actually, no.

suspension is about keeping the rubber in contact with the track/road

 

Regarding front suspension, a thought comes to mind: Could you put the front forks on a swing-arm of sorts, having a monoshock connect the handlebars to the forks sort of like a steering column in a car? I'm not sure it would be practical, but I've seen more than one custom chopper that wasn't even rideable.

 

I have to disagree with you. Suspension is designed to keep the tires in maximum contact with the road surface. Tires are not used for suspension, but their flexibility is calculated in when designing the suspension system. Formula 1 cars are not designed to be comfortable but rather to have the greatest traction in all directions of travel. Therefore they do not need a great amount of travel.

 

the idea is to suspend the wheel from the dynamic mass of the bike so it moves independently

theres enough room under those covers I bet theyve got some kind of flat sliders instead of tubes or maybe even some kinda links

I dont think its a racing bike in any case but it should haul a$$

wonder how it might look with a sissy bar and apes!

 

kind of cool, can't imagine they would go through with it, or if they do it will be very limited but the designs look kick ***.

 

Front Fork
If you look carefully you will see that the tire is right up against the bottom of the triple tree. No or very small movement.Bottom of triple tree against neck, No movement. For concept only if I was betting.

F-1 suspension.
This year Penske charged $32K each for a shock. And you guys are bitching about $1k/pair.

Concept
Loved the shape and I am sure it is a cool concept. Practical? About as much as a custom stretched chopper. Do I want one? Hell ya! Would I want another stretched out chopper...No, two is enough, actually one to many in a lifetime

 

Well, at the surface of things, yeah, you're right ! Obviously. But it gets more complicated than that.

Most of the downforce in a modern F1 car is generated underneath the car. The teams change ride height in 1mm increments, to gain downforce. Having the car bounce up and down greatly disturbs this downforce. As the car gains speed, more downforce pushes the car down closer to the surface. Suspension controls that. They're trying to keep the car at a consistent height from the track surface as it passed over the bumps. Higher ride-height reduces downforce. Lower ride height increases downforce, but if the car is TOO low, then the car bottoms out, taking weight off of the tires.

Most of the movement between the car and the ground in an F1 car is in the huge rubber sidewalls of the tires which is basically un-controllable. The designers can not use low-profile tires to minimize the tire flex, as the tires are all the same and the wheel size is mandated by the rules to keep the brake size small. They CAN use higher pressures to stiffen the sidewalls, but this reduces the contact patch of where the tire meets the ground. Lots of trade-offs here.

The downforce presses the tire onto the track surface. The suspension is indeed to control the tire ( which flexes WAY more than the suspension does as the car goes over bumps ) but also to maintain ride height. In fact, teams have experimented with suspension links that didn't have springs and shocks, but rather suspension arms with that were adjustable for flex.

The drivers get zzzillions of dollars, and aren't being paid to be comfortable with the ride of the car. And they always want more grip.

It's complicated for sure. Not as complicated on a bike. But Ferrari have learned so many tricks that there's no telling what they've done with this thing.