The Official 2015 Canadian Grand Prix thread **SPOILERS**
Discussion
JonRB said:
In years gone by, the other teams would have been innovating and testing like crazy, and bringing revised engines to each race so that by mid-season they'd eventually have caught up (or at least become competitive). The engine "tokens" idea, and the ban on testing, means that teams are prevented from catching up.
the testing ban does not affect engines, they can test engines all they like, just not in an F1 car.Vaud said:
JonRB said:
And the austerity measures on fuel and tyres are equally to blame as they force the "lift & coast" and "only drive at 80%" situation that has already been mentioned by others.
Does anyone know how much additional fuel would be negate the need for lift and coast at the current engine output?i.e. no more power, no change to fuel flow, but more fuel available, so that we reduce the constraining factors a little
I know each track varies, but would 10kg make the difference? 20? 30?
hard to know, this is the first race where we have seen them use all 100Kg's from memory...
moanthebairns said:
where can you find specific lap times.
SO If I wanted to know the lap time on the 6th lap or 26th where would these be.
The live data in the race is free, but I think you need to pay for the full data sets:SO If I wanted to know the lap time on the 6th lap or 26th where would these be.
https://www.formula1.com/content/fom-website/en/su...
Redlake27 said:
Montreal is the one race I always look forward to. Overtaking, no margin for error, tough on cars. It is usually the best race of the year.
If current 'coasting-F1' can't produce a good race at Montreal, it will struggle anywhere else.
this ^^^If current 'coasting-F1' can't produce a good race at Montreal, it will struggle anywhere else.
I know people are sick of hearing it, but the current F1 is a joke in terms of racing..
how many times were we being told about the last few laps being for the attack? what attack? neither had the fuel to fight.
LOL Was looking forward to this and all I can remember is LH won, nothing else.
I know a lot of people are moaning about F1 but when you cant drive flat out, there's big steps in performance from each car what's to look forward to really?
Ferrari are behind Merc, Will behind Ferr etc etc
Im still disappointed with Williams, I thought they be up there challenging Ferrari, not to far behind Merc. But all they do is linger and pick up the pieces of mistakes.
I know a lot of people are moaning about F1 but when you cant drive flat out, there's big steps in performance from each car what's to look forward to really?
Ferrari are behind Merc, Will behind Ferr etc etc
Im still disappointed with Williams, I thought they be up there challenging Ferrari, not to far behind Merc. But all they do is linger and pick up the pieces of mistakes.
Vaud said:
JonRB said:
And the austerity measures on fuel and tyres are equally to blame as they force the "lift & coast" and "only drive at 80%" situation that has already been mentioned by others.
Does anyone know how much additional fuel would be negate the need for lift and coast at the current engine output?i.e. no more power, no change to fuel flow, but more fuel available, so that we reduce the constraining factors a little
I know each track varies, but would 10kg make the difference? 20? 30?
Even if they could have another 20kg (for example) it's quite likely the optimum would be to use say 10, on the assumption that 90% of Canadian GPs have at least one safety car and there's no point carrying fuel you almost certainly won't need.
rscott said:
Not sure it would make that much difference - I believe MB said on Sky's coverage that this was the first race of the season where thry actually put the whole 100kg of fuel in.
Even if they could have another 20kg (for example) it's quite likely the optimum would be to use say 10, on the assumption that 90% of Canadian GPs have at least one safety car and there's no point carrying fuel you almost certainly won't need.
for the merc's, adding more fuel would have been against their interests, they won the race by a large margin over the others, adding more fuel would have just increased the risks of mechanical trouble or drivers taking each other out.Even if they could have another 20kg (for example) it's quite likely the optimum would be to use say 10, on the assumption that 90% of Canadian GPs have at least one safety car and there's no point carrying fuel you almost certainly won't need.
I struggle to understand some of these comments.
I seem to remember a fabulous battle which ended with a brave move by Massa around three successive corners.
I seem to remember Vettel having problems getting past Alonso. Twice. There were other battles, many of which the director caught.
If you looked at the lap times it was obvious that LH was having to manage the distance between him and NR. Sometimes the gap came down to 1 sec. He might have been playing with NR but I doubt it. He was, it appears, low of fuel and an earlier suggestion he had no problems should have read no problems if you keep it at this speed.
We had tyres that lasted 40 laps with little degradation, surely the wet dream of many on here.
F1 has always been a race of parts: there's the initial period where the drivers sort themselves out, then there's the tactical period, and then the end game. With just 20 cars on the grid we are always going to have limited options. Mind you, I don't see this changing all that much when Ferrari run four cars next season.
It was an enjoyable race, with some excitement at the front.
The shame was the short run into the first corner. If it had been a fair distance they KR would have taken NR and probably challenged for the lead. That would have made things fun for a while.
Not a great race, but the runs of Massa and Vettel were quite good.
I seem to remember a fabulous battle which ended with a brave move by Massa around three successive corners.
I seem to remember Vettel having problems getting past Alonso. Twice. There were other battles, many of which the director caught.
If you looked at the lap times it was obvious that LH was having to manage the distance between him and NR. Sometimes the gap came down to 1 sec. He might have been playing with NR but I doubt it. He was, it appears, low of fuel and an earlier suggestion he had no problems should have read no problems if you keep it at this speed.
We had tyres that lasted 40 laps with little degradation, surely the wet dream of many on here.
F1 has always been a race of parts: there's the initial period where the drivers sort themselves out, then there's the tactical period, and then the end game. With just 20 cars on the grid we are always going to have limited options. Mind you, I don't see this changing all that much when Ferrari run four cars next season.
It was an enjoyable race, with some excitement at the front.
The shame was the short run into the first corner. If it had been a fair distance they KR would have taken NR and probably challenged for the lead. That would have made things fun for a while.
Not a great race, but the runs of Massa and Vettel were quite good.
Derek Smith said:
I struggle to understand some of these comments.
I seem to remember a fabulous battle which ended with a brave move by Massa around three successive corners.
I seem to remember Vettel having problems getting past Alonso. Twice. There were other battles, many of which the director caught.
If you looked at the lap times it was obvious that LH was having to manage the distance between him and NR. Sometimes the gap came down to 1 sec. He might have been playing with NR but I doubt it. He was, it appears, low of fuel and an earlier suggestion he had no problems should have read no problems if you keep it at this speed.
We had tyres that lasted 40 laps with little degradation, surely the wet dream of many on here.
F1 has always been a race of parts: there's the initial period where the drivers sort themselves out, then there's the tactical period, and then the end game. With just 20 cars on the grid we are always going to have limited options. Mind you, I don't see this changing all that much when Ferrari run four cars next season.
It was an enjoyable race, with some excitement at the front.
The shame was the short run into the first corner. If it had been a fair distance they KR would have taken NR and probably challenged for the lead. That would have made things fun for a while.
Not a great race, but the runs of Massa and Vettel were quite good.
Yes, your correct, it was entertaining. Everyone else who got bored, looked at their phone for most of it, or watched it while they ate their tea is wrong.I seem to remember a fabulous battle which ended with a brave move by Massa around three successive corners.
I seem to remember Vettel having problems getting past Alonso. Twice. There were other battles, many of which the director caught.
If you looked at the lap times it was obvious that LH was having to manage the distance between him and NR. Sometimes the gap came down to 1 sec. He might have been playing with NR but I doubt it. He was, it appears, low of fuel and an earlier suggestion he had no problems should have read no problems if you keep it at this speed.
We had tyres that lasted 40 laps with little degradation, surely the wet dream of many on here.
F1 has always been a race of parts: there's the initial period where the drivers sort themselves out, then there's the tactical period, and then the end game. With just 20 cars on the grid we are always going to have limited options. Mind you, I don't see this changing all that much when Ferrari run four cars next season.
It was an enjoyable race, with some excitement at the front.
The shame was the short run into the first corner. If it had been a fair distance they KR would have taken NR and probably challenged for the lead. That would have made things fun for a while.
Not a great race, but the runs of Massa and Vettel were quite good.
Not a classic, far too much 'lift & coast', 'manage the tyres' rhetoric.
I'm normally pretty positive about F1 but this race and Monaco have made me think that the changes which are in discussion for 2017 can't come soon enough.
Lots of criticism for Raikkonnen here but on team radio he suggested there was some kind of power delivery inconsistency.
Criticism also for Vettel's move on Hulkenberg, I feel that Hulkenberg was overly charitable and could've maintained his line forcing Vettel to pass off the circuit, in which case Vettel would've had to give the place back. However, expecting Vettel to wait for Hulkenberg after he has spun and recovered is a bit silly.
I'm normally pretty positive about F1 but this race and Monaco have made me think that the changes which are in discussion for 2017 can't come soon enough.
Lots of criticism for Raikkonnen here but on team radio he suggested there was some kind of power delivery inconsistency.
Criticism also for Vettel's move on Hulkenberg, I feel that Hulkenberg was overly charitable and could've maintained his line forcing Vettel to pass off the circuit, in which case Vettel would've had to give the place back. However, expecting Vettel to wait for Hulkenberg after he has spun and recovered is a bit silly.
HustleRussell said:
Lots of criticism for Raikkonnen here but on team radio he suggested there was some kind of power delivery inconsistency.
actually I found Ant's explanation of this very interesting...after the pit-stop the throttle map is the same one used at the start line, apparently they usually trip back to race map in 60 sec's or so, so Kimi arrived at the hairpin with a different throttle map than he had last time round.
Why this is the case, I am sure Ferrari (and others) will be looking at now I guess?
There were moments, but that's all there is in F1 is moments because of the rules strangling all the teams and what the drivers can do. That's my biggest beef.
But, if the teams could do what they want and test what they want, it would proberly end up the same as the top teams now, have the biggest budget and would still be top.
But, if the teams could do what they want and test what they want, it would proberly end up the same as the top teams now, have the biggest budget and would still be top.
Logie said:
There were moments, but that's all there is in F1 is moments because of the rules strangling all the teams and what the drivers can do. That's my biggest beef.
But, if the teams could do what they want and test what they want, it would proberly end up the same as the top teams now, have the biggest budget and would still be top.
not quite.But, if the teams could do what they want and test what they want, it would proberly end up the same as the top teams now, have the biggest budget and would still be top.
the biggest issue these days is that the contribution the driver makes on the race is now almost insignificant compared to the car/team.
in the old days, the driver had way more effect on the performance of the car, you could put a top driver in a mediocre car and he would drag it to the front, these days that's simply not the case, they are all driving the cars to the limit of the car, not the driver.
Scuffers said:
not quite.
the biggest issue these days is that the contribution the driver makes on the race is now almost insignificant compared to the car/team.
in the old days, the driver had way more effect on the performance of the car, you could put a top driver in a mediocre car and he would drag it to the front, these days that's simply not the case, they are all driving the cars to the limit of the car, not the driver.
Yea, the driver look nothing like they used to getting out the car from 10+ years ago. I remember a few times Drivers esp at Monaco needing a hand to keep steady :Pthe biggest issue these days is that the contribution the driver makes on the race is now almost insignificant compared to the car/team.
in the old days, the driver had way more effect on the performance of the car, you could put a top driver in a mediocre car and he would drag it to the front, these days that's simply not the case, they are all driving the cars to the limit of the car, not the driver.
Now they a little sweaty
Paul-M said:
In the post race anylisis Eddie Jordan commented that the Mclaren drivers are annoyed that the team seems to be concentrating more on an upcoming party than developing the car... Has anything else come out about this?
no, I keep checking for an invite but I never got one! ill let you know. can they wait till 2017 for a rule change?
I've watched for decades, ok 2 but still I'm only 27. I watch every race but I felt like turning off yesterday.
the fleeting fan has went, id call myself a fan and I'm thinking of going, all that will be left are the die hards.
Television audiences dwindling, no big sponsors, cars without sponsors.
How many teams will die between now and then.
Sort it now. for the good of the sport, mix it up now. not 2 years down the f
king line.
I've watched for decades, ok 2 but still I'm only 27. I watch every race but I felt like turning off yesterday.
the fleeting fan has went, id call myself a fan and I'm thinking of going, all that will be left are the die hards.
Television audiences dwindling, no big sponsors, cars without sponsors.
How many teams will die between now and then.
Sort it now. for the good of the sport, mix it up now. not 2 years down the f
king line. Logie said:
Yea, the driver look nothing like they used to getting out the car from 10+ years ago. I remember a few times Drivers esp at Monaco needing a hand to keep steady :P
Now they a little sweaty
Nowadays they are superfit athletes who run, swim, cycle and do all sorts of training to keep fit.Now they a little sweaty
Things were a little different in the past
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff