Lewis Hamilton (Vol. 2)
Discussion
PhilAsia said:
Muzzer79 said:
PhilAsia said:
I'm neither here nor there on a conspiracy. It is the lack of normal passing of information that has led to the question though.
Edit: Oh, and why are you 100% that there was not something suspect. Again, I never thought there was, but the question is being asked. So why the certainty...??
A conspiracy has to be proved with something credible. The onus is on the accuser to do that, not on me to prove that the conspiracy didn’t happen.Edit: Oh, and why are you 100% that there was not something suspect. Again, I never thought there was, but the question is being asked. So why the certainty...??
Edited by PhilAsia on Saturday 10th August 18:22
Maybe I am misreading your previous post inference.
But I need something more than "Lewis has clearly been shafted because he's off to Ferrari" to support a conspiracy theory.
I mean, anything's possible; Max Verstappen could theoretically sign for Sauber for 2025 tomorrow but I'll need something supporting it before it has credibility IMO.
732NM said:
No one goes flat out the entire race.
They race to a tyre performance delta.
Higher engine modes perhaps. The car was on the limit when it was presented for weighing. Bang on the limit. They took 2.8 ltrs of fuel from the car - not all of the fuel, to determine that it was underweight. How could GR have had that much fuel in the car at the end of a race where he’d only stopped once? He either started the race, including ballast, overweight or underweight. It’s not clear which. They race to a tyre performance delta.
maz8062 said:
732NM said:
No one goes flat out the entire race.
They race to a tyre performance delta.
Higher engine modes perhaps. The car was on the limit when it was presented for weighing. Bang on the limit. They took 2.8 ltrs of fuel from the car - not all of the fuel, to determine that it was underweight. How could GR have had that much fuel in the car at the end of a race where he’d only stopped once? He either started the race, including ballast, overweight or underweight. It’s not clear which. They race to a tyre performance delta.
Muzzer79 said:
PhilAsia said:
Muzzer79 said:
PhilAsia said:
I'm neither here nor there on a conspiracy. It is the lack of normal passing of information that has led to the question though.
Edit: Oh, and why are you 100% that there was not something suspect. Again, I never thought there was, but the question is being asked. So why the certainty...??
A conspiracy has to be proved with something credible. The onus is on the accuser to do that, not on me to prove that the conspiracy didn’t happen.Edit: Oh, and why are you 100% that there was not something suspect. Again, I never thought there was, but the question is being asked. So why the certainty...??
Edited by PhilAsia on Saturday 10th August 18:22
Maybe I am misreading your previous post inference.
But I need something more than "Lewis has clearly been shafted because he's off to Ferrari" to support a conspiracy theory.
I mean, anything's possible; Max Verstappen could theoretically sign for Sauber for 2025 tomorrow but I'll need something supporting it before it has credibility IMO.
MarkwG said:
maz8062 said:
732NM said:
No one goes flat out the entire race.
They race to a tyre performance delta.
Higher engine modes perhaps. The car was on the limit when it was presented for weighing. Bang on the limit. They took 2.8 ltrs of fuel from the car - not all of the fuel, to determine that it was underweight. How could GR have had that much fuel in the car at the end of a race where he’d only stopped once? He either started the race, including ballast, overweight or underweight. It’s not clear which. They race to a tyre performance delta.
maz8062 said:
MarkwG said:
maz8062 said:
732NM said:
No one goes flat out the entire race.
They race to a tyre performance delta.
Higher engine modes perhaps. The car was on the limit when it was presented for weighing. Bang on the limit. They took 2.8 ltrs of fuel from the car - not all of the fuel, to determine that it was underweight. How could GR have had that much fuel in the car at the end of a race where he’d only stopped once? He either started the race, including ballast, overweight or underweight. It’s not clear which. They race to a tyre performance delta.
Unless you think the FIA missed that Russell's was underweight already on saturday or was part of the grand Merc conspiracy to shaft Hamilton too that is and somehow changed their minds on Sunday....
maz8062 said:
MarkwG said:
maz8062 said:
732NM said:
No one goes flat out the entire race.
They race to a tyre performance delta.
Higher engine modes perhaps. The car was on the limit when it was presented for weighing. Bang on the limit. They took 2.8 ltrs of fuel from the car - not all of the fuel, to determine that it was underweight. How could GR have had that much fuel in the car at the end of a race where he’d only stopped once? He either started the race, including ballast, overweight or underweight. It’s not clear which. They race to a tyre performance delta.
MarkwG said:
The cars are weighed after qualifying, then placed in Parc Ferme, aren't they? If there was a below weight discrepancy before the race, it would be uncovered at that point.
Yes the top ten cars were weighed after qualifying, and all were found to be within required limits. Using fuel as ballast isn’t allowed, the car is weighed empty of fuel. The scrutineer mentioned in his report that George’s car wasn’t necessarily completely empty of fuel, but was nonetheless still underweight by 1.5kg.
While it’s possible that the weight might be down to tyre wear and fluid loss during the race, I think the more likely explanation is that the team messed up their calculations and got the ballast weight wrong. After the last couple of seasons of trying to get the car down to anywhere near the weight limit in the first place, having to deal with ballast willl have been something of a novelty to the engineers and mechanics.
maz8062 said:
MarkwG said:
maz8062 said:
732NM said:
No one goes flat out the entire race.
They race to a tyre performance delta.
Higher engine modes perhaps. The car was on the limit when it was presented for weighing. Bang on the limit. They took 2.8 ltrs of fuel from the car - not all of the fuel, to determine that it was underweight. How could GR have had that much fuel in the car at the end of a race where he’d only stopped once? He either started the race, including ballast, overweight or underweight. It’s not clear which. They race to a tyre performance delta.
PhilAsia said:
maz8062 said:
MarkwG said:
maz8062 said:
732NM said:
No one goes flat out the entire race.
They race to a tyre performance delta.
Higher engine modes perhaps. The car was on the limit when it was presented for weighing. Bang on the limit. They took 2.8 ltrs of fuel from the car - not all of the fuel, to determine that it was underweight. How could GR have had that much fuel in the car at the end of a race where he’d only stopped once? He either started the race, including ballast, overweight or underweight. It’s not clear which. They race to a tyre performance delta.
1. Why Mercedes presented the car for weighing, knowing that a sample of 1ltr of fuel was required to be deducted as per the rules, yet signed a document to say that they’d done so.
2. How the car still had at least 2.8 ltrs of fuel (there was still more in there) at the end of the race when it is well known that fuel adds weight, so why carry needless weight on the car.
3. Why the deflection about tyres, the plank, when the real issue is the use of fuel as ballast.
Merc probably would have got away with it had GR been fuel saving or had a second stop. That way they’d have had enough fuel for the 1ltr sample and we wouldn’t have known about the other ltrs of fuel still in the car.
If one reads the stewards report, between the lines, they’ve given us all of the information to conclude what was actually going on.
You've lost me now.
maz8062 said:
Where I’m struggling with all of this is as follows:
1. Why Mercedes presented the car for weighing, knowing that a sample of 1ltr of fuel was required to be deducted as per the rules, yet signed a document to say that they’d done so.
This sentence doesn't make sense. Mercedes presented a car for weighing, knowing the fuel was to be deducted. Signed what document saying they'd done what?1. Why Mercedes presented the car for weighing, knowing that a sample of 1ltr of fuel was required to be deducted as per the rules, yet signed a document to say that they’d done so.
maz8062 said:
2. How the car still had at least 2.8 ltrs of fuel (there was still more in there) at the end of the race when it is well known that fuel adds weight, so why carry needless weight on the car.
You want to run a race car dry for the end of the race? At Spa? A quick Google says that the average consumption of an F1 car is 75 litres per 100km. So 0.75 litres per 1km
Spa is 7km long. This suggests that Russell had less than a lap of fuel remaining?
maz8062 said:
3. Why the deflection about tyres, the plank, when the real issue is the use of fuel as ballast.
Is it?Muzzer79 said:
You've lost me now.
A quick Google says that the average consumption of an F1 car is 75 litres per 100km. So 0.75 litres per 1km
Spa is 7km long. This suggests that Russell had less than a lap of fuel remaining?
+1maz8062 said:
Where I’m struggling with all of this is as follows:
1. Why Mercedes presented the car for weighing, knowing that a sample of 1ltr of fuel was required to be deducted as per the rules, yet signed a document to say that they’d done so.
This sentence doesn't make sense. Mercedes presented a car for weighing, knowing the fuel was to be deducted. Signed what document saying they'd done what?1. Why Mercedes presented the car for weighing, knowing that a sample of 1ltr of fuel was required to be deducted as per the rules, yet signed a document to say that they’d done so.
maz8062 said:
2. How the car still had at least 2.8 ltrs of fuel (there was still more in there) at the end of the race when it is well known that fuel adds weight, so why carry needless weight on the car.
You want to run a race car dry for the end of the race? At Spa? A quick Google says that the average consumption of an F1 car is 75 litres per 100km. So 0.75 litres per 1km
Spa is 7km long. This suggests that Russell had less than a lap of fuel remaining?
maz8062 said:
3. Why the deflection about tyres, the plank, when the real issue is the use of fuel as ballast.
Is it?maz8062 said:
Higher engine modes perhaps. The car was on the limit when it was presented for weighing. Bang on the limit. They took 2.8 ltrs of fuel from the car - not all of the fuel, to determine that it was underweight. How could GR have had that much fuel in the car at the end of a race where he’d only stopped once? He either started the race, including ballast, overweight or underweight. It’s not clear which.
Use your noggin FFS. He had a spare pit stop time in his pocket to lose as he stroked it home.The team screwed up, it happens.
Muzzer79 said:
A quick Google says that the average consumption of an F1 car is 75 litres per 100km. So 0.75 litres per 1km
Is it though. A race is at least 305km long, so on the above basis you would need over 225 litres. Given that the fuel weighs around 0.75kg/litre this would imply a weight of around 170kg.The maximum fuel allowed aboard the car is 110kg therefore the consumption cannot be that high.
MustangGT said:
Muzzer79 said:
A quick Google says that the average consumption of an F1 car is 75 litres per 100km. So 0.75 litres per 1km
Is it though. A race is at least 305km long, so on the above basis you would need over 225 litres. Given that the fuel weighs around 0.75kg/litre this would imply a weight of around 170kg.The maximum fuel allowed aboard the car is 110kg therefore the consumption cannot be that high.
The one advantage of the hybrids is that they have a damn accurate fuel flow sensor, so the teams can have the drivers lift and coast if the fuel is looking marginal in a race with no safety car.
This is what the stewards wrote:
‘The car was not fully drained according to the draining procedure submitted by the team in their legality documents as TR Article 6.5.2 is fulfilled.’
Interpretation: The team presented the car for weighing despite knowing full well that they had to have deducted at least 1ltr of fuel beforehand. They hadn’t so the scrutineers deducted 2.8 ltrs of fuel for the sample (there was still fuel in the tank). This was dishonest by Merc. They were hiding something for sure or they would have presented the car less the sample and taken the rap for an underweight car.
‘The car was weighed again on the FIA inside and outside scales and the weight was 796.5 kg. The calibration of the outside and inside scales was confirmed and witnessed by the competitor.’
As we don’t know exactly how much fuel was still in the car we don’t know the extent to which the car was underweight.
As mentioned above, the maximum amount of fuel that can be carried is 110kgs. GR did one stop , won the race and still had fuel in the car, the exact amount of which is unknown. How did he have so much fuel in the car?
In my view, the real reason GR was underweight for the weigh-in is because he used up too much fuel - 1ltr too much. Had he had enough for the sample they’d have got away with it and no one would know that X litres of fuel was still in the car.
Just my view folks, don’t take it personally.
‘The car was not fully drained according to the draining procedure submitted by the team in their legality documents as TR Article 6.5.2 is fulfilled.’
Interpretation: The team presented the car for weighing despite knowing full well that they had to have deducted at least 1ltr of fuel beforehand. They hadn’t so the scrutineers deducted 2.8 ltrs of fuel for the sample (there was still fuel in the tank). This was dishonest by Merc. They were hiding something for sure or they would have presented the car less the sample and taken the rap for an underweight car.
‘The car was weighed again on the FIA inside and outside scales and the weight was 796.5 kg. The calibration of the outside and inside scales was confirmed and witnessed by the competitor.’
As we don’t know exactly how much fuel was still in the car we don’t know the extent to which the car was underweight.
As mentioned above, the maximum amount of fuel that can be carried is 110kgs. GR did one stop , won the race and still had fuel in the car, the exact amount of which is unknown. How did he have so much fuel in the car?
In my view, the real reason GR was underweight for the weigh-in is because he used up too much fuel - 1ltr too much. Had he had enough for the sample they’d have got away with it and no one would know that X litres of fuel was still in the car.
Just my view folks, don’t take it personally.
maz8062 said:
This is what the stewards wrote:
‘The car was not fully drained according to the draining procedure submitted by the team in their legality documents as TR Article 6.5.2 is fulfilled.’
Interpretation: The team presented the car for weighing despite knowing full well that they had to have deducted at least 1ltr of fuel beforehand. They hadn’t so the scrutineers deducted 2.8 ltrs of fuel for the sample (there was still fuel in the tank). This was dishonest by Merc. They were hiding something for sure or they would have presented the car less the sample and taken the rap for an underweight car.
‘The car was weighed again on the FIA inside and outside scales and the weight was 796.5 kg. The calibration of the outside and inside scales was confirmed and witnessed by the competitor.’
As we don’t know exactly how much fuel was still in the car we don’t know the extent to which the car was underweight.
As mentioned above, the maximum amount of fuel that can be carried is 110kgs. GR did one stop , won the race and still had fuel in the car, the exact amount of which is unknown. How did he have so much fuel in the car?
In my view, the real reason GR was underweight for the weigh-in is because he used up too much fuel - 1ltr too much. Had he had enough for the sample they’d have got away with it and no one would know that X litres of fuel was still in the car.
Just my view folks, don’t take it personally.
The team didn’t ‘present’ the car for weighing. It stopped in Parc Fermé and was picked up by the scrutineers to be weighed shortly afterwards. ‘The car was not fully drained according to the draining procedure submitted by the team in their legality documents as TR Article 6.5.2 is fulfilled.’
Interpretation: The team presented the car for weighing despite knowing full well that they had to have deducted at least 1ltr of fuel beforehand. They hadn’t so the scrutineers deducted 2.8 ltrs of fuel for the sample (there was still fuel in the tank). This was dishonest by Merc. They were hiding something for sure or they would have presented the car less the sample and taken the rap for an underweight car.
‘The car was weighed again on the FIA inside and outside scales and the weight was 796.5 kg. The calibration of the outside and inside scales was confirmed and witnessed by the competitor.’
As we don’t know exactly how much fuel was still in the car we don’t know the extent to which the car was underweight.
As mentioned above, the maximum amount of fuel that can be carried is 110kgs. GR did one stop , won the race and still had fuel in the car, the exact amount of which is unknown. How did he have so much fuel in the car?
In my view, the real reason GR was underweight for the weigh-in is because he used up too much fuel - 1ltr too much. Had he had enough for the sample they’d have got away with it and no one would know that X litres of fuel was still in the car.
Just my view folks, don’t take it personally.
The draining of fuel took place after this initial weighing. They didn’t need to drain all the fuel, as the car was bang on the limit as it finished the race. They drained more than the required sample from the car, which was then weighed again and found to be underweight.
The scrutineers could have demanded the tank be drained completely, a more complicated process, but there was no need as the offence had already been proven.
Your interpretation is that there was some dishonesty on the part of the team, which isn’t bourne out by the full text of Jo Bauer’s report.
I'm confused. Ignoring for the minute that the minimum weight is dry and that presumably they're always going to ensure the tanks are drained when you're anywhere near that minimum weight, what possible advantage is there in running around with x kgs of extra fuel vs x kilos of lead (or whatever) ballast stuck where it is beneficial to weight distribution?
Pachydermus said:
I'm confused. Ignoring for the minute that the minimum weight is dry and that presumably they're always going to ensure the tanks are drained when you're anywhere near that minimum weight, what possible advantage is there in running around with x kgs of extra fuel vs x kilos of lead (or whatever) ballast stuck where it is beneficial to weight distribution?
There’s no possible advantage to carrying extra fuel in today’s F1*. They usually underfuel the cars and have them lift and coast, as that’s faster than taking on the weight of more fuel. When we used to do in-race refuelling, however, there were a number of cheats that involved running an underweight car for a significant portion of the race, but finding a way to but the weight back in at the final stop to keep the scrutineers happy.
- actually there is one. Remember when Ferrari got caught over-fuelling Lercerc’s car by 5kg, because they had allegedly found a way to exceed the fuel flow limit and get themselves a more powerful engine?
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff