In the round-up: Sebastian Vettel says Ferrari’s reliability is not a major cause for concern despite their two retirements last weekend.
Links
Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more from hundreds of sites across the web:
Vettel: Ferrari has problems under control (Racer)
"For sure you're always on the edge, but if you speak to other people it's the same. So not too worried to be honest, but we need to get on top of the problems that we have."
Hamilton tells Mercedes team: get me back up to speed for Suzuka (The Guardian)
Vettel: "We’ll check (the gearbox) but yeah, that could be another bad surprise this weekend. I hope not because it was completely unnecessary."
'Angry' Ferrari president makes F1 team changes (ESPN)
"Now we're working on the quality department and making some organisational changes. Having this kind of problem during the race make us angry."
Red Bull adamant it would've beaten Ferrari too (Autosport)
"You can see we were running slightly less downforce than the others, we don't have the T-wing here for example, and we have found a very good set-up."
Top six F1 teams lobby Todt and Carey on Budkowski case (Motorsport)
"There might be a potential conflict of interests, which I'm not saying he has in any way abused, but there should be some kind of ethical policy that we all follow."
F1 title rivals should be wary of Red Bull (Reuters)
"Probably if you look at the real pace today, it would have been P5 (fifth place). And that is worrisome."
Living every day like it’s your last - the 'real' Hamilton (F1)
"I feel I was a late bloomer! I missed a lot of my schooling when I was younger and when I came here at 22 I still was something of a kid thrown into the deep end. In my late twenties and early thirties I realized that I am making big steps forward..."
Malaysian GP report (Motorsport magazine)
"The Ferrari guestimate on light-fuelling had been just slightly too aggressive. Had he had an extra few kg and made it past Ricciardo, could he have threatened Hamilton’s second place? Probably not."
Attitude and aggravation could cost Vettel the F1 world title (Sky)
"It is to an extent amusing that the Halo is being introduced next season to further protect the drivers, something of which Seb is an ardent supporter, then he's sitting on the shiny sidepod of a hot F1 car doing 80kph with a fat rear tyre ready to run over him should he slip, for three kilometres."
Got a tip for a link to feature in the next F1 Fanatic round-up? Send it in here:
Social media
Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:
Our thoughts and prayers are with Las Vegas and everyone affected by this horrible event.
— Haas F1 Team (@HaasF1Team) October 2, 2017
250 Gp's for the men on the left!! Thanks for the great support during all these years Sven!!@SchuberthHelmet pic.twitter.com/4UDJADqXbw
— Nico Hülkenberg (@HulkHulkenberg) October 2, 2017
- Find more official F1 accounts to follow in the F1 Twitter Directory
Comment of the day
@Jcost hopes Vettel’s clash with Stroll won’t have a bearing on the championship fight:
For the sake of the championship, please let Ferrari get a penalty free gearbox change!
But after watching pictures from the car following Stroll and Vettel I would understand if FIA does not exempt Ferrari.
@Jcost
From the forum
Happy birthday!
Happy birthday to Pankit!
If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.
David Not Coulthard (@davidnotcoulthard)
3rd October 2017, 0:18
…because that strategy, applied between seasons not races, worked insanely well in achieving titles in the late di Montezemolo era.
Neil (@neilosjames)
3rd October 2017, 0:34
I saw there was one comment, read the roundup then scrolled down… and the comment was almost word-for-word what I was going to write.
Like you say, that sort of approach never served them well in the past. It’s probably even more worrying when Marchionne swoops in for a “seagull” around the office, because he strikes me as a guy who knows a huge amount about business and a fair bit less about the internal workings of an F1 team…
Paul's dad.
3rd October 2017, 9:00
But what about their fiery-italian-ness?! :( You can’t forget about their passion and their soul!
Dom (@3dom)
3rd October 2017, 18:48
I kind of think that there’s an overreaction regarding the engine reliability. When I heard that there were just 4 power units to last the season, I thought that teams would struggle more than they have. What was this? Round 14, 15 of the championship? It’s remarkable that they’ve only just had their first issues with the engine (obviously commendable to Mercedes as well), especially when trying to push the performance envelope in a tight championship battle. Hopefully when they say “organisational changes”, they are referring to adding someone to oversee engine reliability, rather than the all-too-often culling that we’ve seen in the past. When I think of Marchionne’s dealings with Ferrari, it rather reminds me of Darth Vader in The Empire Strikes Back! Surely that “ruling by fear” attitude can’t be the way to bring out the talent in an F1 team long term.
thepostalserviceisbroke (@thepostalserviceisbroke)
3rd October 2017, 4:51
Budkowski must not be permitted to join Renault next year. High ranking persons changing teams take a 1-year sabbatical. How much more so for someone’s who’s been privy to the innermost technical insights into ALL teams? There will be a credibility crisis for the entire governing body. Can you imagine the implications if the teams suddenly can’t trust the motivations of FIA’s technical personnel? Row after row after row as teams just try different things, other teams protesting, arbitration, etc.
Phylyp (@phylyp)
3rd October 2017, 5:00
It’s almost certain that the FIA will rephrase the contracts for new employees (and maybe even amend the existing contracts), for the very reasons you outlined, and I don’t think anyone disputes that point, @thepostalserviceisbroke .
I believe the crux of the issue is that Budkowski’s existing contract only defines a 3-month period which is now turning out the sticking point.
Either the FIA or constructors have to prevail upon Renault to only take Budkowski after that period, or the constructors have to pay off Budkowski for another 9 months, with Renault’s agreement.
BasCB (@bascb)
3rd October 2017, 17:12
They would have to do quite a bit more than just redo contracts @phylyp, @thepostalserviceisbroke since the part of the FIA that employs people is situated in Switzerland, and Swiss employment law does not allow for longer “gardening leave” (although it might be doable with the obligation to pay a full salary for that period).
So they would probably have to change the whole structure of the FIA to do so.
Phylyp (@phylyp)
3rd October 2017, 18:44
@bascb – thanks for that, I noticed Leo had also pointed out the same below.
I thought people were paid on gardening leave? Although I can see the problem here… I would think the gardening leave is paid for by the former employer (the line of thinking is “I’m paying you for a year to not go away with my secrets to my competitor”), and in this case it is the FIA (and not a constructor) who is the former employer, and the FIA might not have anticipated such a need.
So the question might then turn to “who pays?” Either the FIA has to pony up the gardening leave salary to be viewed as a neutral party by the constructors, or the teams have to pool in and pay for the additional 9 months. Interesting to see how this will shape up, for sure.
BasCB (@bascb)
3rd October 2017, 20:43
I am not completely sure about Swiss law in this matter @phylyp, but there are several things to consider.
First of all the option of not allowing them to go to a direct competitor will not fly – since the FIA is not a competitor. I know there are some special rules for regulators in several countries. But I seriously doubt any state would define that as going for an organisation like the FIA.
The money – I guess it might be possible, but it seems that in order to enforce more than the regular 3 months under Swiss law you would need exceptional agreements.
Leo B
3rd October 2017, 11:07
Apparantly under Swiss law a gardening leave is maximised at 3 months.
Anyway, I’m all for a very different approach: all teams must reveal their entire car design somewhere between the final race and the Christmas holidays. This must be a publically available document, including drawings, dimensions, part iterations, software code, etc. It could solve most personnel issues (no more poaching of engineers just to know what another team is doing, no more gardening leaves), it could make the competition closer and it could even drive the cost down a little. I know it’s not going to happen, but it would be the wise thing to do.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
3rd October 2017, 12:46
There used to be a rule requiring that FIA people not be hired by F1 teams within 24 months of leaving their posts (without restricting them in other ways). I wonder if that got struck down by the Swiss courts too? (The rule pre-dated the FIA splitting its base between Paris and Geneva).
BasCB (@bascb)
3rd October 2017, 17:37
Eh, Leo, the design isn’t even final by that time, or really, the design isn’t ever final with an F1 car!
anon
3rd October 2017, 17:48
@bascb, furthermore, wouldn’t every single team just simply report the fundamental basics of their design in that document, and then technically define most of their development work as taking place in the period after December? It sounds like a rather clumsy and not particularly effective technique.
Leo B
4th October 2017, 1:24
To clearify, what I propose is to reveal the design and all of the developments of the 2017 cars in november/december 2017, not the design of next year’s car. That way a clever invention is only exclusive for one season and it will be harder for a (rich) team to dominate for a long period of time. Every team can legally copy stuff from others without having to resort to poaching employees or employ corporate spies.
Stephen Crowsen (@drycrust)
3rd October 2017, 16:43
The odd thing about this is surely this isn’t the first time ever that this situation has arisen? One would have expected the FIA to have had a clause in their contracts stipulating more than 3 months gardening leave for several decades.
Mind you, there is a legend that Adrian Newey was doing design work for Red Bull while on gardening leave. Still, he wasn’t privy to lots of teams secrets.
MG1982 (@mg1982)
3rd October 2017, 6:47
I’m not worried either… the champs are over anyway. The WCC was over since race 1 ended. VET is condemned to win all the remaining races, but it won’t happen for sure. BOT is such a great no.2 too, especially lately, and that’s just more bad news for VET. But, yeah, I still have some hopes some kind of miracles will happen and this WDC will turn into something to remember for a long time.
Makana (@makana)
3rd October 2017, 10:53
I’m baffled how not too worried he is. He must be raging behind closed doors; or maybe, he’s not too worried.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
3rd October 2017, 12:47
He may have decided that there’s no use crying over spilt milk. At last.
petebaldwin (@)
3rd October 2017, 12:59
He’s already got 4 of them so I suppose that helps. What can he do other than say “honestly” lots?
Patrickl (@patrickl)
3rd October 2017, 19:26
@mg1982, The WCC was over after race 1? I thought Mercedes came back quite strongly after Ferrari initially took the lead in that first race?
Ferrari was well ahead after Monaco. It actually took till race 7 (Canada) for Mercedes to really pull ahead, but that was after Ferrari and it’s drivers started dropping the ball over and over (even though they had a car just as fast or faster than Mercedes).
MG1982 (@mg1982)
4th October 2017, 6:39
Yeah, on paper you’re more than right, but it’s not my problem you don’t trust my crystal ball. If you think Ferrari can win a WCC again with RAI in 1 of the cars while the car is not dominant (like in 2002, 2004)… you’re wrong. Mathematically, agree, VET and Ferrari still have chances to win the champs, but reality/common sense say it’s highly unlikely it’ll happen. Recoveries of this kind of points deficit with 5 races to go happen like once in 20 years.
Roth Man (@rdotquestionmark)
3rd October 2017, 8:21
One thing I really didn’t like from the GP was Ocon’s engineer telling him off for not making a whiny case to the stewards for who was to blame in his incident with Sainz. There is a race going on not a court case, the stewards have eyes and all the data, it shouldn’t be a matter of having to make a case for yourself. So regardless of fault and integrity drivers are gonna blame the other guy like footballers begging a referee to give a penalty or get someone sent off. I don’t like it one bit.
sumedh
3rd October 2017, 8:38
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOCTBsG52s8
Actually, see this video. Charlie himself says that he depends on driver to tell him about incidents.
Phylyp (@phylyp)
3rd October 2017, 8:43
@sumedh – interesting, so its like appealing in cricket.
Strontium (@strontium)
3rd October 2017, 9:13
It’s interesting we got to see both of these videos in one weekend. To me this is like saying you have to report a foul to the referee when it’s right in front of them. Surely they know there’s been a collision. The team radio annoyed me as well. Once the engineer had got a response to his question, he should’ve left it at that, having an argument with the driver during the race isn’t going to help anyone
I do have serious concerns about them uploading these videos for us to see. They said it was a one-off after last time, because they don’t want the drivers to feel they can’t speak for fear of their image in the media. Many comments on that video were criticising Grosjean, which is exactly what is worrying. Likewise Perez for being the kid who talks to the teacher at the end (which cracked me up a bit).
Roth Man (@rdotquestionmark)
3rd October 2017, 10:42
Interesting video but Charlie says they rely on the teams informing him not the driver. The guys sat on the pit wall not the ones driving at 200mph @sumedh
Yep agree @strontium the way Ocon’s engineer spoke to me really annoyed me, what a terrible way to manage a young lad driving an F1 car who’s already gonna be emotional from being hit. I found the classroom dynamic really funny. Grosjean the tell tale, Massa dropping Bottas in it for what he told him privately and then Perez like you say at the end 😂
Roth Man (@rdotquestionmark)
3rd October 2017, 10:43
*him
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
3rd October 2017, 13:04
I wonder if Perez noticed the camera and decided on that basis to not speak in front of it? He’s not usually afraid of who hears his opinion…
Force India strikes me as a team that doesn’t report driver issues unless their drivers are actually bothered by them. If the team isn’t aware of Esteban being bothered by Carlos’ bad driving, they’ll reserve their arguing efforts on the other arguments they are already waging. Esteban probably thought it was obvious that Carlos had hit him, hence his lack of comment, but the time limit for protesting is 1 hour after the race – it’s not exactly as if a couple of laps’ delay was going to change anything in this case. Communication issues are not something to berate a driver about mid-race. Like the same engineer (I think – I may be mis-remebering) said earlier, “You could have left that for the [post-race] report”.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
3rd October 2017, 12:53
I don’t like it one bit either. If we have race drivers making cases against each other, both of them are going to drive slower because of it, they’re going to be perpetuating the negativity that weakens so many people’s support of F1 and it makes subjectivity and rhetoric more important than the objective tools stewards are supposed to be using (in perception, if not necessarily in reality).
Race Control should not need to depend on anyone else telling them about incidents. It should be something they spot themselves, and/or have teams protest to stewards directly (a facility that already exists).
Why Me?
3rd October 2017, 8:52
fully agree.
And even though the engineer was correct that all contact should be radioed in, he could have mentioned it during the post race debrief.
What’s next? Telling a driver they left the toilet seat up?
frood19 (@frood19)
3rd October 2017, 9:29
it sucks for the title fight (maybe, you never know what will happen to hamilton) but i can’t see any reason for vettel to get a free gearbox change. it’s a racing incident.
JeffreyJ
3rd October 2017, 16:56
1 DNF by Hamilton and Vettel is within striking distance again… It’s not over yet, but Ferrari and Vettel himself keep messing up and it’s proving to be very costly. Quite frankly it robs us from an epic title battle at this point.
F Truth (@)
3rd October 2017, 9:36
Brundle needs to stop moaning. In the same article he’s criticising Seb for hitching a lift he admits he did it years ago also. Well sometimes the crowd deserve a few scenes.
His unwarranted attack on Alonso for posing on the deckchair was also an embarassment and i’m glad Jenson called him out on Twitter for it.
After spending years alongside the great Murray Walker who was an endlessly positive old man he’s turning into the complete opposite, endlessly grumpy.
I’m enjoying the 4K coverage on Sky this year but I wish they would shake up the correspondents and get someone with a bit of backbone to challenge some of the things Brundle and Crofty come out with!
Makana (@makana)
3rd October 2017, 10:55
Sky are fanboys this season and they know it.
Strontium (@strontium)
3rd October 2017, 11:07
@offdutyrockstar Nothing but sensationalist commentary from Brundle, Croft, and the entire Sky broadcast, it’s dire to listen to. The first thing they always talk about who is to blame for things, then they start slamming a driver for things they’ve done, and it’s very very negative indeed, and not remotely enjoyable to listen to.
I’d go as far as to argue it creates a negative vibe around the sport and it’s no wonder people don’t want to watch. People m
And listening to David Croft’s non-stop Hamilton bias is so irritating. There isn’t a problem with supporting a driver or team but when you’re commentating on a race, it’s nice to keep it to an absolute minimum. It’s a theme these day (for all commentators) to talk every second of the race, and as a result they just give a load of drivel. I’d much rather they only spoke if there is something genuinely worth saying.
Channel 4’s commentary is less efficient, they miss a lot of details
Strontium (@strontium)
3rd October 2017, 11:11
Sorry, the comment posted before I’d finished.
I don’t think the US commentary is very good but very often they are enthusiastic and enjoying it, which makes such a difference.
Channel 4’s commentary misses a lot of details, and can get quite mundane at times, but they don’t try and rub things in all the time. I much prefer listening to Edwards and Coulthard
Phylyp (@phylyp)
3rd October 2017, 12:01
@strontium – given that I wish at times I could turn off the commentary track and just listen to the race sounds… and this is with C4 commentary, I can imagine only how dire the Sky commentary is!
StefMeister (@stefmeister)
3rd October 2017, 12:38
@phylyp I think the Sky commentary is better than C4 which is why I ended up continuing with my Sky subscription after my 12 month discount/contract ended a few months back.
I tried watching some of the C4 races & I just can’t stand David Coulthard’s commentary & don’t think Ben Edwards is as good as he was when he was alongside John Watson during there EuroSport/F1 Digital+ commentary in 95/96/02.
I don’t think Sky’s commentary in terms of bias or blaming or anything is quite as bad as @strontium makes out. They do have some bias towards British drivers but its no worse than any of the previous commentators/broadcasters & certainly nowhere near as bad as ITV in 2007/2008. I also think they do a good job at analyzing incidents, Especially with there Sky-pad & I find myself more often than not agreeing with there analysis & direction of any blame.
Not saying there coverage is perfect, But I enjoy it, Prefer it to the alternative & have no plans to end my subscription anytime soon.
Phylyp (@phylyp)
3rd October 2017, 12:40
@stefmeister – cheers, StefMeister, good to have that viewpoint.
Will Jones
4th October 2017, 2:22
It’s worth pointing out that with sky you have the option to get rid of commentary, which is amazing, honestly, once I tried it a few years ago, I never went back!
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
3rd October 2017, 13:18
I find the British commentary situation frustrating. Both Sky and Channel 4 are apt to either miss a lot of information, or be so slow to spot patterns that they almost might as well have missed it (the two may be linked). At least Channel 4’s approach doesn’t give me a headache due to the commentators there knowing they can speak at more than one volume and not sounding like they swallowed a bag of marbles each. If it weren’t for the pictures and the frequent interruptions, I think I’d be using Radio 5 Live – their approach is sometimes insightful. But I really miss that Britain no longer has a broadcasting team as good as Rai (alas, I’m the only member of my family who understands Italian…)
I found Sky to be hopelessly biased towards Hamilton – not so much because of its extent, but because of its volume, their propensity to turn things that don’t really have much to do with Lewis into pieces with shoehorned Lewis bits and ridiculous rumour creation about him. Channel 4 usually does better, but is starting to veer this way regarding Verstappen. Argh!
Michael Brown (@)
3rd October 2017, 17:15
They framed the de-rates as a reliability problem, when in actuality Hamilton was using his battery in different parts of the lap than Verstappen.
tgu (@thegrapeunwashed)
3rd October 2017, 12:52
@offdutyrockstar Agree with you about Sky, from the little I’ve seen it is toe-curling. Martin Brundle was already going off the boil before Sky hired him, the BBC team which C4 revamped is much better: Ben Edwards is a superb commentator and very sharp-eyed, Coulthard is a little low key but solid (Jenson Button would be ideal) and Steve Jones is a joy! Karun Chandhok has been a great success too. Webber’s good, but I guess Allan McNish and Ant Davidson are just as capable, and Lee McKensie is very competent. It will be a real shame if this team is broken up in 2019 when F1 goes exclusively to Sky.
F Truth (@)
3rd October 2017, 13:43
Lots of good points.
Wholeheartedly agree re: US commentary and how it adds to the excitement, when I lived in Dubai the commentary switched from US, ESPN commentators to Sky’s Crofty and Brundle and I preferred the former. Sometimes when the commentary was randomly in Arabic for some races I would tune into Radio 5 live and that was quite good too, even if the pictures didnt match the commentary!
I havent watched any C4 coverage this year, I may give it a crack whenever their next live race is. Last year I didnt have a Sky subscription and Eddie J and the guy off T4 were immensely annoying, Webber however was great and I always appreciate DC. I guess both channels have their MVP’s, this year Pat Simmons and PDR are adding some good insight filling the gap Anthony Davidson leaves when he’s busy.
Overall however I can’t do without Sky now simply for the 4K. I have a 70″ screen and 1080p looks less than great on it, with the 4K it looks amazing.
Perfect lineup for me would be Jake Humphry on anchor, Webber, DC and Brundle as pundits (just because it would be so entertaining to see Webber slap Brundle down whenever he starts getting too big for his boots), Pat Simmons for the techy stuff (when he explains things it feels like when your favourite science teacher at school used to speak and you actually used to listen) and Anthony Davidson for the replays and analysis.
Lazenby, Crofty, Damon Hill, Johnny Herbert, EJ and yes, Ted Kravitz would all get the cut from me. Wow thats mostly all Sky team.
Sundar Srinivas Harish
3rd October 2017, 14:42
I think the support team generally echoes the commentary team. I think removing Croft and Brundle from the commentary box would take care of their negativity. Well, actually, Brundle is the only one who is a wet blanket, I find Croft’s voice annoying for some reason.
C4 is great, Edwards is enthusiastic and DC is witty as hell – the two of them are a great team. The conversations between them don’t seem forced like those between Croft and Brundle. Apart from a slight bias towards British drivers and drivers DC has driven with, C4 is great stuff.
BigJoe
3rd October 2017, 15:24
Is Dario Franchitti available? I thought he was great in Formula E
Michael Brown (@)
3rd October 2017, 17:17
Agreed. Croft’s voice is annoying. I can’t believe his voice is even in the official F1 game, as though it’s trying to portray him as the “voice of Formula One.” Good thing I can turn off his voice.
Phil-F1-21
3rd October 2017, 20:22
I agree with this. I much prefer the C4 team to Sky’s. If a race is on both channels I always go for C4. I find most of the Sky team annoying although I actually don’t mind Brundle.
I dread the thought of having to subscribe to Sky after 2018. Not only because I am not a big fan of the coverage but also because I object to sending any money the way of anything connected with the Murdoch family.
tgu (@thegrapeunwashed)
3rd October 2017, 18:06
Yeah, me too. The thought that I might have to pay for these clowns to continue watching F1 past 2019 is painful. Actually, I like Damon and Johnny, I just think they’re surplus to requirements. EJ is the real weak link in C4’s coverage, but they seem to have scaled back on him this season.
Fresillo
3rd October 2017, 13:56
To be completely honest I keep the TV volume on during a race just in case the commentators might have any information about the race ( from their data, tyres, strategy, etc.) that I can’ t quickly get access to.
Why Me?
3rd October 2017, 14:46
I’m one of those lucky viewers who can get Sky, Irish (Eir Sport=C4), German, Spanish, Dutch, and RTBF.
IMO C4 is much better than the annoying Sky. German broadcast is average although they tend to get some good insights from Lauda en Wolff. The Spanish is reasonable but talk a lot and (expectedly) focus on Alonso and Sainz. And I’m sure the Dutch will follow Verstappen’s every turn.
It would be interesting to have a poll on this site which broadcast we value most.
spoutnik (@spoutnik)
3rd October 2017, 11:31
I’d oppose strongly against giving Vettel a free gearbox. It was entirely avoidable. A shame, truly, but no reason to do it.
JerseyF1 (@jerseyf1)
3rd October 2017, 14:05
Mark Hughes’ suggestion that the amount of fuel in Vettel’s car was a “guestimate” seems a little unfair, I suspect there was much effort put into the estimate rather than just guessing.
He also talks about “Had he had an extra few kg and made it past Ricciardo” , this alternative scenario overlooks the fact that Vettel would not have caught Ricciardo as quickly (or possibly at all) with the weight penalty of more fuel on board so in that sense perhaps the fueling “guestimate” may have been close to optimal, though perhaps frustrating for Vettel.
BigJoe
3rd October 2017, 15:21
I loved the way when Vettel got his first couple of wins, the bedroom F1 fans claimed all their problems must have been Alonso’s fault LOL
ADUB SMALLBLOCK (@waptraveler)
3rd October 2017, 15:48
Keith Collantine: Can you give us any insight into the Ferrari failure? When I hear “problem with the airflow between the turbo and the engine”, I’m not sure if they mean on the inlet side or exhaust side of the turbo. I would think on the exhaust/high pressure side, but not sure. Is this thought to be a mechanical failure of the connecting works?
anon
3rd October 2017, 18:01
@waptraveler, in the case of Vettel, Ferrari eventually pinpointed it to a broken turbocharger exhaust manifold, resulting in a loss in pressure in the air that was being fed from the compressor into the engine. https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/ferrari-gets-to-bottom-of-vettel-s-fault-as-new-parts-fitted-959853/?s=1
As far as I understand things, it seems that the same problem affected Kimi on race day.
ADUB SMALLBLOCK (@waptraveler)
3rd October 2017, 22:04
Anon: Thanks! I hadn’t seen that. Sure makes sense. Wonder if it is just poor quality control, or if the design inherently introduces dangerous levels of stress in order to meet the space/performance targets?
erikje
3rd October 2017, 20:32
italian mice in the system perhaps?