Official 2019 Spanish Grand Prix Thread ***SPOILERS***

Official 2019 Spanish Grand Prix Thread ***SPOILERS***

Author
Discussion

paulguitar

2,380 posts

54 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
cb1965 said:
Eric Mc said:
Trying to justify F1 as some sort of "technology proving ground" for family runabouts is a nonsense
Aside from all the road car technology that has been developed form motorsport, of which there is plenty, you are spot on rolleyes
Go ahead and list them - especially technology that first appeared in F1 and ended up in my Ford Focus.
I would be interested in this list too, I have not yet seen evidence that F1 has furthered road cars in any direct way, as far as I can recall. Even ABS came from aircraft technology.



Derek Smith

33,188 posts

189 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
entropy said:
I'm surprised Lando Norris wasn't penalised for his punt on Stroll. It was a rather optimistic move. Had it been Grosjean we'd all be shouting for him to get the sack yet funnily enough RoGro had the sense to back out and yet people point fingers and laugh.

Maybe Norris got a free pass from the stewards because he's been having stellar drives without displaying anything untowards with aggressive/lairy driving.
When I first saw it I blamed Norris. On looking at it a second and third time I changed my mind to a racing incident. Both drivers could have avoided the crash. To blame the person overtaking is a way of ensuring no overtakes. This was, after all, Spain.


Eric Mc

106,130 posts

206 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
paulguitar said:
I would be interested in this list too, I have not yet seen evidence that F1 has furthered road cars in any direct way, as far as I can recall. Even ABS came from aircraft technology.
It did - as did disc brakes.

janesmith1950

2,829 posts

36 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
Derek Smith said:
When I first saw it I blamed Norris. On looking at it a second and third time I changed my mind to a racing incident. Both drivers could have avoided the crash. To blame the person overtaking is a way of ensuring no overtakes. This was, after all, Spain.
It looked like a 50/50 to me, too. There doesn't always need to be someone to blame.

It's a hard distinction to make, however I tend to go by if a legitimate move ends in contact, that's often fair enough, whereas if the move could only work through contact (Vettel, Verstappen, I'm sometimes looking at you!), then apportioning blame is worthwhile.

Biggest travesty for me was Hamilton on KR at Spa. That penalty was the ultimate insult to motor racing.

Don't racing fans have long memories!

entropy

3,595 posts

144 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
Derek Smith said:
When I first saw it I blamed Norris. On looking at it a second and third time I changed my mind to a racing incident. Both drivers could have avoided the crash. To blame the person overtaking is a way of ensuring no overtakes. This was, after all, Spain.
You have to be wheel to wheel into and through Turn 2 to make it stick. That's why you have drivers backing out, cut across the Esses, go round the cone then rejoin the circuit. Inexperience at racing in Spain and less for Norris to worry about as it won't be needed in a few years time ...maybe even the stewards knew Zandvoort was a done deal!
Advertisement

paulguitar

2,380 posts

54 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
janesmith1950 said:
Biggest travesty for me was Hamilton on KR at Spa. That penalty was the ultimate insult to motor racing.
I completely agree. To me, that was the darkest day I can recall for F1, accidents aside.



cb1965

3,003 posts

86 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
cb1965 said:
Eric Mc said:
Trying to justify F1 as some sort of "technology proving ground" for family runabouts is a nonsense
Aside from all the road car technology that has been developed form motorsport, of which there is plenty, you are spot on rolleyes
Go ahead and list them - especially technology that first appeared in F1 and ended up in my Ford Focus.
Motorsport invents some technologies and hones others.

A few that are becoming commonplace in road cars:

Paddle shift gearboxes
Lubricant technology to increase fuel efficiency
Energy recovery systems
Adaptive suspension
Traction control
Carbon fibre
Safety cells
Tyre technology
Computer control systems

Things like disc brakes and turbocharging were not invented by motorsport, but their use in motorsport and research into the technologies saw them becoming cheaper and therefore commonplace on road cars.

Even the humble rear view mirror comes from motor racing.

Eric Mc

106,130 posts

206 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
cb1965 said:
Motorsport invents some technologies and hones others.

A few that are becoming commonplace in road cars:

Paddle shift gearboxes
Lubricant technology to increase fuel efficiency
Energy recovery systems
Adaptive suspension
Traction control
Carbon fibre
Safety cells
Tyre technology
Computer control systems

Things like disc brakes and turbocharging were not invented by motorsport, but their use in motorsport and research into the technologies saw them becoming cheaper and therefore commonplace on road cars.

Even the humble rear view mirror comes from motor racing.
I see you are using the more generic term "motorsport" rather than F1 - which is a slight deviation from the argument. I would agree that other forms of motorsport have often been ahead of F1 when it comes to innovation. However, I would still argue that virtually every item you have listed above came in ORDINARY motoring development or even aviation rather than F1.

Paddle shift gearboxes - not exclusive to F1 and not really taken up for ordinary motoring

Lubricant technology to increase fuel efficiency - happens anyway and little to do with F1 specifically

Energy recovery systems - used on buses and trains way before F1

Adaptive suspension - in existence before F1 and when it was used in F1, it got banned

Traction control - as above.

Carbon fibre - invented for aerospace purposes and introduced into F1 a good decade after it started being used in aviation

Safety cells - again, not exclusively derived from F1. And the safety cells on road cars have little to do with how safety cells are designed and work in F1 or other open wheel series

Tyre technology - F1 tyres feed very little to road tyres. Years after most road tyres went to radials, F1 was still running on crossply tyres

Computer control systems - again, not something specifically invented by F1. Computer controlled ignition systems.


Vaud

32,063 posts

96 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
Paddle shift gearboxes - not exclusive to F1 and not really taken up for ordinary motoring
Other than by Audi (tiptronic), Mercedes, Porsche, Volvo etc in many auto versions.

Plenty of ordinary motoring has flappy paddles as an option or standard, and has for 15 years.

cb1965

3,003 posts

86 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
cb1965 said:
Motorsport invents some technologies and hones others.

A few that are becoming commonplace in road cars:

Paddle shift gearboxes
Lubricant technology to increase fuel efficiency
Energy recovery systems
Adaptive suspension
Traction control
Carbon fibre
Safety cells
Tyre technology
Computer control systems

Things like disc brakes and turbocharging were not invented by motorsport, but their use in motorsport and research into the technologies saw them becoming cheaper and therefore commonplace on road cars.

Even the humble rear view mirror comes from motor racing.
I see you are using the more generic term "motorsport" rather than F1 - which is a slight deviation from the argument. I would agree that other forms of motorsport have often been ahead of F1 when it comes to innovation. However, I would still argue that virtually every item you have listed above came in ORDINARY motoring development or even aviation rather than F1.

Paddle shift gearboxes - not exclusive to F1 and not really taken up for ordinary motoring

Lubricant technology to increase fuel efficiency - happens anyway and little to do with F1 specifically

Energy recovery systems - used on buses and trains way before F1

Adaptive suspension - in existence before F1 and when it was used in F1, it got banned

Traction control - as above.

Carbon fibre - invented for aerospace purposes and introduced into F1 a good decade after it started being used in aviation

Safety cells - again, not exclusively derived from F1. And the safety cells on road cars have little to do with how safety cells are designed and work in F1 or other open wheel series

Tyre technology - F1 tyres feed very little to road tyres. Years after most road tyres went to radials, F1 was still running on crossply tyres

Computer control systems - again, not something specifically invented by F1. Computer controlled ignition systems.
I used the term motorsport originally, you chose to ignore it.

As for your assertion that everything I listed came from somewhere else I would argue you're wrong.

Let's take a few examples:

Paddle shift gearboxes - invented by John Barnard for the 1989 Ferrari and by 1995 no more manual gearboxes were used. Now featured on a vast amount of automatics using various shift technologies derived from the original F1 semi auto gearboxes.

Lubricant tech - using low viscosity synthetic oils to reduce friction owes much to F1 development. Teams have employed the tech not only to increase engine speed and reliability, but to eke out more efficiency from a tank of fuel.

Energy Recovery - systems like regenerative braking may not have been invented by F1, but their development within F1 has led to their suitability and subsequent introduction in road cars, in electric vehicles as well as those with traditional drive systems.

I'll not post again on the subject as I'm sure you'll have a contrary answer and I'm busy, but I work in the field of engineering innovation so am writing from a position of genuine knowledge rather than speculation or conjecture.

HardtopManual

1,129 posts

107 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
cb1965 said:
Paddle shift gearboxes - invented by John Barnard for the 1989 Ferrari
The paddles were actually Piero Lardo Ferrari's idea. Barnard was originally going to put buttons on the front of the steering wheel</pedantry>

Benrad

408 posts

90 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
entropy said:
You have to be wheel to wheel into and through Turn 2 to make it stick. That's why you have drivers backing out, cut across the Esses, go round the cone then rejoin the circuit. Inexperience at racing in Spain and less for Norris to worry about as it won't be needed in a few years time ...maybe even the stewards knew Zandvoort was a done deal!
Seems like I'm a lone voice here, but it was 100% Stroll's fault to me. He turned in on a car already established alongside him. Lando had realised Stroll was going to turn in and tried to back out of it to avoid contact which made it look like he wasn't as far alongside, not that it matters in my mind. It's foolish to poke a nose in, but if you allow people to turn in with impunity then you're pretty much insisting all overtaking must happen in a straight line!

Edited for typos that meant I made even less sense than usual


Edited by Benrad on Wednesday 15th May 09:08

Derek Smith

33,188 posts

189 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
paulguitar said:
janesmith1950 said:
Biggest travesty for me was Hamilton on KR at Spa. That penalty was the ultimate insult to motor racing.
I completely agree. To me, that was the darkest day I can recall for F1, accidents aside.
Good grief! That's a strange thing to post. I remember a one-car race, albeit with three cars in it. I can remember outrageous decisions by 'the management' that were partial and unfair. I can remember a team being allowed to cheat in pit stops, gaining an advantage for the drivers, but no one got anything more that a mild tutt, despite nearly burning down Germany. I can remember lots of times when motor racing was not only insulted but kicked when it was down.

The 2008 Spa race incident was arguable at best. KR pushed LH wide, in fact off the circuit, but he had a certain amount of justification to take the racing line. LH dropped back as far as anyone else did previously but he was faster along the home straight. I'm a fan of LH, although not exclusively, and yet I reckon that LH should have given the place back.

So arguable.

I could quote many instances that were, quite clearly, insults to F1.

I don't know what Todt's like. I don't know if he's a fair bloke. I don't know if he's in it for the money. What I do know is that F1 has changed for the better since he's been in charge. He's not kicked F1 in the teeth.


LaurasOtherHalf

14,816 posts

137 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
vdn said:
We can all agree; a big shake up wouldn’t hurt.
I can disagree with that. If one thing is guaranteed to create a walkover for one team it's a big rule change.

Keep things the same and parity follows. Always has, always will.

LaurasOtherHalf

14,816 posts

137 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
cb1965 said:
Motorsport invents some technologies and hones others.

A few that are becoming commonplace in road cars:

Paddle shift gearboxes
Lubricant technology to increase fuel efficiency
Energy recovery systems
Adaptive suspension
Traction control
Carbon fibre
Safety cells
Tyre technology
Computer control systems

Things like disc brakes and turbocharging were not invented by motorsport, but their use in motorsport and research into the technologies saw them becoming cheaper and therefore commonplace on road cars.

Even the humble rear view mirror comes from motor racing.
I see you are using the more generic term "motorsport" rather than F1 - which is a slight deviation from the argument. I would agree that other forms of motorsport have often been ahead of F1 when it comes to innovation. However, I would still argue that virtually every item you have listed above came in ORDINARY motoring development or even aviation rather than F1.

Paddle shift gearboxes - not exclusive to F1 and not really taken up for ordinary motoring

Lubricant technology to increase fuel efficiency - happens anyway and little to do with F1 specifically

Energy recovery systems - used on buses and trains way before F1

Adaptive suspension - in existence before F1 and when it was used in F1, it got banned

Traction control - as above.

Carbon fibre - invented for aerospace purposes and introduced into F1 a good decade after it started being used in aviation

Safety cells - again, not exclusively derived from F1. And the safety cells on road cars have little to do with how safety cells are designed and work in F1 or other open wheel series

Tyre technology - F1 tyres feed very little to road tyres. Years after most road tyres went to radials, F1 was still running on crossply tyres

Computer control systems - again, not something specifically invented by F1. Computer controlled ignition systems.
As usual Eric, you're muddying the waters to try and win the internet (even if no one's interested).

F1 in particular of motorsport, may not be the bleeding edge of invention for the car industry but it is the proving ground. Yes all of the technologies pilfered by the teams to try and steal an advantage have their philosophies based in other industries but it is F1 that makes it appear on your car.

Like it or not (and you clearly don't, we all get the "pleasure" of reading your distaste on the sport foisted upon us by being fellow members of this site) F1 technology sells, no matter how far removed.

The same reason a 17 year old sticks on vinyl fake carbon fibre to his Fiesta is the same reason BMW put a V10 in a 5 series. Or Ferrari put an indicator button on a steering wheel wink

TheDeuce

1,482 posts

7 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
Paddle shift gearboxes - not exclusive to F1 and not really taken up for ordinary motoring

Adaptive suspension - in existence before F1 and when it was used in F1, it got banned
Paddle shift is hugely popular in road cars now. even in cars that really do not need them, simply because it's a cute selling point. Since about 2010 ZF have been selling an 8 speed box designed to deliver shifts on demand almost as fast as DSG, and the number of auto makers that have adopted it and added the paddles is insane. the advancement in auto-boxes speed this last decade, combined with the paddles, has bought drivers all the benefits of manual combined with all the benefits of auto. On the paddles it's easily quicker to swap cogs than having to change manually, the extra ratio's bring improved economy, the gearbox will always shift perfectly so no significant wear and tear. And you get paddles, which obviously appeals to a lot of passionate drivers! Paddle shift has been a huge success story in the industry - and in many cases it has genuinely improved the cars driving credentials.

Adaptive suspension is also on the up and up in terms of popularity. In automotive terms it's used to avoid the traditional compromise between solid handling and a reasonable level of comfort. In F1 it was used to keep the car riding at the optimum height in order to enhance ground effect - so two very different purposes. But it was a technology showed off to great effect via F1. Today it remains a high tech blagging right for cars that have it. It's a very neat addition to any road car and F1 really can take some of the credit. Initially it was sports/super cars that utilised adaptive damping in order to increase performance and also to blag 'F1 tech'. Then the real life benefits filtered through and it became an option on just about any mid range or upward car you can buy today.



Edited by TheDeuce on Tuesday 14th May 22:30

paulguitar

2,380 posts

54 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
Derek Smith said:
Good grief! That's a strange thing to post.
Well, perhaps I was a little melodramatic.

Derek Smith said:
he 2008 Spa race incident was arguable at best. KR pushed LH wide, in fact off the circuit, but he had a certain amount of justification to take the racing line. LH dropped back as far as anyone else did previously but he was faster along the home straight. I'm a fan of LH, although not exclusively, and yet I reckon that LH should have given the place back.
He did give the place back, that’s the thing. The issue was that he subsequently had the totally legitimate win taken from him which was outrageous, Niki Lauda, at that time nothing to do with Hamilton, said it was the worst decision he had ever seen made by a steward.

Zoobeef

3,914 posts

99 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
paulguitar said:
He did give the place back, that’s the thing. The issue was that he subsequently had the totally legitimate win taken from him which was outrageous, Niki Lauda, at that time nothing to do with Hamilton, said it was the worst decision he had ever seen made by a steward.
He gave him it back and was going slower the Kimi as they crossed the line.

Eric Mc

106,130 posts

206 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
Derek Smith said:
Good grief! That's a strange thing to post. I remember a one-car race, albeit with three cars in it. I can remember outrageous decisions by 'the management' that were partial and unfair. I can remember a team being allowed to cheat in pit stops, gaining an advantage for the drivers, but no one got anything more that a mild tutt, despite nearly burning down Germany. I can remember lots of times when motor racing was not only insulted but kicked when it was down.

The 2008 Spa race incident was arguable at best. KR pushed LH wide, in fact off the circuit, but he had a certain amount of justification to take the racing line. LH dropped back as far as anyone else did previously but he was faster along the home straight. I'm a fan of LH, although not exclusively, and yet I reckon that LH should have given the place back.

So arguable.

I could quote many instances that were, quite clearly, insults to F1.

I don't know what Todt's like. I don't know if he's a fair bloke. I don't know if he's in it for the money. What I do know is that F1 has changed for the better since he's been in charge. He's not kicked F1 in the teeth.
The Indy GP debacle where only a few cars ran a few laps was a disgrace.

LaurasOtherHalf

14,816 posts

137 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
The Indy GP debacle where only a few cars ran a few laps was a disgrace.
Wasn't that the good old days that we want back?