Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I agree with Horner about it being bad for the sport (they will lose viewers this year if the other teams don't close the gap). But I agree with your "have a cry".

Rbr should just ditch the Renault engine and bolt in either a fez or merc engine.

Horner can go eat a dick. It was ok by the sport when his team was winning and he gave no fk for anyone else struggling. Now he is in a world of pain and suddenly the sport is under threat.

Was then, is now. Maybe he will have cause to reflect and start by thinking of someone other than himself. How long that may last is another question.

something has to be done. But who knows what?

the other teams need to do as good a job as Mercedes.

or the fans need to stop expecting parity type racing in a non-parity formula where they push the limits of engineering and each take slightly different directions...

Edited by hrd-hr30

Lol...but they cant do as good a job. Combination of money and technical resources....the limited opportunity to develop, test and implement due to testing restrictions and homologation of parts etc.

No doubt Mercedes gave done a good job. If they were miles ahead in an area of the car other teams could develop like aero or composite materials/weight...wheel or brake rech etc ..then get lifting boys.

But the engine freeze sinks that as an option.

They get a bandaid and have to develop an engine they only get 4 of for the season....its BS

Yeah the whole development freeze basically means that for this season (and I think even next season has limited development allowed too) we get to watch the mercs race each other, while the others race to be the first of the losers.

I think the focus on the engine as the entire reason for the Merc's speed is wrong. A third of the rest of the grid have the Merc engines, but none have got close to the Mercedes' lap times on any aero tracks. Williams is the only one that has matched them at times. They certainly had the straight line pace to match or beat Mercedes, so it's not that Merc are handing out lesser spec engines. But Williams can only keep up in terms of lap times on a few tracks where bhp and straight line speed matter heaps more than aero. And Ferrari now have plenty of power as well - I thnk they had higher trap speeds than the Mercedes engined cars! It's the Chassis and aero that is Mercedes real advantage IMO.

I think the focus on the engine as the entire reason for the Merc's speed is wrong. A third of the rest of the grid have the Merc engines, but none have got close to the Mercedes' lap times on any aero tracks. Williams is the only one that has matched them at times. They certainly had the straight line pace to match or beat Mercedes, so it's not that Merc are handing out lesser spec engines. But Williams can only keep up in terms of lap times on a few tracks where bhp and straight line speed matter heaps more than aero. And Ferrari now have plenty of power as well - I thnk they had higher trap speeds than the Mercedes engined cars! It's the Chassis and aero that is Mercedes real advantage IMO.

So IMO if you put a Merc engine in every car you would have a good race between RBR and Mercedes...then it is debatable where Williams would be relative to Ferrari this year, FI, Lotus etc. A few more races may add light to that.

Williams were largely competitive because of their engine. Yes others did less with their engine, but FFS it is Force India and a confused McLaren that we are comparing them to.

Williams built a slippery car that used the power of the Merc engine to do the job it did. RBR have good aero that they are trimming down to lower than target figures to try and give themselves a hope in hell in a straight line. If they had the power of the Merc they would run the same DF if not more than Mercedes and leave both to fight for the podium step.

This year, we will see how Lotus go...I am hoping they will beat Sauber which will give more of a feel for Mercedes vs Fezz power. The more you read about Allison the more you need to be open to the fact that the Ferrari this year is actually just a good car. I expect next year will be better again now that he is in charge of engine and chassis so the Ferraris are only going to get better as he whips the Fezz factory into shape and all groups start performing.

Having a good engine gives you good aero as you hacve good drivability off corners and you are not bleeding aero off the car to compensate for lack of grunt.

IMO Renault will get better by the time they are back in Europe and by Spain RBR, well Dan will be pushing for second best with Ferrari. Williams are still a bit of a mystert at present and need to see what Bottas can do with a clean weekend. Poor Massa is still the guy that always gets tyres stuck in his wing, bad pitsop, gets put on his lid etc

I've heard theories that the Renault engines are something like 80hp down on power compared to the mercs. That's a pretty substantial difference. And during the prerace show of the melbourne gp, I'm pretty sure that it was when they were taking the tour of the merc offices in the UK old mate toto was saying that they reckoned they'd found nearly a second of pace compared to last year's car. I doubt any of the others found half as much, so the gap just widened.

Oh and Dan Ricciardo came into work today....

Lol...but they cant do as good a job. Combination of money and technical resources....the limited opportunity to develop, test and implement due to testing restrictions and homologation of parts etc.

No doubt Mercedes gave done a good job. If they were miles ahead in an area of the car other teams could develop like aero or composite materials/weight...wheel or brake rech etc ..then get lifting boys.

But the engine freeze sinks that as an option.

They get a bandaid and have to develop an engine they only get 4 of for the season....its BS

Homologation and reduction in testing and modification has never and will never produce the desired outcomes of reduced cost and increased parity, it simply "locks in" the current performance disparity.

I've heard theories that the Renault engines are something like 80hp down on power compared to the mercs. That's a pretty substantial difference. And during the prerace show of the melbourne gp, I'm pretty sure that it was when they were taking the tour of the merc offices in the UK old mate toto was saying that they reckoned they'd found nearly a second of pace compared to last year's car. I doubt any of the others found half as much, so the gap just widened.

Oh and Dan Ricciardo came into work today....

Wait and see I guess...but as always I am expecting Horner is sooking and making things out to be worse than they really are.

Testing wasnt as bad as Melbourne and that seems to support the argument that Renault were under a load of pressure to take a punt in Melbourne with an upgrade that wasnt fully tested and ready for a race weekend. So RBR may have played a part in wishing the risk upon themselves

I understand Renault were in Austria using extra dyno resources in conjunction with their own dynos getting the miles and hours on the drivability etc.

It seems maybe Bahrain, but more likely Spain we will see where Renault are at

Ferrari were even slower in a straight line than Renault last year and claim to have made 70bhp over the winter while still saving 10 of their 32 tokens. Their car is now the fastest in the speed traps - obviously a mix of drag and power, but they're not exactly hurting for power now and are more than a match for Williams.

Renault made up heaps of ground during last season. By the end they were about 40bhp down from what I read. Renault claim to have gained over 50bhp since the Barcellona test while saving 12 tokens for a mid-season upgrade. They have the most tokens up their sleeve. The problems with power and driveablitiy at Melbourne they're blame on the software. They can fix that without using tokens from my understanding. So they should be able to unleash that extra power they have up their sleeves as soon as they sort out the software gremlins. That should put them in the game with Ferrari and Williams. Then they have the most tokens left of anyone to upgrade during the season on top of that... But I doubt they'll catch Mercedes in race pace because the Merc's aero performance and fuel economy is just too good IMO. Alan Jones would be on your side that RBR have the best chassis though - if that makes you feel any better.. hehe

Mercedes also claim to have made 50bhp over winter. Seems to be the magic number... Who knows how true any of these claims are, but it's all we've got to go on. But they claim their real strength is in high speed corners now.

Edited by hrd-hr30

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



  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...