Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Unless I'm mistaken Richard, wasn't that the 107% rule? Not 110%...

Either which way I agree with Webbers statements too, it goes for most sportsmen in general...

1989 grand final, when Dipper and Dermy both played on with a punctured lung and bruised liver respectively, both with internal bleeding and both winding up in hospital post game.... Now look at the pansyfl.... All full of do-gooders and soft-cocks...Everyone may as well give up and play soccer and badminton.. Motorsport has definitely gone the same way..

I believe it may have been changed from 107% to 110% before they finally got rid of it. I guess the FIA decided they'd rather have a full grid than a field of decent cars, much like this year.

  • Replies 3.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Did anyone see the F1 2010 preview on OneHD last night?

They did a wrap up/year in review of 2009 at the start, and it was fcuking amazing!

Yeh saw that was pretty good missed the rest of the show though anything else good?

http://www.racer.com/mclaren-vent-system-s...article/165546/

lulz - sneaky little kents. Might make 10km/h more on the straights.

Goooo Team!

Payback for '09 diffuser. Will be funny if the other teams don't have the chassis design to accomodate it :P

More interested then ever about some of the inner team battles.

My thoughts Alonso to pip Massa. Lewis to be comfortable against Button.... Just how good is Rosberg and hwo much did the surgery and injury affect Webber last year? COME ON WEBZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

5 hours to go to P1 2010! :cheers:

I am working in Singapore at the moment and our office is just down the road from a Ferrari dealership. Well about 3 hours ago ther ewas about 15-20 cars from Californias, F430 and a few Scuds and 599s all driving down the road in formation. I am wandering if its a group hand feed / admiration thing coinciding with the kick off for F1 2010

Prac 1 just finished

Top 10 results-

1 Sutil (!) 1:56.583

2 Alonso 1:56.766

3 Kubica 1:57.041

4 Massa 1:57.055

5 Button 1:57.068

6 Hamilton 1:57.163

7 Liuzzi 1:57.194

8 Rosberg 1:57.199

9 Webber 1:57.255

10 Schumi 1:57.662

on to Prac 2 at 10pm...

Webz has broken the car ... again. I want to know what the full story was with Geoff Willis (was former technical director at RBR) leaving mid last year. The car was unreliable befor ehe joined, and sicne leaving the car has gone back to its unreliable 2007 ways...just like Jag used to be and often Newey cars are ??? :blush:

FP session 2 Commentary

14:15

Hamilton reports that his rear tyres are destroyed after just four laps.

14:16

That does not bode well, because he is on the hard tyres.

14:16

The softs are even more fragile.

14:16

What's more he only has two sets of each compound to use during practice.

14:17

Tyre wear on heavy fuel loads is a serious concern in the hot weather in Bahrain this weekend. What we don't know about Hamilton's destroyed tyres is how many laps he had already put on them in the first session.

I agree we don't have much of an idea as to how many laps those tires MAY have done prior to FP2, but either way... LOL, given any hot GP's this year, and I think anyone could safely discount Louise... Unless he tweaks and adjusts his aggressive driving style this side of soon...

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 think you're really missing the point. The spec is just the minimum spec that the fuel has to meet. The additive packages can, and do, go above that minimum if the fuel brand feels they need/want to. And so you get BP Ultimate or Shell Ultra (or whatever they call it) making promises to clean your engine better than the standard stuff....simply because they do actually put better additive packages in there. They do not waste special sauce on the plebian fuel if they can avoid it. I didn't say "energy density". I just said "density". That's right, the specific gravity (if you want to use a really shit old imperial description for mass per unit volume). The density being higher indicates a number of things, from reduces oxygen content, to increased numbers of double bonds or cyclic components. That then just happens to flow on to the calorific value on a volume basis being correspondingly higher. The calorific value on a mass basis barely changes, because almost all hydrocarbon materials have a very similar CV per kg. But whatever - the end result is that you do get a bit more energy per litre, which helps to offset some of the sting of the massive price bump over 91. I can go you one better than "I used to work at a fuel station". I had uni lecturers who worked at the Pt Stanvac refinery (at the time they were lecturing, as industry specialist lecturers) who were quite candid about the business. And granted, that was 30+ years ago, and you might note that I have stated above that I think the industry has since collected together near the bottom (quite like ISPs, when you think about it). Oh, did I mention that I am quite literally a combustion engineer? I'm designing (well, actually, trying to avoid designing and trying to make the junior engineer do it) a heavy fuel oil firing system for a cement plant in fricking Iraq, this week. Last week it was natural gas fired this-that. The week before it was LPG fired anode furnaces for a copper smelter (well, the burners for them, not the actual furnaces, which are just big dumb steel). I'm kinda all over fuels.
    • Well my freshly rebuilt RB25DET Neo went bang 1000kms in, completely fried big end bearing in cylinder 1 so bad my engine seized. No knocking or oil pressure issue prior to this happening, all happened within less than a second. Had Nitto oil pump, 8L baffled sump, head drain, oil restrictors, the lot put in to prevent me spinning a bearing like i did to need the rebuild. Mechanic that looked after the works has no idea what caused it. Reckoned it may have been bearing clearance wrong in cylinder 1 we have no idea. Machinist who did the work reckoned it was something on the mechanic. Anyway thats between them, i had no part in it, just paid the money Curiosity question, does the oil system on RB’s go sump > oil pump > filter > around engine? If so, if you had a leak on an oil filter relocation plate, say sump > oil pump > filter > LEAK > around engine would this cause a low oil pressure reading if the sensors was before the filter?   TIA
    • But I think you missed mine.. there is also nothing about the 98 spec that supports your claim..  according to the fuel standards, it can be identical to 95, just very slightly higher octane number. But the ulp vs pulp fuel regulations go show 95 (or 98), is not just 91 with some additives. any claim of ‘refined by the better refineries’ or ‘higher quality fuel’ is just hearsay.  I have never seen anything to back up such claims other than ‘my mate used to work for a fuel station’, or ‘drove a fuel delivery truck’, or ‘my mechanic says’.. the actual energy densities do slightly vary between the 3 grades of fuel, but the difference is very minor. That said, I am very happy to be proven wrong if anyone has some hard evidence..
    • Hey guys I’m chasing a Rb20det complete or bare block need a good running engine as mine has low comp 
    • You're making my point for me. 95 is not "premium". It is a "slightly higher octane" version of the basic 91 product. The premium product that they want people to buy (for all the venal corporate reasons of making more profit, and all the possibly specious reasons of it being a "better" fuel with nicer additive packages) is the 98 octane stuff. 95 is the classic middle child. No-one wants it. No-one cares about it. It is just there, occupying a space in the product hierarchy.
×
×
  • Create New...