Jump to content
SAU Community

2009 F1 Season

dezz

By dezz,
in Motorsport Discussion & Builds

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

Duncan Grand Master

Duncan

Posted
Posted

like me!

I hate the arrogance of a suggestion that one team is more important than any other, and indeed more important than the whole sport. And Bernie and Max's actions in allowing Ferrari to have more than their fair share of income reinforce that

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TALBO Grand Master

TALBO

Posted
Posted
like me!

I hate the arrogance of a suggestion that one team is more important than any other, and indeed more important than the whole sport. And Bernie and Max's actions in allowing Ferrari to have more than their fair share of income reinforce that

That's fair enough, everyones entitled to their opinion. How exactly do they allow Ferrari a bigger slice of the pie? I'm not aware of any preferential treatment.

My understanding is that teams are paid their allocation of money dependant on where they finish in the WCC. If it were not for Ferrari and to a lesser degree McLaren teams wouldn't get f**k all from TV rights... they were the ones that fought for the teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Marco-R34GTT Grand Master

Marco-R34GTT

Posted
Posted
like me!

I hate the arrogance of a suggestion that one team is more important than any other, and indeed more important than the whole sport. And Bernie and Max's actions in allowing Ferrari to have more than their fair share of income reinforce that

In that instance, I take it that you're as happy as a pig in sh1t looking at the bull-headed egotistical arrogance displayed by Bernie and Max then eh???

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Duncan Grand Master

Duncan

Posted
Posted

no, not at all, they are terrible for the sport as a whole. couple of pages back I was complaining about thier combination of milking 3rd world countries for hosting fees and undermining team income by not racing in their sponsor's main markets.

talbo, I understand the concorde agreement allowed significantly higher payments to ferrari than other teams - good on them for negotiating that in, poor form from bernie/max in allowing it. (but I don't have time to dig out the source of that atm, bloody work gets in the way of internet sometimes. I'll have a hunt round tonight if no-one posts beforehand)

BTW australian rubgy union said they are not going to bid for the rugby world cup until at least 2020 due to the fees required to host it. I wish countries had the same sort of balls dealing with f1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
djr81 Grand Master

djr81

Posted
Posted
no, not at all, they are terrible for the sport as a whole. couple of pages back I was complaining about thier combination of milking 3rd world countries for hosting fees and undermining team income by not racing in their sponsor's main markets.

talbo, I understand the concorde agreement allowed significantly higher payments to ferrari than other teams - good on them for negotiating that in, poor form from bernie/max in allowing it. (but I don't have time to dig out the source of that atm, bloody work gets in the way of internet sometimes. I'll have a hunt round tonight if no-one posts beforehand)

BTW australian rubgy union said they are not going to bid for the rugby world cup until at least 2020 due to the fees required to host it. I wish countries had the same sort of balls dealing with f1.

Ferrari have used the "we are taking our bat & ball & going home" trick before. It is how they screwed a disproportionately large amount of money out of the previous Concorde agreement. It meant they recevied more for winning a championship than any other team would have. Which is pretty wrong.

The difference then compared to now is Ferrari had an almost viable alternative ie Indycars. Now there is none.

So yes F1 needs Ferrari. But I suspect Ferrari needs F1 more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TALBO Grand Master

TALBO

Posted
Posted
But I suspect Ferrari needs F1 more.

Not necessarily. If Toyota, BMW, RBR and STR all pull the pin with Ferrari there would be a good chance a new series would be developed I would think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hrd-hr30 Grand Master

hrd-hr30

Posted
Posted (edited)
vettel went from 2nd to 4th on the first lap. I don't think that was a strategy call. I'm fairly certain RBR didn't say, "hey vettel drop some spots off the grid mate."

webber had a good start, kept it clean and held his spot.

Vettel got as good a start as the fantastic Webber - if anything slightly faster off the line. Its just that the Ferrari with KERS just managed to pass him and Rubens got around everyone with an absolute screamer! Maybe he should have qualified slower like his team-mate and dodged the criticism of being passed on the the start? Fact is his launch was slightly faster than Mark's.

I don't believe Massa didn't use KERS into the first turn regardless of what the television telemetry says. Track position is everything, particularly at that track. The start is the best opportunity to make positions. If you aren't going to use KERS there, may as well remove the button!

vettel got trapped behind massa and did nothing about it.

all the drivers talk about how difficult it is to pass there. Only real opportunity is at the end of the straight, and when you are behind a KERS car, that's not an opportunity either. Only realistic way to pass was in the pits.

webber nearly got stuck behind alonso and carved him up nicely. then ran away from him. webber and alonso were together on track at that point but mark finished about 20 seconds ahead of sanchez. if he'd pussied out he would have been stuck behind him.

Webber blew the restart which allowed Alonso to pass him in the first place. If he hadn't muffed the restart, he wouldn't have needed to make that desperado dive back inside Alonso. Sure Alonso has KERS and that would have helped him on the restart, by Vettell was dissapearing away from Webber up the straight on the restart as well, so it wasn't only KERS that got Webber, it was a poor restart. But Webber gets high praise for that.

vettel only got 4th at all because it was gifted to him by massa who basically pulled over 5 laps from the end. otherwise he would have had a 'well deserved' 5th place to think about from 2nd on the grid.

it was 3 laps from the end, and with only 3 clear laps in the entire race to show his pace, and on the slower prime (hard) tyre, Vettel managed to finish only 5sec behind Mark and do times that Mark was doing on the faster rubber.

webber drove a great race guys. he was quick at the right times, and sure he had a good 2nd stint, but he took pain for it early on and looked like he was out of the game. no one knows in advance what the best call is going to be. as best I could tell vettel had the prime or safe strategy. he was on the same strategy as all the other main players, webber was the one with what looked to be the dud strategy. but he ran hard at the end of the stint and clawed back that time. give the bloke some credit. vettel was ordinary. he did nothing special all race. he just went backwards from the first moment. webber made his way up for once.

it was obvious that RBR had to do something in the pits to get their cars around Massa. All the drivers talk about how hard it is to pass there. And that was before you had to try and pass a KERS car! RBR did that for Mark, fuelling him long for the 2nd stint. It was equally obvious to the casual observer that their strategy of leaving Vettel stuck behind Massa for the whole race was not the "prime" strategy. I couldn't believe they didn't fuel him short to get track position, or fuel him long as they did for the other RBR car. Had they done that, he should have rejoined ahead of Webber...

You can say Vettel was ordinary, but he only had 3 laps in the whole race to do anything with due to the good start by Massa. Mark had a great run of clean track for the best part of 30 laps thanks to his team putting him in a good position on the track away from slower cars and giving him alot more laps on the faster option tyre, and yet only finished 5 sec ahead of Vettel who was held up for the entire race! Mark's start was no faster than Vettels, and he damn near blew it on the restart after the 1st lap Safety Car. His Team put him in the clear track that allowed him to make track position on the 2 cars he passed in the race. He didn't pass Vettel because he out-raced him, it was all won and lost in the pits.

Edited by hrd-hr30
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sh@un Grand Master

sh@un

Posted
Posted

I don't think there's anything 'cloak†' about it- What point would the team have had to purposely stooge Vettel? He is still a decent amount clear of Web in the WDC points standing even after last weekend. I'm sure if they could have finished him higher somehow, they would have.

Not to put to fine a point on it, but I think you'd say; Vettel just f**ked up

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kinks Grand Master

Kinks

Posted
Posted

I disagree, the team kept pitting him and bringing him out behind massa. short fuel him, long fuel him, try something guys.. in hindsight they should have long fuelled him at the first stop meaning he could stay out and leapfrog massa on the second. Easy to say from the couch though, I must admit :)

At least RBR haven't left both their drivers sitting in the pits at various times and watched themselves get eliminated from Q1. For it to happen to Ferrari twice is laughable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Roy Grand Master

Roy

Posted
Posted

Massa was heavier then Vettel at the start and Ferrari knew that with RBR being quicker they didnt want Vettel to get any clear laps. So as soon as they saw Vettel and RBR coem out, Ferrari pulled Massa in.

The just mirrored the RBR strategy...lol only to short fill him in the final stop :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hrd-hr30 Grand Master

hrd-hr30

Posted
Posted

no one is sayign they intentionally "stooged" him sh@un, just that they totally stuffed his race through poor strategy. Can't see how anything Vettel did f**ked his race though.

the fact that they got out smarted in the pits by Ferrari only emphasises that point!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dezz Grand Master

dezz

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Massa was heavier then Vettel at the start and Ferrari knew that with RBR being quicker they didnt want Vettel to get any clear laps. So as soon as they saw Vettel and RBR coem out, Ferrari pulled Massa in.

The just mirrored the RBR strategy...lol only to short fill him in the final stop :P

That just makes them look even worse imo...Massa was in front of Vettel, so it's Ferrari that acts first on track...If RBR couldn't fool Ferrari into pitting Massa a lap or 2 earlier than they were brining Vettel in, then that's pretty average..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Roy Grand Master

Roy

Posted
Posted

Just admit, Vettel is a hack and has been lucky in the first few races, and that race last year :( Why else would i like him...surely i am not actually liking a driver with real talent and a genuine chance of winning races...my support normally condemns drivers :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Lithium
      Boost level and torque curve

      By Lithium · Posted

      As someone who has been playing with turbo things for some time now, be prepared for this to not be the first time feeling this way    I'm busy as atm, but if no one else covers the things I'm realising are worth mentioning to you then I will when I have a chance as it seems like I overestimated your knowledge on how turbos and wastegates work.  Otherwise I recommend having a look around how wastegates and boost control work, really anything on understanding the general mechanism of boost control as it will help you find the answers to the questions you're looking for.  Your initial question jumps some fundamentals.
    • thx78
      Boost level and torque curve

      By thx78 · Posted

      I don't understand anything anymore.
    • thx78
      Boost level and torque curve

      By thx78 · Posted

      so this is an anomaly??? I thought it was a voluntary increase
    • Duncan
      Boost level and torque curve

      By Duncan · Posted

      we can only guess exactly what happened from our keyboards, but to me it looks like they were targeting 27 but the wastegate was too small or poorly controlled and the boost crept up, that is quite common
    • Lithium
      Boost level and torque curve

      By Lithium · Posted

      Good points!  Took those for granted - though I *did* actually give an example of winding boost up more than it had been before where I wasn't actually specifically looking for more peak power.  The Toyota Starlet dyno plot that I shared and mentioned showed an overlay from the previous tune it had and the one I'd redone, I left the boost targetting the same as the old tune but then after peak power I ramped boost up by a good 5psi or so over what the old tune had at the same rpm. The reason I felt comfortable with this (though the owner of the car had a "are you sure?" moment when I suggested it) is that the setup wasn't turbo limited, it was largely head sealing limited and the owner was a bit concerned as for the last few seasons he'd had issues with head lifting - sometimes not completing an event without having some headgasket issue, so he didn't want to run any more boost than it was. The reasons I was ok with raising the boost a good 5+psi MORE than that was that I left it where it was in the middle, and only increased it where VE (and therefore cylinder pressure vs psi) were dropping hard and I didn't stop the torque from dropping, just reduced the drop.  Well, there is that and the fact that the previous tuner had it overtimed by near 7degrees at peak torque - but that's another story haha.    I didn't really go into detail about that "turning it up more" thing but now you've mentioned the "not detuning", sometimes the boost *can* be turned up higher than you'd expect if the setup allows for it and you do it smartly.  I've tuned things to run 30psi on BP98 "safely" that a few years ago (or still?) people would cry that it was a stupid idea - but given they were well intercooled, low EMAP turbos and only doing that kind of boost where VE is dropping etc I was pretty confident it wasn't as cowboy as it sounded at face value and we never ended up with issues as a result of it.     
×
×
  • Create New...