The Official 2015 Canadian Grand Prix thread **SPOILERS**
Discussion
Red for Button warranted in my book.
Nasr is going to feel a bit of a wally, opens DRS, then starts throwing the rear around ? not clever.
Eric B says Button needs an engine change and is out of qualifying.
Lewis on the back foot, he's not happy with set up and lost critical laps in that session. I predict a Nico pole.
The real question is who will be best of the rest ? the Ferraris are quick, as is Grosjean and the Williams. Could be a very tense Q3 and I will not be surprised to see a non merc car on the front row of the grid.
Nasr is going to feel a bit of a wally, opens DRS, then starts throwing the rear around ? not clever.
Eric B says Button needs an engine change and is out of qualifying.
Lewis on the back foot, he's not happy with set up and lost critical laps in that session. I predict a Nico pole.
The real question is who will be best of the rest ? the Ferraris are quick, as is Grosjean and the Williams. Could be a very tense Q3 and I will not be surprised to see a non merc car on the front row of the grid.
markcoznottz said:
Mafioso said:
Anyone else getting miffed with all the red flags? No wonder people are switching off if a parked car (x2) is deemed too dangerous for anyone to drive past...
Shambolic slow amateur recovery of stopped/crashed cars. Too many reds is ruining a lot of motor sport now Looking foward to this qually session and I have my fingers crossed Raikkonen will perform (against all odds I suppose). Maybe Vettel could spring a surprise too.
Getting really sick of the Sky F1 coverage basically being the Lewis Hamilton show...... non stop talking about f
king Monaco and analysing every decision and comment to the nth degree when we have no idea what is really going on behind the scenes. It is getting ridiculous.
Getting really sick of the Sky F1 coverage basically being the Lewis Hamilton show...... non stop talking about f
king Monaco and analysing every decision and comment to the nth degree when we have no idea what is really going on behind the scenes. It is getting ridiculous. hdrflow said:
Mosley speaks sense imho.
On the two rule idea ?I think its rubbish. All you do is create F1 and F1.5. He put forwards this idea before in 2010, if you budget cap you get unlimited wind tunnel time, unlimited RPM, higher output KERS and possibility of 4WD.
So, you're budget capped, the engine manufacturer with a works non-capped team supply your engine. Are they going to develop an engine with a higher rev limit and better KERS just for you ? hell no. If you go elsewhere for an engine you've got to cover the cost of engine development and god knows, they are expensive enough (even in the V8 era).
Wind tunnel is the same - unlimited time but they are massively expensive to run or rent - but you haven't got any budget to pay for it.
The suggestion at the time was 4wd could be achieved by running KERS on the front wheels only.. so who is going to develop that ? how can a capped team afford it ?
The alternative is that everyone goes caped and cheats on the budget (almost impossible to police), in which case it achieves absolutely nothing - just like the RRA.
Either way Bob Fernley will still be going around telling anyone who listens how the small teams are being hard done by and it isn't fair etc etc.
I think Moseley is wrong, it'd just create two classes within F1 and it'd evolve in to them having two race series into 1, effectively the F1.5 having its own championship.
What needs to happen is the Concorde agreement needs to be scrapped and everyone gets equal money, maybe a small bonus for the WCC. The big teams are never going to agree though.
As an aside, James Allen reckons that the small teams are going to the EU and complaining about the strategy group and having it investigated. See http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2015/06/f1-set-to-fa...
Lots of ifs and buts around that, but I doubt much is going to happen.
Jasandjules said:
Yet he's driven better than most rookie drivers in their first F1 season IMHO. I wonder if that is what they are most afraid of!
Yeah, I mean it isn't just Verstappen. I find it a bit tedious the way certain drivers seem to get a 'reputation' (often without actually having done much) and then get slapped with penalties and criticism all the time. It is almost like the other drivers and stewards need a whipping boy. Some drivers did earn a reputation like Grosjean and Maldonado, but others I'm not so sure. All of the younger generation are expected to make mistakes at some point, the difference is people seem almost gleeful that Verstappen finally made a mistake.
Massa is certainly one of the the last people who should be commenting..... whenever there is a situation on track where there is a 50/50% chance of having an accident he always seems to have that accident..... where as the likes of Button, Raikkonen, Alonso, etc, nearly always manage to avoid it.
Mermaid said:
BigBob said:
Europa1 said:
I know it's a familiar refrain of mine, but could the BBC please ditch Suzi Wooden-Perry and replace her with Lee McKenzie, who clearly really understands the sport, is a much more natural, fluid, articulate presenter?
A big +1 from me on this - Suzi Perry doesn't even look 'hot' anymore.Crafty_ said:
hdrflow said:
Mosley speaks sense imho.
On the two rule idea ?I think its rubbish. All you do is create F1 and F1.5. He put forwards this idea before in 2010, if you budget cap you get unlimited wind tunnel time, unlimited RPM, higher output KERS and possibility of 4WD.
So, you're budget capped, the engine manufacturer with a works non-capped team supply your engine. Are they going to develop an engine with a higher rev limit and better KERS just for you ? hell no. If you go elsewhere for an engine you've got to cover the cost of engine development and god knows, they are expensive enough (even in the V8 era).
Wind tunnel is the same - unlimited time but they are massively expensive to run or rent - but you haven't got any budget to pay for it.
The suggestion at the time was 4wd could be achieved by running KERS on the front wheels only.. so who is going to develop that ? how can a capped team afford it ?
The alternative is that everyone goes caped and cheats on the budget (almost impossible to police), in which case it achieves absolutely nothing - just like the RRA.
Either way Bob Fernley will still be going around telling anyone who listens how the small teams are being hard done by and it isn't fair etc etc.
I think Moseley is wrong, it'd just create two classes within F1 and it'd evolve in to them having two race series into 1, effectively the F1.5 having its own championship.
What needs to happen is the Concorde agreement needs to be scrapped and everyone gets equal money, maybe a small bonus for the WCC. The big teams are never going to agree though.
As an aside, James Allen reckons that the small teams are going to the EU and complaining about the strategy group and having it investigated. See http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2015/06/f1-set-to-fa...
Lots of ifs and buts around that, but I doubt much is going to happen.
At the moment the FIA has no authority so it just leaves Ecclestone in charge. He, like MM, has given 'special consideration' to Ferrari so now what we have are problems changing the rules.
MM pushed for the wrong things and went into a dead end. If F1 had gone along the lines of one chassis/one engine/off the peg aero, F1 would be dead.
It might be possible to have a budget cap, but the better idea would be to have cheapness built in for the basics so that 0.05 seconds improvement will cost a team a fortune.
As we have just seen, £200,000 to repair Nasr's car. With, for instance, a single element nose wing, the development costs would be quite low and the replacement costs would be lower as well.
The power costs are farcical.
Crafty_ said:
Lots of interesting stuff as always
In general rather than the specifics. The governance model is broken and the cars need to change to faster, better and on the edge technologically. The details can be discussed but the engine is half the story. They could always run better KERS and or more boost, or whatever it takes.A lot of time can be gained on aerodynamics alone so the smaller teams could get closer if allowed technological freedom. Would they win the WCC? Probably not but would introduce an element of randomness to the results without upsetting the ultimate status quo. A bit like Reading beating Chelsea but not all the time.
Wouldn't want it to be as different to allow F1 and an F1.5. We have enough numbers for formula racing as is
.What I object and agree with Mosley is the whole strategy group as it stands today is just pure dead nonsense and F1 needs radical change in some way. And having some VC suggesting the rules is absurd, like the now defunct refuelling.
Fernley is probably just repeating what Mallya says but Saward has been spreading the rumour of an EU investigation for quite some time now.
As for the money distribution equalisation is probably not good either since it'll foster some chancers to run cars just for the money. It needs a model of distribution that motivates better results but it also needs to allow for those results to be achievable.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff