DC's RBR Contract

[Happy Harvick]

Is this annoying anyone else? At Valencia he seemed to be defending MW to the death and blaming Lotus etc for what was a racing incident! That and when ever something happens to one of Red Bull's cars he goes all neutral. It does really wind me up because I think he could be genuinely good if he didn't have to defend the soft energy drink at every turn...

Also, this made me giggle: http://news.theage.com.au/breaking-news-sport/cap-...

Edited by Happy Harvick on Friday 2nd July 12:40

[Whitefly Swatter]

[quote=Happy Harvick]Is this annoying anyone else? At Valencia he seemed to be defending MW to the death and blaming Lotus etc for what was a racing incident! That and when ever something happens to one of Red Bull's cars he goes all neutral. It does really wind me up because I think he could be genuinely good if he didn't have to defend the soft energy drink at every turn...

Also, this made me giggle: http://news.theage.com.au/breaking-news-sport/cap-...

quote]
[sarcasm]
lets see them running on a figure eight track

or come to it the top half of the feild running clockwise and the others anti clockwise
[/sarcasm]

[Jasandjules]

Nope, it annoyed the hell out of me as well that, in fact, he went right down in my estimation directly after that.

[KaraK]

Annoyed here as well, there seems to me to be a marked difference in DC's tone and body language when he goes into "corporate" mode. It's a shame as he is definately good at what he does otherwise.

[Rude-boy]

DC is very good, except that you do have to view everything he says in relation to Red Bull as PR, not commentary.

[Hotblack]

What I don't understand is DC (and others) talk about speed differentials and the Lotus being slower. If the Lotus was as fast(ish) as the Red Bull Heikki would have had to brake even earlier (unless it also had better brakes) and MB would still have been airborn. Speed differential is always going to be an issue when one car brakes/lifts earlier than another regardless of matched acceleration and top speed.

H

[Derek Smith]

What I don't understand is how 35bhp down equates to 3% disadvantage.

[zac510]

Hotblack said:

What I don't understand is DC (and others) talk about speed differentials and the Lotus being slower. If the Lotus was as fast(ish) as the Red Bull Heikki would have had to brake even earlier (unless it also had better brakes) and MB would still have been airborn. Speed differential is always going to be an issue when one car brakes/lifts earlier than another regardless of matched acceleration and top speed.

H

You would expect for argument's sake for the Lotus to have better downforce, l ratio, brakes etc. Generally faster cars brake later due to the superior downforce.

[pedromorgan]

I can.

I am not particularly technically minded but as speed increases wind resistance increases and it takes a far higher amount of horsepower to get a small increase in speed. 35hp may be nothing at the lower end of the cars speed range but at the top end that 35hp is desperatly needed.

Hence the Veyron needing 1000bhp to get to its top speed.

Peter

[motaboy]

Yep, it's starting to get on my wick. DC would be far more interesting if he wasn't Mr RBR all the time.

[John D.]

Happy Harvick said:

Is this annoying anyone else? At Valencia he seemed to be defending MW to the death and blaming Lotus etc for what was a racing incident! That and when ever something happens to one of Red Bull's cars he goes all neutral. It does really wind me up because I think he could be genuinely good if he didn't have to defend the soft energy drink at every turn...

Also, this made me giggle: http://news.theage.com.au/breaking-news-sport/cap-...

Edited by Happy Harvick on Friday 2nd July 12:40

Can't say I have found his stance on Redbull irritating at all this season. Think he was bang on with the Kovi/Webber smash too.

[John D.]

Hotblack said:

What I don't understand is DC (and others) talk about speed differentials and the Lotus being slower. If the Lotus was as fast(ish) as the Red Bull Heikki would have had to brake even earlier (unless it also had better brakes) and MB would still have been airborn. Speed differential is always going to be an issue when one car brakes/lifts earlier than another regardless of matched acceleration and top speed.

H

The Lotus has far less downforce than the Redbull. So has to brake earlier as it has less grip. Does'nt matter so much that it is travelling slower to start with.

[Whalespin]

F1fanatic posted an article about the incident, and had the speed trap speeds from qualifying, showing the Lotus is not as slow in a straight line as people think.

Driver Car Top speed (kph)

Jarno Trulli Lotus-Cosworth 309.5
Heikki Kovalainen Lotus-Cosworth 308.1
Sebastian Vettel Red Bull-Renault 307.7
Mark Webber Red Bull-Renaullt 307.3

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2010/07/02/coulthards-c...

[paulrockliffe]

pedromorgan said:

I can.

I am not particularly technically minded but as speed increases wind resistance increases and it takes a far higher amount of horsepower to get a small increase in speed. 35hp may be nothing at the lower end of the cars speed range but at the top end that 35hp is desperatly needed.

Hence the Veyron needing 1000bhp to get to its top speed.

Peter

No you can't!

Drag increase proportionally to the velocity squared, so an extra 35bhp at 5mph might mean a 10mph increase in speed, whereas at 180mph it'll make fk all difference.

HTH

[skwdenyer]

Whalespin said:

F1fanatic posted an article about the incident, and had the speed trap speeds from qualifying, showing the Lotus is not as slow in a straight line as people think.

Driver Car Top speed (kph)

Jarno Trulli Lotus-Cosworth 309.5
Heikki Kovalainen Lotus-Cosworth 308.1
Sebastian Vettel Red Bull-Renault 307.7
Mark Webber Red Bull-Renaullt 307.3

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2010/07/02/coulthards-c...

Agreed. Unless Webber wants a spec series, he's going to have to "man up" and admit that he just didn't understand what was going on. Not every car can brake in the same place, just as not every car has equal traction, equal apex speed, and so on. Without those differences, Webber would have little / no chance of being able to make up places to compensate for his catastrophic start. To criticise Kovi for being beatable seems a little rich

[patmahe]

Yeah, it annoys me too. Most of the time his analysis is spot on, but he chooses his words very carefully when there is a red bull car involved.

It means you cannot fully believe those views are his own, which taints his contributions.

[Tony 1234]

patmahe said:

Yeah, it annoys me too. Most of the time his analysis is spot on, but he chooses his words very carefully when there is a red bull car involved.

It means you cannot fully believe those views are his own, which taints his contributions.

+1 spot on!

[CooperS]

Tony 1234 said:

patmahe said:

Yeah, it annoys me too. Most of the time his analysis is spot on, but he chooses his words very carefully when there is a red bull car involved.

It means you cannot fully believe those views are his own, which taints his contributions.

+1 spot on!

Don’t you challenge everything you read or hear in the media.... Come on ffs.

Yes he seems a bit too bias at times but they all have their allegiances and will contribute various opinions which suit them at the time.

[anonymous-user]

skwdenyer said:

Whalespin said:

F1fanatic posted an article about the incident, and had the speed trap speeds from qualifying, showing the Lotus is not as slow in a straight line as people think.

Driver Car Top speed (kph)

Jarno Trulli Lotus-Cosworth 309.5
Heikki Kovalainen Lotus-Cosworth 308.1
Sebastian Vettel Red Bull-Renault 307.7
Mark Webber Red Bull-Renaullt 307.3

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2010/07/02/coulthards-c...

Agreed. Unless Webber wants a spec series, he's going to have to "man up" and admit that he just didn't understand what was going on. Not every car can brake in the same place, just as not every car has equal traction, equal apex speed, and so on. Without those differences, Webber would have little / no chance of being able to make up places to compensate for his catastrophic start. To criticise Kovi for being beatable seems a little rich

In the brief F1 Forum post the race Mark quite openly said he has learnt from that incident that the slower cars have to brake a lot earlier than he expected. I dont think he needs to Man Up about anything, he seems about as fair and self critisising a guy out there as there is to me.

[skwdenyer]

johnfelstead said:

skwdenyer said:

Whalespin said:

F1fanatic posted an article about the incident, and had the speed trap speeds from qualifying, showing the Lotus is not as slow in a straight line as people think.

Driver Car Top speed (kph)

Jarno Trulli Lotus-Cosworth 309.5
Heikki Kovalainen Lotus-Cosworth 308.1
Sebastian Vettel Red Bull-Renault 307.7
Mark Webber Red Bull-Renaullt 307.3

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2010/07/02/coulthards-c...

Agreed. Unless Webber wants a spec series, he's going to have to "man up" and admit that he just didn't understand what was going on. Not every car can brake in the same place, just as not every car has equal traction, equal apex speed, and so on. Without those differences, Webber would have little / no chance of being able to make up places to compensate for his catastrophic start. To criticise Kovi for being beatable seems a little rich

In the brief F1 Forum post the race Mark quite openly said he has learnt from that incident that the slower cars have to brake a lot earlier than he expected. I dont think he needs to Man Up about anything, he seems about as fair and self critisising a guy out there as there is to me.

OK, so let me rephrase: Webber needed to "man up", and it appears that, with hindsight, he has done. That does not, however, detract from the statements he made after the incident. To put it in context, however, he has simultaneously stated that he needs to learn how slow the back markers are whilst continuing to suggest that a car he was racing with for position should have given way to him.

Now, it may be that "new, improved, 2010 Mark Webber" is simply trying to play a Sennaesque mind game with the hapless back markers, in the hope that they will yield (rather than be crashed-into) in the future. Certainly his form in 2010 thus far would suggest that this is the image that he is trying to project. If it is - or even if it is, but only inadvertently - I'm afraid I don't have much time for it.

An apology or admission, when caveated, is little or no apology or admission at all. IMHO, of course