Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Well Williams Renault has a certain ring to it.

As does Lotus - Renault. In black. With some bloke called Senna driving.

Your Polish mate in the Renault is doing alot better than almost everyone thought this year. His team mate doesn't suck teh balls to anywhere near the extent I thought he would, come to that.

Bring back McConville I say. The yocals bore me to tears. The Brits are their usual one eyed selves. Still it is better than Murray Walker when Mansell was around.

yep, agree my polish bro is doing well. he is still about as appealing to look at as a donkeys arse crack but man he can drive. definitely punching above his weight at the moment.

you're right too petrov is not as shit as I thought he would be. doing a reasonable job of it so far.

All this BS of trying to break the tow? Come on. Drafting is part of motorsport, and is really the first principle for getting close enough to a car to get a tow, pull out and get the job done under brakes.

Even the FIA for a long time have written:

2. Overtaking, car control and track limits

b) Overtaking, according to the circumstances, may be carried out on either the right or the left.

However, manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers, such more than one change of direction to defend a position, deliberate crowding of a car beyond the edge of the track or any other abnormal change of direction, are strictly prohibited.

Seems pretty clear to me that what Hamo did was as stupid and amatuerish as something i would do at the local go-kart track. The guy is more and more looking to be a great talent, but at the minute I would have to say the likes of Vettel and Kubica are maturing quicker then him, though they have not had the car and success that Hamo has.

A warning was the correct ruling, but frankly, he robbed us of another couple of fun racing laps. Remember Malaysia last year, Hamo and Webber? That was great racing and entertainment as they for 2-3 laps got past one another only for counter attacks to once again relegate them after compromised exits etc. Hamo just couldnt handle his amazing progress to that point being interruped by a rookie in a Renault so threw his dummy out the car and drove like a child.

LOL, above is harsh but generally true. Hamo is nowhere near as annoying as he used to be, but these sorts of things are the reason why i remember why i am not a fan

However, manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers..... deliberate crowding of a car beyond the edge of the track ..... are strictly prohibited.

Come on Troy - how many times have you seen that happen & go unpunished? It is Webber's stock move most of the time & the rest of the field for that matter.

Come on Troy - how many times have you seen that happen & go unpunished? It is Webber's stock move most of the time & the rest of the field for that matter.

Thats a tougher one. With visibility what it is i think you have to give a little slack on the first lap until people work out who is where. But agree, it happens more often...but i dont think Webber and Kimi at Brazil is an example. Webber was moving over to the inside line and Kimi thought he would keep going to try and kers through to make a gap.

Funny, the most recent examples of crowding is Hamo at Monza in the wet in 2008. I am sure it has happened dozens of times between then and now and my bias has me remembering those incidents. But that was the more deliberate and intenational examples.

whatever happened to these sub 2 second pit stops red bull were claiming? they're no faster than anybody else

so why make the claim in the first place?

Maybe if they got Kimi in there for 2011, and return the fun to the team, they might turn back into 'that team' with the great parties and so and so. Their current duo dont seem to make everybody laugh and divide opinion like the iceman did.

I will be real curious to see if RBR are interested in Kimi. Webber would have to be mindful of not having a contract for next year in 2010s best car (so far)

I think Kimi is phenomenal, but i think he has hurt himself as he is more the pre 90s F1 driver. Living the good life, getting paid serious bank and only really drives the car. He isnt the " i will be oint eh factory for the 10days between GPs working with engineers type. It will be interesting to see if RBR are happy with Vettel developing the thing and then Kimi and Vettel racing them!?!??!

Every team is due for a bad car every few seasons, but whilst Kimi drove the wheels off a shitty Ferrari last year, i cant help but blame the fact for it being shitty in the first place on poor feedback from Kimi and Massa through 2008 and in testing 2009

lol, didn't take kimi long to fk years of punishing fitness regimes at the hands of his F1 masters. god I love him. he'd be even more likeable as a fat kunt.

I will spit chips if he takes webber seat though. I don't think it will happen but anything's possible.

whatever happened to these sub 2 second pit stops red bull were claiming? they're no faster than anybody else

yes the claim does seem a bit silly but I believe what they meant was actually changing the tyres takes less than 3 seconds - ie the car is already up on jacks it's purely the remove/refit operation.

As bad as that Buemi crash was..... did anyone else find it a little bit funny that he was trying to steer without any front wheels? lulz.

What a massive failure in the front end though! Very lucky that he wasnt injured. Just heard on fox news that Buemi says the crash was 'nothing serious'.... Lol WTF?

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

    • Nah. For something like boost control I wouldn't start my design with PID. I'd go with something that originates in the fuzzy logic world and use an emergency function or similar concept. PID can and does work, but at its fundamental level it is not suited to quick action. I'd be reasonably sure that the Profecs et al all transitioned to a fuzzy algorithm back in the 90s. Keep in mind also that where and when I have previously talked about using a Profec, I'm usually talking about only doing an open loop system anyway. All this talk of PID and other algorithms only comes into play when you're talking closed loop boost control, and in the context of what the OP needs and wants, we're probably actually in the realm of open loop anyway. Closed loop boost control has always bothered me, because if you sense the process value (ie the boost measurement that you want to control) in the plenum (after the throttle), then boost control to achieve a target is only desirable at WOT. When you are not WOT, you do not want the the boost to be as high as it can be (ie 100% of target). That's why you do not have the throttle at WO. You're attempting to not go as fast as you can. If the process variable is measured upstream of the throttle (ie in an RB26 plenum, or the cold side pipework in others) then yeah, sure, run the boost controller closed loop to hit a target boost there, and then the throttle does what it is supposed to do. Just for utter clarity.... an old Profec B Spec II (or whatever it is called, and I've got one, and I never look at it, so I can't remember!) and similar might have a MAP sensor, and it might show you the actual boost in the plenum (when the MAP sensor is connected to the plenum) but it does not use that value to decide what it is doing to control the boost, except to control the gating effect (where it stops holding the gate closed on the boost ramp). It's not closed loop at all. Once the gate is released, it's just the solenoid flailing away at whatever duty cycle was configured when it was set up. I'm sure that there are many people who do not understand the above points and wonder wtf is going on.  
    • This has clearly gone off on quite a tangent but the suggestion was "go standalone because you probably aren't going to stop at just exhaust + a mild tune and manual boost controller", not "buy a standalone purely for a boost controller". If the scope does in fact stop creeping at an EBC then sure, buy an EVC7 or Profec or whatever else people like to run and stop there. And I have yet to see any kind of aftermarket boost control that is more complicated than a PID controller with some accounting for edge cases. Control system theory is an incredibly vast field yet somehow we always end up back at some variant of a PID controller, maybe with some work done to linearize things. I have done quite a lot, but I don't care to indulge in those pissing matches, hence posting primary sources. I deal with people quite frequently that scream and shout about how their opinion matters more because they've shipped more x or y, it doesn't change the reality of the data they're trying to disagree with. Arguing that the source material is wrong is an entirely separate point and while my experience obviously doesn't matter here I've rarely seen factory service manuals be incorrect about something. It's not some random poorly documented internal software tool that is constantly being patched to barely work. It's also not that hard to just read the Japanese and double check translations either. Especially in automotive parts most of it is loanwords anyways.
    • If you are keeping the current calipers you need to keep the current disc as the spacing of the caliper determines the disc diameter. Have you trial fitted the GTS brakes fit on a GTSt hub or is this forward planning? There could be differences in caliper mount spacing, backing plate and even hub shape that could cause an issue.
    • Hi there I have a r33 gts with 4 stud small brakes, I'm going to convert to 5 stud but keep the small brakes, what size rotor would I need?
    • First up, I wouldn't use PID straight up for boost control. There's also other control techniques that can be implemented. And as I said, and you keep missing the point. It's not the ONE thing, it's the wrapping it up together with everything else in the one system that starts to unravel the problem. It's why there are people who can work in a certain field as a generalist, IE a IT person, and then there are specialists. IE, an SQL database specialist. Sure the IT person can build and run a database, and it'll work, however theyll likely never be as good as a specialist.   So, as said, it's not as simple as you're thinking. And yes, there's a limit to the number of everything's in MCUs, and they run out far to freaking fast when you're designing a complex system, which means you have to make compromises. Add to that, you'll have a limited team working on it, so fixing / tweaking some features means some features are a higher priority than others. Add to that, someone might fix a problem around a certain unrelated feature, and that change due to other complexities in the system design, can now cause a new, unforseen bug in something else.   The whole thing is, as said, sometimes split systems can work as good, and if not better. Plus when there's no need to spend $4k on an all in one solution, to meet the needs of a $200 system, maybe don't just spout off things others have said / you've read. There's a lot of misinformation on the internet, including in translated service manuals, and data sheets. Going and doing, so that you know, is better than stating something you read. Stating something that has been read, is about as useful as an engineering graduate, as all they know is what they've read. And trust me, nearly every engineering graduate is useless in the real world. And add to that, if you don't know this stuff, and just have an opinion, maybe accept what people with experience are telling you as information, and don't keep reciting the exact same thing over and over in response.
×
×
  • Create New...