Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

2015 Formula 1 Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
happycadaver said:
I have corrected that for you. ;)

It's a shame that the issues of Mercedes don't hit HAM more often. The result is an even more lame season than last year.
Click to expand...
How is Vettel a better driver than Hamilton? Yes he might have more world championships, but in that car I believe many drivers could have won. You could of course argue the same for the Merc of Hamilton, but I believe RBR very clearly had a preferred driver. Where as Lewis has taken what he learnt last year and has improved.
 
Gav2k said:
Ok:.

Max time penalty for tire pressure infringement is 25 seconds hence the 'hammer time' telling Lewis nothing was to stop vettle trying to keep within that limit. Was Lewis at his limit? Opening an extra 1 second in two laps says no!
Click to expand...

He wasn't driving at the limit until told to do so - but his radio transmissions after those instructions were issued sounded to me like he was pushing the limit for a lap or two there (setting a new record each time).

Gav2k said:
The reason there was no punishment is due to Pirelli verifying the pressures with the team before the race. The issue is the pressures fluctuate so yes clarity is needed which I think needs to be a pressure taken in the blanket before the race.
Click to expand...

I think Pirelli made a similar comment before the race - pressures are taken prior to start but how can a team guarantee those will remain constant throughout a race? In fact the latter must be almost impossible. It's case of loopholes being exploited (turning up the heat on the blankets, for instance), not rule being broken. As I understand it there is no rule governing what your tire pressure must be at the end of the race.
 
Lord Blackadder said:
He wasn't driving at the limit until told to do so - but his radio transmissions after those instructions were issued sounded to me like he was pushing the limit for a lap or two there (setting a new record each time).



I think Pirelli made a similar comment before the race - pressures are taken prior to start but how can a team guarantee those will remain constant throughout a race? In fact the latter must be almost impossible. It's case of loopholes being exploited (turning up the heat on the blankets, for instance), not rule being broken. As I understand it there is no rule governing what your tire pressure must be at the end of the race.
Click to expand...
Turning the blankets up would increase the pressure. Teams want a lower pressure hence the lower limit to stop them dropping the pressures.

As for the whole on the limit thing Lewis explained that after the race. It was a case of pushing on old tires he classed as a risk and he didn't know what was going on at the time.
 
Gav2k said:
Turning the blankets up would increase the pressure. Teams want a lower pressure hence the lower limit to stop them dropping the pressures.
Click to expand...

Team get a lower pressure by under-inflating the tires and then using extra-hot tire blankets to raise pressures up to within the limits when they are measured before the start. Then the blankets come off and the tires drop to lower-than-specified pressures for the race.
 
But tbh, does anybody want a driver disqualified for having 0.3 PSI discrepancy?
Why don't they set a cold tyre pressure? Then people can do what they like with the blankets.
 
Apple fanboy said:
Why don't they set a cold tyre pressure? Then people can do what they like with the blankets.
Click to expand...
No way to change the tire pressures after they're checked because they're checked just before the warmup lap. If you checked when they're cold in the garage there would be opportunities for cheating. Tire pressures don't matter to me much in any case, if you're setting pressures that are bad for the tires you'll pay for it in DNFs. Seems like a self-correcting problem to me.
 
Mercades telling Hamilton to speed up when his nearest rival was 28 seconds behind, but not telling him why. It was to cover off any time penalty over low tyre pressures.
 
Apple fanboy said:
But tbh, does anybody want a driver disqualified for having 0.3 PSI discrepancy?
Click to expand...

I'd like to know what the average pressure variation across the cours of an F1 race typically is. Given the abuse F1 tires take (and their short usable lifespans), I'm sure its not unusual for a tire to lose a few tenths of PSI.
 
Apple fanboy said:
But tbh, does anybody want a driver disqualified for having 0.3 PSI discrepancy?
Why don't they set a cold tyre pressure? Then people can do what they like with the blankets.
Click to expand...

Mainly because Pirelli has to guarantee the safety of the tire and can only do so at a certain PSI. Nobody "wants" their driver to be disqualified but sometimes they take calculated risks.

That race was garbage in my opinion. As soon as Raikkonen bogged down and Hamilton hit the first corner in front it was essentially over. It's not even fun watching a Ferrari climb from last through the field anymore. So much pace control, tyre management, & temperature control; is it even racing? Seems like manufactured engineering. I think I watch F1 more for the panoramic shots they show on TV more than anything else nowadays. Unless there's drivers pushing for the entire distance in similar machinery, I don't think you can call it racing.
 
F1 are trying to keep cars similar and keep costs down. But unless they more directly restrict what teams can spend, the gulf in capability between the top and bottom teams will remain.

[sarcasm] Maybe they should just have the top 4 teams field 2 extra cars each and eliminate the poorer teams altogether. [/sarcasm]
 
Lord Blackadder said:
F1 are trying to keep cars similar and keep costs down.
Click to expand...
No, they're trying to maximize costs. I can't think of a single thing they do that doesn't increase costs. If they were trying to reduce costs they wouldn't have significant rules changes every year and massive rules changes every several years. If they wanted to reduce costs they wouldn't come up with dumbass ideas like 5-race engines and transmissions. This was touted as another money-saving measure, but $100k for a new engine and transmission every race is a hell of a lot cheaper than the R&D required to make them last 5 races.

Regulatory stability is the single biggest thing they can do to reduce costs and improve competitiveness of lower-tier teams.
 
randian said:
No, they're trying to maximize costs. I can't think of a single thing they do that doesn't increase costs. If they were trying to reduce costs they wouldn't have significant rules changes every year and massive rules changes every several years. If they wanted to reduce costs they wouldn't come up with dumbass ideas like 5-race engines and transmissions. This was touted as another money-saving measure, but $100k for a new engine and transmission every race is a hell of a lot cheaper than the R&D required to make them last 5 races.

Regulatory stability is the single biggest thing they can do to reduce costs and improve competitiveness of lower-tier teams.
Click to expand...

I never said the F1/the FIA were doing a good job. I merely repeated their stated goals.

If you make the format somewhat open and consistent, a few really rich teams will always be the best at building the fastest "legal" car. If you change the format constantly to close loopholes, you impose unacceptable financial/development pressures on the "poorer" teams. If you make the format less open it becomes a spec series and manufacturers bail out.
 
randian said:
No, they're trying to maximize costs. I can't think of a single thing they do that doesn't increase costs. If they were trying to reduce costs they wouldn't have significant rules changes every year and massive rules changes every several years. If they wanted to reduce costs they wouldn't come up with dumbass ideas like 5-race engines and transmissions. This was touted as another money-saving measure, but $100k for a new engine and transmission every race is a hell of a lot cheaper than the R&D required to make them last 5 races.

Regulatory stability is the single biggest thing they can do to reduce costs and improve competitiveness of lower-tier teams.
Click to expand...

This is true unfortunately.

F1 is being run as luxury marketing brand instead of a sport so you're essentially window shopping for two hours on TV every grand prix. If you look at the North American sport model, what they do is aim to raise the value of each individual franchise and do not want markets to suffer. When each individual team increases in value, the wealth, size, and stability of the league grows. In F1 it's the opposite. The big teams get all the money and the exposure (Ferrari takes a piece off the top) and the rest battle it out for bread crumbs. There is no ability for lower teams to build themselves into a perennial contender so all the other joiners are funded by men who love motorsport and want to be in the atmosphere, they all know they will never win. So what you have is not a sport, but a showcase of businesses who have the most money, spending the most money and showing it off on 19 weekends every year.
 
Lord Blackadder said:
F1 are trying to keep cars similar and keep costs down. But unless they more directly restrict what teams can spend, the gulf in capability between the top and bottom teams will remain.

[sarcasm] Maybe they should just have the top 4 teams field 2 extra cars each and eliminate the poorer teams altogether. [/sarcasm]
Click to expand...
This is a problem. As is this nonsense with Mercedes and Red Bull. Mercedes doesn't want to supply engines to Red Bull as Merc knows RBR could beat them with Merc power. So now what? The engine manufacturers that also have factory teams aren't willing to provide engines to a perfectly good customer? What a joke. It augments the classes separation in F1. Ferrari has already said they are willing to power RBR, which is tough for Ferrari, but good for them as it is fantastic for the sport.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pachyderm
So 4th for Hamilton and 7th for Nico make it look like Mercedees have blown it for Singapore. However I'm willing to bet that's sorted for qualifying and the race.
In other news looks like VW will be buying RBR. They will be supplying their own engines, but not until 2018. Until then they will use Ferrari engines.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pachyderm
Apple fanboy said:
So 4th for Hamilton and 7th for Nico make it look like Mercedees have blown it for Singapore. However I'm willing to bet that's sorted for qualifying and the race.
In other news looks like VW will be buying RBR. They will be supplying their own engines, but not until 2018. Until then they will use Ferrari engines.
Click to expand...

VW might want to slow down on that RBR purchase. The could be paying a 18 billion $ fine to the EPA plus fixing the 400,000 plus cars with that "sneaky" algorithm that allowed them to circumvent emission standards here in US. I'm not a hater, I own one of them and I like it just the way it is.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money...lkswagen-audi-evading-emission-laws/72400018/
 
  • Like
Reactions: pachyderm
zagato27 said:
VW might want to slow down on that RBR purchase. The could be paying a 18 billion $ fine to the EPA plus fixing the 400,000 plus cars with that "sneaky" algorithm that allowed them to circumvent emission standards here in US. I'm not a hater, I own one of them and I like it just the way it is.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money...lkswagen-audi-evading-emission-laws/72400018/
Click to expand...
I read about that. Given the VW group owns about 6 major car companies, I think they can afford it!
Volkswagen Group sells passenger cars under the Audi, Bentley, Bugatti, Lamborghini, Porsche, SEAT, Škoda and Volkswagen marques.
I'd love to see Porsche or Audi racing. But Team Skoda could be quite fun!
 
  • Like
Reactions: pachyderm
no to skoda. yes to VW or Porsche!


pjgvZq0.png

cOudFTD.png
 
Last edited:
Apple fanboy said:
I read about that. Given the VW group owns about 6 major car companies, I think they can afford it!
Volkswagen Group sells passenger cars under the Audi, Bentley, Bugatti, Lamborghini, Porsche, SEAT, Škoda and Volkswagen marques.
I'd love to see Porsche or Audi racing. But Team Skoda could be quite fun!
Click to expand...
I hadn't really thought about who would be the title racing brand if you will. If F1 is going more global, you have to go Audi, Porsche, or Lamborghini
 
Apple fanboy said:
I read about that. Given the VW group owns about 6 major car companies, I think they can afford it!
Volkswagen Group sells passenger cars under the Audi, Bentley, Bugatti, Lamborghini, Porsche, SEAT, Škoda and Volkswagen marques.
I'd love to see Porsche or Atudi racing. But Team Skoda could be quite fun!
Click to expand...

Afford it, really. That's a possible 18 billion dollars! Ok, maybe if they paid it installments:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back