Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

woah! that would be big news. Very interesting. they already have ferrari engines. now they'll have schuey and brawn to help them cheat their way to the top. I like it.

and troy, I think that could be a plan. maybe we could hit up paul sotddart for use of one of his old army transport planes. there would be plenty of room for 2 cars and a few strippers too just to keep us sustained for the journey.

  • Replies 2.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

"The regulation was introduced just prior to the season and the three-centimetre diameter white circle that was painted on the soft tyres for the Australian Grand Prix proved to be not visible enough."

Isn't it funny how with all the money and brains in the formula 1 industry that they could think such a stupid idea would work. First of all you have the words 'Bridgestone Potenza' printed in white on the sidewall of the tyre, now spin that tyre at 300km/h and try and workout if you can see a white dot in it all, obviously they were all on the piss when they thought of that idea.

The new idea of a white ring around the tyre is interesting and looks a little bit cool, atleast it definitely works.

I for one don't understand the purpose of the regulation requiring teams to run two different compounds. Judging by the Melbourne GP two thing can & probably will happen.

1. No one uses them until the last, shortened stint in the race because as often as not they will grain & the teams don't want to risk it. Running them on a rubbered in track lessens the chance of graining, but by then the race is almost always over anyway.

2. Cars with suspension that is harder on their tyres (mostly the mid ranked teams) just become less competitive anyway.

There is a chance the harder of the two compounds will be the better option at some tracks. In which case whether or not you run them other than last entirely depends on if you believe you will get a pace car during the race.

As ever artificial means to "spice up the racing" inevitably works for about 10 minutes until everyone cottons onto the best strategy. Then everything just reverts back to normal - wasting time, money & peoples rapidly diminishing attention spans. If they want to make the racing more interesting give everyone proper soft compound tyres & get rid of re-fuelling.

I think as bridgestone refine the differences in both compounds, we'll start to see it become a more important part of stratagy making by the teams. Because this is such a new concept the tyres are still going through some development. I think eventually it will a good specticle to watch, but so far they're still teething

Edited by ctjet

you'd think with hack teams consistently performing in practice sessions, you guys would start to realise that it means sweet f**k all in real racing terms....they're out there running times because they need to be...where as major teams could be out there raping them without lube....

Of course this is just my personal opinion on this stuff, and yes there are big teams out there in the times above....but I wouldn't be reading too much into any of it :laugh:

The 2nd qualifying session is the only way to see who is fastest in F1.

The 1st qualifying session the top teams only do enough to get into the 2nd session and the 3rd session they are on their race fuel/strategy so that can lead to different results. The race speed well who knows what strategy or tyres they are on and the same with the practice days just testing new parts, tyres, etc not going their for outright lap speed.

The only times practice sessions mean anything is when you compare them to to the lap record.

If a car can sustain a time close to that of the fatest lap for that track over long distances than you know who stands where. Anyone can piss fart around for a day than pump in a quick one at the end for the sponsors... its anout knowing the breakdown of how and when they got the PB for that session.

Ferrari and Mclaren a so far infront its rediculous


you'd think with hack teams consistently performing in practice sessions, you guys would start to realise that it means sweet f**k all in real racing terms....they're out there running times because they need to be...where as major teams could be out there raping them without lube....

Of course this is just my personal opinion on this stuff, and yes there are big teams out there in the times above....but I wouldn't be reading too much into any of it :)

f**k you dezz.. that hurt... what about sato.. yer thats right.. sato,

Enough said.,

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

    • Well, in the same way that you can't tell any SUV from any manufacturer in any size category from any other one, "sports" coupes now all look identical. Stand back and squint your eyes and the Supra and the 400Z and the GR/BRZ things all look the same. I was just thinking last night, when sitting behind a Subaru CrossTrek, that I have no idea what it is, how it differs from an XV, or a Forester, or an Outback, or anything else Subaru offer, and I couldn't tell if it was supposed to be small, medium or large. I contrasted that to the good old days, where a HQ Kingswood had familial similarities to an LJ Torana, but there is no way that you could confuse them, and how a bit later, the HX Kinger and the concurrent Torana and the Gemini all had familial similarities, but you still could not confuse them. Ditto the ugly Fords and Chryslers of the era. But now, a RAV4 looks like a Kluger, looks like a Yaris/Cross/whatever they're calling those stupid f**king things, looks like every other Toyota that's not a Camry/Corolla sedan.
    • The Prelude doesn't look that bad without all that lens distortion in those pics. Makes it look disproportionate when it isn't. Actually I kind of liked it at the Osaka Auto Messe earlier this year. 
    • Pour in the highest octane, non-ethanol fuel you can get and see if the readout changes. If it's dead bang on 11% then I would question the sensor. Another quick test, just take it out and run normal (in an american accent) gas-o-line through it and see if the sampled ethanol or lack of changes.   United E85 here in the land of drop bears does vary a bit, I've had as high as E87 (could be water in their tanks too, who knows)
    • Yep. And if you ever do, you'll just have to deal with it then.
    • E10 is pretty tightly regulated in percentage. Too much and engines can't adapt. Every incentive is against them to have too little ethanol though. The more ethanol the higher the octane.
×
×
  • Create New...