc -- What?
What kind of a comment is that? At what point did I even mention production figures?
Also, I think you'll find they do pump them out on an assembly line of sorts. An assembly line is a line of production processes where something is assembled. If you're trying to say that F1 cars aren't assembled, then you're living on a different planet.
CKTV 1 year ago
the ceiling would have to be flat not curved or you'll lose the downforce created under the car. awesome tho i'm still waiting for some team to do it :-) I will happen one day.
vtecintegra9 1 year ago
@vtecintegra9 you would lose a part of the downforce of the diffusers and underbody sucking it down but i think if u go fast enough there enough left and generated by the wing and other components that it might be okay just like in this simulation
EnfinityX 1 year ago
but would the engine run upside down?
julianleeho 1 year ago 3
@julianleeho i would think not due to a high change of the engine going into hydro lock unless the engine was built to counter that
113stDFX9900 1 year ago
@julianleeho what's to say it wouldn't?
captainstaple 1 year ago
I think the problem is getting a long straight enough tunnel to try this out in....and then risk millions on a single car, and more millions on a pro f1 driver....lol.
Flatline89 1 year ago
I wonder if someone will ever be suicidal enough to try it.
Ferrariman601 2 years ago
@Ferrariman601 I am suicidal enough to try it
Jordeleo 1 year ago
you can not have centrifugal force going in that direction, you could be upside down but only for a slit second if you went around the tunnel. like a loopty loop, because you would be traveling around the center of axis. you are not pulling y axis g's like it is showing on the video, but if you kept accelerating you would be pulling x axis g's
ondamountain 2 years ago
Centrifugal force has nothing to do with it. It is rather the downforce created by the airfoils. Read the description.
tautologoustautology 2 years ago
@ondamountain those cars have a lot of down force, that means that the faster it is going the more car is pushed downward or upward if the car is upside down making it possible to drive upside down for as long as he likes, unless the car does not have a gas tank or engine that do not work upside down
richboytyson 2 years ago
this would take racing into a whole new realm. . .
ChinaGhost52 2 years ago 3
great someone please build a tunnel long enough :)
peterclark17 2 years ago
this is completely possible
25Celtics 2 years ago 43
@25Celtics it is they even found a tunnel long enough to do it in however they aint found anyone crazy enough to do it yet :P
Garfie489 1 year ago
@25Celtics but has anyone tried it? sounds like a dare to travis pastrana
lazynutbag 10 months ago
@lazynutbag you'd have to be insane to do it lol i dont believe its ever been done, and the Mercedes SLS commercial with michael schumacher is fake lol
25Celtics 10 months ago
it is possible to loop a car though, tons of physics involved
25Celtics 10 months ago
@25Celtics That WOULD be possible thanks to the generated downforce by the Formula 1 cars. The problem is that the engine cannot work upside down
PiaERo 6 months ago
Comment removed
louis812spence515 6 months ago
Comment removed
DanielElyRankin 2 years ago
what on earth did you just write? :D
a) what is a stock F1?
b) what are those gravity feeding issues?
c) what do you mean by needing downforce to run a speed?
d) how fast is 2gs fast?
e) what do we need 3-4g for?
There is no tunnel suitable for this tho, I agree with you there :P
Prophier 2 years ago 4
Stock F1 is the cars that most drivers use in the racing series Formula One. Gravity feeding issues is bullshit. The downward force on a Formula 1 car to stick to a track that is completly upsidedown. Think the fins, it is going so fast, that the air is sucking it to the wall. 2gs fast, 8 f/s/s *2. 3-4g is 3-4 * 8f/s/s
MCALfilms 2 years ago
Stock F1 Cars? I've never heard something so rediculous.
F1 cars are F1 cars. They are built for a purpose and built to regulation. To say that 'most drivers' use 'Stock F1' cars in F1 is bullshit. They ALL use cars built to the same F1 regulations, and if they weren't, they wouldn't be in an F1 car, would they?
There is no exception. It's either an F1 car, or it isn't. None of that 'Stock' bullshit...
CKTV 2 years ago 37
@CKTV wow you're a bit too much into it lol :S
david1991rules4life 10 months ago
@david1991rules4life Yeah sorry I know. F1 is my passion! :D
CKTV 9 months ago
wouldn't the engine have to be modified to work under negative-g's?
Vandatta1 2 years ago
technically you can't have negative g's as every particle has its own gravitational field, so what that really means is that if you lose one gravitational field from one particle, you just move into another one depending on the distance between the fields, in physics we call the distance "r". And an F1 car in THEORY should be able to do this as the downforce created by wind moving over the rear and frontal wings still pushes the car down, though it will be harder due to gravity, g,
ishaan14 2 years ago
@ishaan14 g`s is the unit for g-force, being the acceleration relative to free-fall. and, being a relative vector it can be negative. in SI units 1g is about 9.11m/s^2
nippondancing 1 year ago
@nippondancing G UNIT!
1320carlover 1 year ago
@1320carlover haha didnt think about it that way!
nippondancing 1 year ago
@nippondancing G,G,G,G UNIT!
punos7471 1 year ago
and sorry for the long explanation, and please don't think of me as one of those physics geeks, im just looking to take up mechanical engineering once I get into Uni, after me last year of secondary school, god the IB diploma makes you a nerd :D
ishaan14 2 years ago
Because having a brain and being one of those 'physics geeks' you mention is a really bad thing...
CKTV 2 years ago
idk if the engine will work upside down though... the water cooling system and fluids...
marianopicco 3 years ago
yeah i heard on top gear that theyre gonna actually do this but not with an F1 car i think it was called the gumpert or something
pielord8 3 years ago
They said the Gumpert could do the same thing, but they didnt test it or anything.
Joedidyjoe 3 years ago
TG FTW!
holypally33 2 years ago 2
they said, the gumpert could do it, so can an F1 car, what they said was on the lines of, it creates as much downforce as an F1 car so should be able to do the same thing.
ishaan14 2 years ago
Comment removed
urbannibja123 3 years ago
lies....
DownshiftProductions 2 years ago
of***
soarer205 3 years ago
il drive it for u lol... what the worse that can happen
soarer205 3 years ago 3
in the famous words of top gear "how hard could it be" and then "what could go wrong"
BadDriversRUs 3 years ago 3
ya all they have to do is get a tunnle, put a path on the roof and a the god darm car going... i mean, hwo hard can it be?. lolz famous last words or 1 jermicus carksonious... 4th centry BC
soarer205 3 years ago