Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Green light for 2007 Belgian Grand Prix

The Belgian Grand Prix, axed from this year's Formula One calendar, will definitely return to the historic Spa-Francorchamps circuit in 2007, it was confirmed Wednesday.

The classic race's comeback was assured after the signing of a contract between Formula One Supremo Bernie Ecclestone and the race's new management team, the local regional government announced.

It is due to be staged on September 16 by the Spa-Grand Prix company which succeeded DDF1, whose bankruptcy led to the cancelling of this season's race. Ecclestone gave his go-ahead after Spa-Grand Prix agreed to carry out major renovation to improve the track's infrastructure at an estimated cost of 40 million euros.

YAAAAAAYYYYYYY!!!

best

track

ever...

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Kimi keen to end his career with Ferrari

McLaren's Kimi Raikkonen says he does not intend to be racing in F1 for the next 10 years and has joined Ferrari so that he has the best chance of becoming World Champion very soon. The Finn, who turns 27 on the 17th October, admits that he will miss working with his McLaren team but that his decision to leave for the Scuderia was "one hundred percent technical."

Raikkonen has been with the McLaren-Mercedes outfit for five years but has had a disappointing and unsuccessful year with the British team in 2006 and is looking forward to donning the Ferrari red next season.

"I am really happy to be joining Ferrari".

"They are the most successful team since the beginning of Formula 1 and the team to beat the past seven or eight years, so to be driving for them is a dream come true".

"I joined them because I believe they will give me the best opportunity of being a world champion. Hopefully that we be in 2007! I can't wait".

Rumours surrounded the lengthy Schumacher replacement saga with one of the most frequent reporting that the Raikkonen had a pre-contract with Ferrari. The Iceman, as he is affectionately known in racing circles, denies this though, saying that he had signed a three-year deal from the very beginning. Unlike his predecessor, Raikkonen says he does not intend on being in Formula One for a very long period of time, saying in fact that he believes Ferrari will be his last stop in F1.

"I do not think I will drive as long as Schumacher did. Ferrari will probably be my last team," he told Auto Motor Und Sport.

looks like the iceman will be around for 3-5 years and Ferrari has to replace him already... suppose the tabloids are harrasing him as to who will replace him?

F1 scraps third cars, amends engine rules

18 October 2006

F1 teams will not be allowed to run three cars at Grand Prix practice sessions from next season, the FIA announced on Wednesday. Third drivers, however will still have their time in the spotlight in a revised weekend timetable.

Friday free practice will be extended to two 90-minute sessions, from the current two 60-minute format. However, teams will be limited to using two cars in any one session which will be driven by a nominated third driver or the team's regular two race drivers. In another twist, Friday practice will be exempt from the two-engine rules.

At the moment engines must last for two successive Grands Prix and any unscheduled engine changes incur a ten place grid penalty. This has meant that the main drivers have not run much on Fridays to conserve engine mileage. The new rule is designed to fix that problem.

Tyres will also change next season as Bridgestone will be the only supplier, teams will have 14 sets available per driver per weekend - twice as much as currently.

Another change involves safety cars where lapped cars will be allowed past the pace car so they don't get in the way of the leaders. Any lapped car between cars running on the lead lap will have to pass those cars and the safety car and proceed around the track to take up position at the back of the line of cars behind the safety car.

More on track action next year :laugh:

It is going to suck in a way becuase by freeing up testing on track on Fridays the teams will undoubtedly go to the race with more refined set ups. So the animals (aka teams) will basically be forming up on the grid two by two. Still it is better than not having anyone who's name you recognise going around on the Friday....

fuel strategies i think will play a big part in next years championship... i dont think the two by two dilemma wil be too much of a problem next year, teams opt for different tyres, fuels, strategies etc etc... plus some teams have drivers that are not in the same calliber as their teammate

c'mon let's all get behind MS. love him or hate him i'm sure you hate alonso more. i mean the guy is a massive tool, plus i hear he has erectile disfunction, and he once tried to crack onto to fillepe massa. and he's fashioned himself to look like a dorky version of zoro.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I'd be installing 2x widebands and using the NB simulation outputs to the ECU.
    • Nah, it's different across different engines and as the years went on. R32 era RB20, and hence also RB26, the TPS SWITCH is the idle command. The variable resistor is only for the TCU, as you say. On R33 era RB25 and onwards (but probably not RB26, as they still used the same basic ECU from the R32 era), the idle command is a voltage output of close to 0.45V from the variable resistor.
    • It's actually one of the worst bits of Nissan nomenclature (also compounded by wiring diagrams when the TCU is incorporated in ECU, or, ECU has a passthru to a standalone TCU).... the gripe ~ they call it the TPS, but with an A/T it's actually a combined unit ...TPS (throttle position switch) + TPS (throttle position sensor).... ..by the looks of it (and considering car is A/T) you have this unit... https://www.amayama.com/en/part/nissan/2262002u11 The connector on the flying lead coming out of the unit, is the TPS (throttle position sensor) ...only the TCU reads this. The connector on the unit body, is the TPS (throttle position switch) ...ECU reads this. It has 3 possible values -- throttle closed (idle control contact), open (both contacts open, ECU controls engine...'run' mode), and WOT (full throttle contact closed, ECU changes mapping). When the throttle is closed (idle control contact), this activates what the patent describes as the 'anti stall system' ~ this has the ECU keep the engine at idling speed, regardless of additional load/variances (alternator load mostly, along with engine temp), and drives the IACV solenoid with PWM signal to adjust the idle air admittance to do this. This is actually a specific ECCS software mode, that only gets utilized when the idle control contact is closed. When you rotate the TPS unit as shown, you're opening the idle control contact, which puts ECCS into 'run' mode (no idle control), which obviously is a non-sequitur without the engine started/running ; if the buzzing is coming from the IACV solenoid, then likely ECCS is freaking out, and trying to raise engine rpm 'any way it can'...so it's likely pulling the valve wide open....this is prolly what's going on there. The signal from the connector on the flying lead coming out of the unit (for the TCU), should be around 0.4volts with the throttle closed (idle position) ~ although this does effect low throttle shift points if set wrong, the primary purpose here is to tell TCU engine is at idle (no throttle demand), and in response lower the A/T line pressure ... this is often described as how much 'creep' you get with shifter in D at idle. The way the TPS unit is setup (physically), ensures the idle control contact closes with a high margin on the TPSensor signal wire, so you can rotate the unit on the adjustment slots, to achieve 0.4v whilst knowing the idle control contact is definitely closed. The IACV solenoid is powered by battery voltage via a fuse, and ground switched (PWM) by the ECU. When I check them, I typically remove the harness plug, feed the solenoid battery voltage and switch it to ground via a 5watt bulb test probe ; thing should click wide open, and idle rpm should increase... ...that said though, if it starts & idles with the TPS unit disconnected, and it still stalls when it gets up to operating temperature, it won't be the IACV because it's unused, which would infer something else is winking out...  
    • In the context of cam 'upgrader' I mean generally people who upgrade headers/cams - not my specific change. I mean it makes sense that if I had a bigger cam, I may get more false lean readings. So if I went smaller, I'd get less false lean readings. To a point where perhaps stock.. I'd have no false lean readings, according to the ECU. But I'm way richer than stock. My bigger than normal cam in the past also was giving false rich leanings. It's rather odd and doesn't add up or pass the pub test. Realistically what I want is the narrowbands to effectively work as closed loop fuel control and keep my AFR around 14.7 on light sections of the map. Which is of course the purpose of narrowband CL fuel control. So if I can change the switch points so the NB's target 14.7 (as read by my WB) then this should be fine. Haven't actually tested to see what the changed switchpoints actually result in - car needs to be in a position it can idle for awhile to do that. I suspect it will be a troublesome 15 min drive home with lots of stalling and way too rich/lean transient nightmare bucking away for that first drive at 2am or whevener it ends up being. Hopefully it's all tune-able. Realistically it should be. This is a very mild cam.
    • Messing with narrowband switchovers is a terrible bandaid. I don't want to think about it. You are a cam "upgrader" only in concept. As you said, your new cam is actually smaller, so it's technically a downgrade. OK, likely a very small downgrade, but nevertheless. But the big thing that will be the most likely suspect is the change of the advance angle. That change could be equivalent to a substantial decrease in cam lobe duration. I haven't gone to the effort of trying to think about what your change would actually cause. But until someone (you, me (unlikely), Matt, someone else) does so and comes to a conclusion about the effect, it remains a possibility that that is the change that is causing what you're seeing.
×
×
  • Create New...