RacingManiac Posted March 15, 2008 Report Share Posted March 15, 2008 No worries. First thing I did was check the F1 website to see how it was all gonna turn out. I have spotted something in the rules and I have a question as well... The new rules for gearboxes are that it has to last 4 races. If the gearbox needs replacing prematurely it costs the car 5 grid positions. They've added a clause where, if the car fails to finish a race, the gearbox can be changed immediately with no penalty. Obviously, the idea of this is to remove safety issues about being forced to re-use a gearbox involved in a crash OR so a team doesn't lose out twice, once when their gearbox fails during a race and then, again, when they lose grid position in the following race for changing the faulty gearbox. However... I can see EVERY car that fails to finish in the points mysteriously breaking down on the last lap with gearbox problems, probably related to software. Make no mistake, guys like Ross Braun will spot loopholes like this right away and it'll end up creating even more of a farcical situation. The question I have is related to the above point... Engines are supposed to last 2 races and, if you need to replace an engine prematurely, you're at the back of the grid. Does anybody know if there's a similar clause regarding engines; that if it fails during a race it can be replaced with no further penalty? If there is then I can envisage this years championship being a horrible joke. Its the same deal with the engine ever since the one engine per 2 races rule came out, and Honda have done it before(2006 Australia I believe, when Honda dilebrately DNFed JB's car meters before the finish line to get a free engine the race after) The concern is there, however as anyone who are going to resort to this is not likely going to be a major contender, especially based on the current points system. There are also rules that governs with regards to what constitude an engine related failure in the race, and I believe you don't get a free engine change if your car were to fail without having suffer such failure.... The fixed budget rule BTW is in the works, and it is expected to be implemented in the near future, it is also something I believe if policed properly will be the best way to save money, and be really encouraging good engineering practice and such without being overly strict on rule changes.....good engineers anyway works with a fixed budget and they have to work within that....and makes F1 less of a spending contest... Link to post Share on other sites
Stealthbomber Posted March 15, 2008 Report Share Posted March 15, 2008 first things first - i think F1 is horrifically dull - same cars, round the same track for about 3 hours ? no thanks. but what makes it worse is there seems to be very little excitement to your average joe viewer. somebody with more interest in the sport may notice little things that make it more exciting, but to a casual viewer like me, i think its rubbish. to be fair, track racing in general doesnt interest me, but F1 is the worst. i'd much prefer to watch WRC, a million times more chance of seeing something different every time the cars go round, much more interesting. I agree with your POV. The problem is that there's only one set of laws of physics. Back in the 60's and 70's we didn't properly understand the laws of aerodynamics. As a result, a lot of F1 teams were doing pretty bizarre things and the result was that the cars varied hugely in how they handled. Some were great at going around corners but terrible at high speed. Others were terrific in clean air but badly upset when stuck behind another car. As a result, the racing was unpredictable and exciting. These days, the teams all have a full(?) understanding of what they can and cannot do to make a car work. The result is that each car is pretty similar to the rest and a fast car even struggles to overtake a slower car because they're both almost identical except for the last 5% of performance, if you see what I mean. The other, huge, problem that's developed is that the air behind a car gets badly screwed-up as the car cuts through it. Back in the 70's this didn't happen so much. These days, because the teams know how to squeeze every last drop of advantage out of the way the air passes the car, the air is horribly turbulent and a following car simply doesn't get any of the aerodynamic advantage that the leading car enjoys. As a result, a following car gets to within about 10ft of the leading car and just can't get any closer without huge effort. Course, it doesn't help that the designers are kinda sneaky and, if they can get away with it, they deliberately build cars that create air as turbulent as possible (such as the way Ferrari fitted "heat exchangers" to their exhausts to mix hot and cold air behind the car) to make it even harder for a following car to overtake. anyways - the idea of making them keep certain parts, am i right in thinking it was to reduce costs, and therefor make the playing field more level bewteen the big hitters and the 'minnows' in F1 ? as surely you have more chance of winning if you culd field a brand new car every race rather than one thats already done half a season ? Absolutely right. The idea is that, with these restrictions in force, a designer will use stronger materials to aid reliability. No chance. Believe it or not, most people in F1 DO retain a "win at all costs" attitude and, as a result, they will always sacrifice reliability for speed if possible. The only difference is that the "minnows" will build a gearbox out of stronger (cheaper) materials but, because of poor R&D budget, it'll still only score about 6/10 for reliability. Meanwhile, the big hitters will develop multi-million dollar gearboxes that are made from carbon fibre and pixie-dust and, due to superior R&D, will still score 7/10 for reliability. Then there's a double-whammy created by weight restrictions. If the car MUST weight 500kgs then it doesn't matter if it has an aluminium gearbox or a carbon-fibre one, as long as it still weighs 500kgs, right? Well, no. A small budget team will use whatever materials they can and squeeze a 500kg car out the other end. A big-budget team will build their car from pixie-dust and then have the luxury of adding weights wherever they want to make the car handle as well as possible. Link to post Share on other sites
Stealthbomber Posted March 16, 2008 Report Share Posted March 16, 2008 Great result for all racing fans. Both Ferraris parked-up and 2 Ferrari engines didn't last the race. Lovely. All in all, not a very interesting race. Raikkonen had plenty of opportunity to prove he could overtake (being at the back such a lot) but failed to really do anything besides get past other cars during safety-car incidents. After 2 lucky escapes it was only fair that his car eventually snuffed it and denied him any consolation. Nice to hear the Brit national anthem on the podium though. Get used to it this year. *EDIT* Gotta love DCs comments about Phillipe Massa too. Link to post Share on other sites
GuzziHero Posted March 16, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2008 CAUTION: Spoilers follow for anyone who intends to watch the re-run I thought it was a fascinating race and I was so glad to see reliability playing a part. Leaves a lot of opportunity for never-scorers to become scorers thanks to keeping their heads down and getting the job done. I mean, just look at Bourdais! Ive never really been a McLaren fan till Hamilton came along (always thought they were a bit too clinical and soulless) but Im being won over! McLaren: a brilliant job from start to finish. Only an unfortunate SC prevented a silver arrows lockout. Both drivers were pretty faultless and Kovalainen made 2 brilliant passes (Raikkonen, Alonso) - more than half the rest of the field did all race combined. They should mark that pitlane limiter button better though! Most importantly though, they kept both cars running and running well. BMW: showed they are still the best of the rest after McLaren and Ferrari, and did a fine job. Heidfeld kept his head and benefitted, and Kubica would have pointed if not for Katayama...sorry, Nakajima...having brain fade. Williams: must have a mixture of pleasure and frustration to know theyre there..but not close enough. Rosberg admitted the car wasnt perfect but will improve (yeh, Honda said that last year!). Kata...gah, Nakajima fell asleep and was lucky to pick up anything at all. I still expect he will have rare flashes of brilliance and frequent bouts of lunacy as time goes on. I even got all giddy when I thought hed passed Alonso but it turned out to be only Piquet. Renault: Piquet, I would rather forget. Alonso had a great drive, taking advantage of various situations, and also went for every available opportunity. As long as he keeps his over-opinionated mouth shut, I could start liking him again. Honda: what can be said? The only team that had a more rollercoaster race than Ferrari may even now have Lady Luck spit in their faces. Button was faultless in his own retirement and could have achieved much. As it was Barrichello struggled through, benefitting from safety cars and then being disadvantaged by one...and a schoolboy error may cost him what was a well deserved 3 points. He can always try the excuse that he thought he was still at Ferrari and believed the red light marked the 'Ferrari VIP Lane'. Still, Honda shows promise. At last! Toro Rosso: Their race was one of contrasts and was almost an analogy of the individual drivers talents. Vettel made a tiny error possibly from over-exuberance and was out at race one, Bourdais made good use of the safety cars to benefit (though showed impressive defensive skills against faster cars). A sad shame that he could have finished as highly as 4th if not for an engine made by... Ferrari: Massa had a total disaster. He should have been Ferraris big podium hope and it all went wrong in turn 1. If hed been further back he could have made the excuse that chaos around him made him spin, but for that he has little excuse. Made reasonable progress and then made a clumsy pass attempt on Coulthard from way back. Not sure why he stopped at the end, but Id like to think it was because of his damage after ramming DC. Raikkonen made several errors, although I dont blame him for spinning while desperate to overtake only for the car to sadly let him down. At least he was giving it a try. Sad to hear him going on and on about getting a point if Barrichello gets disqualified - not a very proud way to take a point now, is it? Toyota: Trulli did well, driving smoothly until he got some sort of problem in the footwell in the car and jumped out like there was a redback spider sitting on the throttle pedal. Apparently it was some sort of battery problem. Glock picked up the torch and ran strongly with it until he had a lurid accident, being launched into the air by a grass bump after an access road while trying to stay on track after running wide. Showed a great deal of promise all the same. Red Bull: never really looked as good as they did in quali. Webber of course ended his race on lap 1 (but hey, so did 4 others). DC did a reasonable job till Massa made an unrealistic pass attempt and completely demolished the RB. Something to build on though. Super Aguri: if Webber is one of the unluckiest men in F1, Davidson must be THE unluckiest. Once again, an error from someone else took him out before he even completed a lap. Hed made great progress from last on the grid till that point. Sato ran 11th for some time, doing a great job of staying there too, till the car let him down after the last safety car. Force India: Fisichella tipped off at turn 1, Sutil pulled into the pits for an unknown reason. Not much else to say, really. Link to post Share on other sites
fool Posted March 16, 2008 Report Share Posted March 16, 2008 If I see somebody sliding their car up the inside of another, into a corner, tonight I will support them loyally all year. So... I take you're a Raikkonen fan now? Or do I remember wrong about him coming inside of Kovalainen wheels locked? Did run it wide tho but you said what you said. Link to post Share on other sites
Stealthbomber Posted March 16, 2008 Report Share Posted March 16, 2008 So... I take you're a Raikkonen fan now? Or do I remember wrong about him coming inside of Kovalainen wheels locked? Did run it wide tho but you said what you said. I prefer it if the people who overtake manage to actually keep the car on the track afterwards. Kovalainen put a clean move on Raikkonen in the dying moments and then (the muppet) stabbed at his speed limiter along the main straight. Doh! Didn't really see any spectactular overtaking. The pinnacle of overtaking, IMO, was Jean Alesi trying to overtake somebody a few years ago. I recall him coming up the inside with a tyre locked, the other guy moved to the inside, Alesi released the brakes and swerved around the outside, the other guy "accidentally" drifted wide so Alesi braked again and went through on the inside. All within the space of about 3 seconds. Brilliance! Tut try looking for "Alesi Overtaking" on youtube and it might be there. Link to post Share on other sites
RacingManiac Posted March 16, 2008 Report Share Posted March 16, 2008 Kovy passed Alonso, not Raikkonen, in the dying moment, only to have himself speed limited on the pit straight.... Anywho, I don't see that was boring race, the guys I was watching with thought it was pretty entertaining....I mean you can't have a boring race with only 7 cars finishing on the perfectly sunny day.... On the Coulthard/Massa incident, I don't think Coulthard could be so stern in his view that it was Massa at fault, When they came together Massa had all 4 wheels over the curb to avoid Coulthard and he still turned in on him..... Link to post Share on other sites
fool Posted March 16, 2008 Report Share Posted March 16, 2008 You could see how hard it is to over take when watching Raikkonen cruise behind Barichello. Every time Kimi came close he had huge amounts of over steer and his engine started heating up so he had to drop back again. Link to post Share on other sites
GuzziHero Posted March 16, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2008 ...from a position where he was too far back to attack and would Coulthard would have no idea he was there. Schoolboy error. I must admit Im disappointed that the lack of TC didnt present more overtaking opportunities. Melbourne is really a bit too flowing to have seen the best of the changes. And im pretty sure that Alonso passing Raikkonen and Kovalainen in one deft move was pretty spectacular! For me - pinnacle of overtaking was this: Like father like son: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlFWvaQCS1w (much as I dont like Jacques). Other notable ones: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4uNSYTnhnA and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEAGCIqgB0k from Zontas car Senna... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGV3uwJflCE Prost... (in my mind better than Senna) Piquet... better than them both! Not F1 but... How not to do it (scroll to 1m27s): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPTtTzzSF24 Fittipaldi's mother fainted on the pitwall... Link to post Share on other sites
RacingManiac Posted March 16, 2008 Report Share Posted March 16, 2008 I thought Coulthard said he saw him coming.....Massa was clearly side by side with his as they are both braking at that point, besides, coming from far behind is one thing, he turned in on him is another, Hamilton's pass on Raikkonen at Monza last year was absolutely out of no where, and yet they both go through unscathed and Monza's first chicane is way tigher than Australia's turn one..... Link to post Share on other sites
Stealthbomber Posted March 16, 2008 Report Share Posted March 16, 2008 Anywho, I don't see that was boring race, the guys I was watching with thought it was pretty entertaining....I mean you can't have a boring race with only 7 cars finishing on the perfectly sunny day.... I didn't think it was a boring race. It's always nice to see red cars ploughing into the armco or going in a different direction to to everybody else. On the Coulthard/Massa incident, I don't think Coulthard could be so stern in his view that it was Massa at fault, When they came together Massa had all 4 wheels over the curb to avoid Coulthard and he still turned in on him..... Unless I'm mistaken, the rules are that whoever has half a car length in front has the advantage. Obviously that's difficult to judge in the heat of the moment but Massa's on-board camera showed him planting his front wheels into DC's side-pod so Massa should carry the can for it. FWIW, I think these type of things are just racing incidents but some you win, some you lose. This time DC has the moral high ground because he WAS in front heading into the corner. I'm sure that, from his POV, because he was half a car ahead, DC felt he shouldn't have to compromise his cornering and Massa should lift off. Course, maybe he should be happier with 1 less point rather than a DNF but, I guess, a real racing driver should be aggressive where possible. Massa will certainly think twice about doing that to DC again. Interestingly, I see that Massa shook his fist at DC after driving into the side of him. If DC sees that, I suspect he WILL be "knocking the sh*t out of the little b*stard". Link to post Share on other sites
RacingManiac Posted March 16, 2008 Report Share Posted March 16, 2008 If Massa actually plowed into DC it would've been a different story, but they both have slowed to the point that both CAN make the corner, knowing Massa was there DC should've left him space, but he clearly did not, as Massa at that point was alredy on the curb.....DC was half a length in front, and he could've still salvage that corner since the next turn he was on the inside, he could've just ran wider and he would still be in front and be on the inside of turn 2, but he chose to turn into Massa..... I don't see how he can have the moral high ground.... Link to post Share on other sites
Danke Posted March 17, 2008 Report Share Posted March 17, 2008 I liked that race, to bad Kimi's on big red now and take the hate. I loved DC's quote. The BMW's are a nice looking car this year. I'll continue to pull for Lewis even though we may not see much of him if he keeps heading out the front door. Link to post Share on other sites
GuzziHero Posted March 17, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2008 Lewis...poor bugger cant win - he drives an awesome race and noone sees it on camera because its pretty boring I have to wonder if Ron Dennis didnt beg the stewards to bring out the safety car a couple of times so that their car/sponsors would actually be on the TV footage a little Link to post Share on other sites
Stealthbomber Posted March 17, 2008 Report Share Posted March 17, 2008 I have to wonder if Ron Dennis didnt beg the stewards to bring out the safety car a couple of times so that their car/sponsors inned iwould actually be on the TV footage a little Don't even joke about it. I thought Hamilton might have been robbed at the end, after Glocks flying lesson. Hamilton had just come into the pits and exited in 4th position. Glock binned it and left debris all over the track. If they'd decided to end the race there (after all, there were only a handful of laps remaining and there seemed to be a huge amount of debris on the track) Hamilton could have had it snatched away from him. Interesting point about the sponsors though. I seriously think Bernie might end up pointing out to the TV director that he has an obligation to show the leader every so often to help pay the bills. Mind you, with the whizzy chrome paint-job on the McLarens this year, I dunno if you could actually read the adverts anyway. Link to post Share on other sites
GuzziHero Posted March 17, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2008 Glock was so unlucky. Nearly saved it and then just after the access road there was a bit of a grass berm which launched him. If that had been flat he'd have been OK. Might have had some damage but certainly wouldnt have made that spectacular application to join the RAAF! Interesting point on the paintscheme. Watch this space for a comparison of F1 paintschemes now to 1994 - my fave year for F1 car design. Link to post Share on other sites
GuzziHero Posted March 17, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2008 As threatened... Williams: FW16 FW30 --- Benetton/Renault B194 R28 --- Ferrari...well, not much changes. --- McLaren MP4/9 MP4/23 See how busy and overstyled the new ones are? More comparisons may follow later. Link to post Share on other sites
EdrrakNolat Posted March 17, 2008 Report Share Posted March 17, 2008 mmmmm McLaren.... Link to post Share on other sites
GuzziHero Posted March 17, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2008 Yeh...but the new one looks ridiculous compared to the clean lines of previous cars. Link to post Share on other sites
Stealthbomber Posted March 20, 2008 Report Share Posted March 20, 2008 Oooh, this just in: F1 to return to BBC from next year. Woot! No more adverts and not more Jim Rosenthal. Absolutely bloody BRILLIANT!!!! I see ITV say they chose to give up F1 voluntarily. Right, cos with Lewis Hamilton just getting set to become, possibly, an even better driver than Michael Schumacher there's obviously no interest to Brits in F1 for the forseeable future. OTOH, I see Bernie is saying HE binned ITV because he figured they were ignoring it in favour of other events. Sounds more like it to me. How many times have we been denied the after-race interviews because ITV had to go to some football match, horse show or god-knows-what? Seriously, I think the BBC got very complacent about F1 when they lost it. They didn't bother hyping it up at all. When ITV got the rights to it they DID make each race seem like a big event and they really jazzed the whole thing up for a while. However, it was BLATANTLY obvious that several of the ITV team had no actual clue about F1 or interest in it. I absolutely HATE having Jim Rosenthal sitting there telling me about F1. If you turned off the autocue you just KNOW the plonker couldn't even tell you what circuit they are at. Loiuse Goodman was totally clueless when she arrived. The drivers all used to take the mickey out of her by talking nonsense when she tried to interview them. I guess she's learned a bit since then but, meh! I vote the beeb get Damon Hill commentating on F1 and, if then can, get Murray Walker to do a short piece about the history of each track or about a driver each week. Martin Brundle can stay cos he's been there and done it but they should get rid of Mark Blundell cos he's a fat, useless twonk. Link to post Share on other sites
Danke Posted March 20, 2008 Report Share Posted March 20, 2008 We're pretty lucky here in Canada as it's on Speed from the US, and TSN from Canada at the same time, you can flip channels as the commercials come up and reduce the breaks by 90%. There are a couple races that black out but otherwise it's as close as you'll get to a live feed. Link to post Share on other sites
RacingManiac Posted March 20, 2008 Report Share Posted March 20, 2008 But we do get the ITV feed, but we only get it during the race, with James Allen and Martin Brundle + Louis Goodman and Ted Kraviz in the pit.... Wonder who BBC will use.... The only thing I don't like about ITV is the on-air orgasm James Allen seems to have when Lewis Hamilton does well....other than that its far superior to the SPEED TV's commmentator... Link to post Share on other sites
Danke Posted March 20, 2008 Report Share Posted March 20, 2008 But we do get the ITV feed, but we only get it during the race, with James Allen and Martin Brundle + Louis Goodman and Ted Kraviz in the pit.... Wonder who BBC will use.... The only thing I don't like about ITV is the on-air orgasm James Allen seems to have when Lewis Hamilton does well....other than that its far superior to the SPEED TV's commmentator... You just make it into a drinking game, whenever they mention his name you drink. When Carl Fogarty was racing in WSB you couldn't make it to the end of the second race. Link to post Share on other sites
GuzziHero Posted March 20, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 20, 2008 Didnt know you Canadians had an interest in F1 since the big nancy Jacques got the boot (kidding!) Link to post Share on other sites
snowman Posted March 20, 2008 Report Share Posted March 20, 2008 Martin Brundle can stay cos he's been there and done it but they should get rid of Mark Blundell cos he's a fat, useless twonk. What did Brundle do that Blundell didn't (I assume you mean racing experience)? Cheers. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.