Forum Replies Created
30th August 2015, 21:26 at 9:26 pm #303936
+1, obviously. (Fo’ sure, haha. :))
I likewise wish to highlight Keith’s always measured, solid and sensible views. I like to think these words always fit my thinking as well, but it is not so. They do a lot of times, I think, and I can see where we are along the same lines (also with a lot of respected people in the paddock), but then time and again I lose some of that common sense and Keith’s points are often there to pull me back on the ground. I’m thankful for it.
As well as for the site, of course, it’s growing richer with content almost week in week out and it’s great to see (also considering how it began; well, not even how it began but how it was around 2009-2010 – I recall my first regular visits from around that time according to a few old print screens).23rd August 2015, 19:04 at 7:04 pm #303710
While I also adore Verstappen’s guts to make the move around the outside in Blanchimont, I’m also with the Kvyat move on Massa.
Massa is also known as a late braker, so indeed. Kvyat had to be that late (it was so late, I was sure he would not make the corner, it was unbelieavable). With choosing that braking point and then negotiating the bend without slipping either the fronts or the rears (I don’t know how his balance was) actually took more driving skills, I think, then ‘just’ tkaing Blanchimont on an even tighter radius still flat out. (Albeit on the marbles and with higher speed than usual due to the tow Verstappen picked up.)
EDIT: But then again, Kvyat had another hard thing to nail, which was to have the courage to stay in the slipstream very late. Only Alonso stays in as late as Kvyat did today, it takes guts as well. (E. g. I think Perez and Grosjean were much more cautious with it.)10th August 2015, 13:10 at 1:10 pm #303070
@dragoll That’s quite right – stock cars are probably the only remaining vehicles for which the Esses still presents its great challenge. In others, it’s just flat-out sweeps. It’s strange how a corner goes from a beast to zero in an instant once it becomes flat-out.
And yeah, Laguna Seca is not the most renowned place for overtaking, it never was.
However, that’s not to say they aren’t great circuits by themselves.9th August 2015, 10:50 at 10:50 am #303017
It certainly is a tricky proposition although I always thought America has even better ones – like the Glen, Sonoma, Laguna Seca or Road Atlanta. It’s funny how they run their most popular races on ovals (in NASCAR) or on street circuits (in IndyCar, where next to no-one turns up for the ovals), yet they still have a bunch of the best road courses in the world.
In Road America, I always found the Carousel and the blind Turn 4 to be the most difficult corners in the sim, although nailing the big stops, especially Turns 3 and Canada Corner is hard as well. Strangely, I never had issues in the “confidence lift” corners, such as Turn 5 and Turn… 8? (The one after the Carousel.)
NASCAR already ran some special races there, despite it being a relatively recent addition to the XFINITY series calendar. It was here that Alex Tagliani did a monstrous last 2 laps, moving up like 15 spots, after running out of fuel near the end, and it was here that it took the maximum 3 green-white-checkered attempts to finish a race for the first time.13th July 2015, 22:22 at 10:22 pm #301902
Am I the only one who wasn’t overly impressed with the Battersea track? (Although it has to be said it was a rather unique setting somewhat akin to the Budapest street races of the 1930s.)
It was, for most part, straight-chicane-straight-chicane and it did not seem to have offered an awful lot of overtaking opportunities. I was most pleased with the extremely heavy crowning of the road though, I would say it provided an unusual challenge.
All things considered, I cannot possibly imagine F1 cars taking to that layout as it’s soo narrow and short (I cannot imagine London widening the park roads to accomodate a GP either), so I don’t understand what all the fuss was about the ‘F1 should come here’ topic during the FE weekend.13th July 2015, 19:14 at 7:14 pm #301895
I would totally dig a race on one of the Paris layouts of GRID Autosport.
But I’ve heard it’s going to be around Les Invalides instead.8th July 2015, 6:59 at 6:59 am #301757
It seems to be VERY fast for a street circuit. Should be fun.7th July 2015, 11:42 at 11:42 am #301735
The helicam replay during the GP itself also shows (even better) that Ricciardo seemed to touch Grosjean ever so slightly in the braking zone, which led to Grosjean losing his control over the car, sending it first into Ericsson, then back into Ricciardo and finally hard into Maldonado.4th July 2015, 15:15 at 3:15 pm #301491
The only plus of the new T9 at COTA is that it allows for an iconic shot with the sighting tower in the background and the cars cresting a rise in the foreground. What’s more, the conspiracy theorist in me would say it was the main reason they’ve changed the original design.
The original design was much better there as well – it would have allowed for a fast in, slow in the middle, fast out Esses sequence, like the Maggotts-Becketts-Chapel, but then the revised version made in a fast in, slow in the middle and even slower out, which just kills every momentum a following car may have otherwise made into the hairpin turn which follows next. It’s also bad for overtaking – the original desgn would likely have made the last bit of the Esses flat, which would have enabled cars to get closer by the time they reach the hairpin.
Typically, it was a non-Tilke design in the first place, and Tilke ‘adjusted’ it and, of course, messed it up.
I totally expect the same with T9 at the Hermanos Rodriguez – it’s the original design in the F1 2015 and it flows well. I just expect it to be a bit more fiddly in real life. So sad.4th July 2015, 9:30 at 9:30 am #301483
Absolutely spot on Keith, and I think that was the only corner which – originally – would have stayed exactly on the same place with largely the same radius as it was. Now it’s changed as well – and made slower.
What an utter shame this whole thing might turn out to be.
Plase, don’t make it into another ‘low-and-medium-speed-corner’ borefest, like the Sochi track is. No variety at all. (Thank God, Silverstone and Suzuka manages to stay on the calendar.)27th June 2015, 9:47 at 9:47 am #301040
It did come off – very disturbing.
Although it has to be said the hoop actually got three impacts in this crash, one light and two heavy. First sideways with the right rail towards Les Combes, then on the two occasions it hit the ground. So I’m not that surprised that it failed – the crash test probably measures a single impact and teams will always want to juust slip past the test; they won’t want any more rigidity there than what is necessary (it would add weight, all this provided they have some liberties in modifying the chassis – if they don’t… well, then it’s a worrying thing altogether).
I guess the most positive thing about this is that the helmet was that strong – that it was able to keep Menezes healthy while it skidded along the tarmac for about 10-20 meters.
On a final note, Les Combes and its entry is quickly becoming a controversial place following this accident and the Hamilton-Rosberg run-in last season…22nd June 2015, 9:48 at 9:48 am #300602
My thought is that it was rather Rosberg’s poor quali performance rather than Hamilton’s genius that decided the pole.
I mean Hamilton usually gets the most out of what he has, that’s his main strength, always on the limit (his weakness is not always nailing the setup on what he has), but Rosberg must have simply done an awful first run, because even Hamilton’s first effort seemed a rather good banker lap rather than an on-the-edge pole lap (e. g. he missed half of his apexes).
But I do agree that that this circuit brought out driver ability more. For example, the last turn, Turn 9, had this little dip in the road right before its apex and it was great to see a driver (incidentally, Hamilton again) going through the process of understanding how to tackle it (i. e. backing down a touch just before it, else the car would get loose as it enters the dip and nears the centre of the cornering phase when it transitions from deceleration to acceleration and hence is the most vulnerable to balance issues).22nd June 2015, 9:38 at 9:38 am #300601
Bottas on Hulkenberg for the first time.
Albeit a DRS-assisted move, Bottas set it up on the preceding straight and I couldn’t help but feel he went extremely close to the limits of his car’s grip and brakes as he turned in to Turn 3 as he wasn’t that far ahead when they began braking. He pulled it off, but I felt he risked a spin there.
EDIT: Also, this was the move in which tyre life difference made the least impact. Maldonado on Verstappen was good, Grosjean on Nasr was great, Ricciardo on Nasr was good, but all of them had the following car on much fresher tyres, hence a lot more grip.17th June 2015, 11:25 at 11:25 am #300172
It is extremely good. Veery impressive, very well adjusted to the music, especially at the stops (both in the music and at the crashes). My personal taste would’ve required a touch more of those epic wheel-to-wheel battles between the GTE Pro leaders (Corvette vs. Ferrari?) near the evening at around Mulsanne at the expense of crashes, but otherwise excellent.
Just change the title of the topic, haha. :)17th June 2015, 9:49 at 9:49 am #300144
Sorry guys for my kind of misplaced, and essentially double, posts here lately – I’m often have problems with the forums, my posts just don’t get online instantly; I’m just redirected to another topic when I click on Send. To make matters worse, these posts do seem to appear later on and then they kind of seem like they are out of context.
Sorry again, F1 Fanatic allegedly tried very very hard to resolve these kind of long-time issues, but they still linger and probably will for some time.
Getting back to the topic, @hohum again has a valid point for me regarding the effects of the Paul Ricard-style run-offs on motorcyclists – and those effects are quite devastating for my idea. So scrap it for now, at least the version I drafted above.
I’m happy to see a lot of you seem to agree with my proposition to decrease downforce and increase mechanical grip which kind of underlines the importance of that rule-change from the fan standpoint.
However, some mentioned increasing ground effect – the thing is, teams are already making more and more underbody downforce step-by-step, because, of course that’s ‘free’ downforce (next to no drag) so it’s always the aim. I’m sure the classic 30-40-30 downforce generation ratio between front wing, floor-diffuser, rear wing is already moving slowly, but steadily towards a higher middle value. I won’t necessarily support decidedly pushing for ground effect in the rules, e. g. with skirts as we all know how dangerous they were when they were allowed. ‘Sealing’ the floor via clever little aerofoils on the edge of it seems enough for me.
Interestingly, so far (till I wrote this post, might be not till you see it…) there’s only one of you who’s for some rule change regarding tyres – and I very much agree. I think the great racing of the past few years, since 2011 (most often behind the runaway best guy that is) was down to the tyres and the performance difference it may create. The only thing I’d change is Pirelli’s overly conservative approach lately – I don’t see early 2013 deg levels, but a more healthy balance. I think the current system is great (we don’t need that complicated nonsense Pirelli announced yesterday), the tyres just have to be less durable.
Some notes on engine formula – I’m supportive of an LMP1-style freed-up engine development, but only on the longer run. It isn’t cheap either, that’s the reason. Don’t forget, LMP1’s varied PUs are developed by huge factory teams whose manufacturers pour quite some money into them as well – no wonder smaller LMP1 teams are not using them, they can’t afford it. So not now. No substantial fuel flow increase either – the green aspirations of F1 fends off attacks from the environmentalist sides and at least that part is OK now. Maybe a minor increase for louder engines, if other options won’t prove to be successful in that regard.
Finally, free-to-air coverage – and yes that’s a big thing which should be a priority. Most of the very successful series worldwide stayed free to watch (NASCAR, BTCC, V8, WEC on some major markets), so it seems to be an essential part of the recipe of success. It’s down to two parties basically – Bernie to ask less money and the networks to have the most professional, robust and solid finances to afford the high prices. I don’t see how regulatory bodies may have an effect on this, however, and then we’re back to the ‘checks & balances’ between the FIA (regulatory side) and the FOM (commercial side).