Forum Replies Created
13th May 2016, 22:12 at 10:12 pm #319806
Aah, I haven’t presumed you haven’t seen this one before either and so I fully expected a better angle before I clicked on the topic, lol.
It was also at the exit of the old Verriere sweepers which they don’t use anymore. It was at the entry of those sweepers where Elio de Angelis flew off the track and died in 1986. That flat-out chicane must have placed an unimaginable amount of load on the suspensions.13th May 2016, 22:08 at 10:08 pm #319805
Was just about to post.
It’s a win-win except for TV audience and/or attendance – NASCAR has probably one of its biggest and most successful events on that weekend, the Southern 500 in Darlington. If there’s one oval I like and a track of that mold which is as revered as The Glen among the road courses, it’s Darlington.
I hope the retro feeling of the Indy cars returning to Watkins Glen will pull through anyway. I’ll try to catch the race somewhere between the Monza sessions.10th May 2016, 17:09 at 5:09 pm #319525
A top-category open-wheeler on The Glen is stupid fast, especially with the recent repave – and that’s not a complaint either. The Glen is one of the top 5 best race tracks in the world.11th March 2016, 0:36 at 12:36 am #314884
Basically, count me as someone who quotes this entirely post above and asks the same thing.25th February 2016, 10:35 at 10:35 am #313181
Further on the ‘how much Toro Rosso will gain/lose by switching from the less powerful Renault to the more powerful Ferrari, but from an up-to-date engine to a year-old one’ topic.
It’s interesting to note how Ricciardo claimed the new Renault (sorry, TAG Heuer) PU is not as much of an improvement as Renault expected, yet when Formula1.com asked Franz Tost who would their main opponents be in 2016, he listed Force India, McLaren, Sauber and Haas instead of Red Bull (or Renault, for that matter, although he probably expects the latter to be more behind rather than ahead.)17th February 2016, 23:04 at 11:04 pm #312453
There you go, re my previous posts here.16th February 2016, 22:45 at 10:45 pm #312364
@xtwl Williams is actually abandoning their low drag-low downforce approach and are going more conventional this year. It’s a completely new aero design for them. Now others, like Red Bull, Toro Rosso and Mercedes are two years down that development path so that may still mean Williams won’t be among the best downforce-wise – but they tell us their numbers look very well-improved from last season, so I think they will. And that elevates them above Red Bull pretty firmly.
Judging from the lists above, I think we can concur that the three biggest dark horses of the season should be McLaren, Toro Rosso and Haas – people rank them wildly differently and indeed their success hangs on just a few factors playing out right or wrong.
Has Honda managed to get larger turbines into the V and improve recovery efficiency? Will the ’15 Ferrari indeed be better than the ’16 Renault, especially mid-to-late season? Did Haas really benefit from using Ferrari expertise wherever it could?
Opponents sounded off this winter like they really expect all three questions to be answered with a more or less confident ‘yes.’ Mercedes TWICE warned of a much-improved McLaren-Honda based on their nearly 20-year experience with McLaren recently, Max Verstappen said switching from ’15 Renaults to ’15 Ferraris will alone yield 1s to Toro Rosso and Force India expected Haas to be regularly in contention in the midfield battle a while ago.16th February 2016, 10:40 at 10:40 am #312351
I almost fully agree with you which is a miracle given how ‘murky’ these waters all are…
The odd bits of different opinion comes in when it comes to gaps (e. g. between Force India and Renault, I think it’ll be bigger) and the position of Toro Rosso.
Toro Rosso actually had one of the best chassis on the grid in 2015, so there’s a point (I mean ask anybody), and the ’15 Ferrari was so much better than the ’15 Renault that I can’t imagine the ’16 Renault being better than the ’15 Ferrari, especially early-to-mid season. On par later on, at best. That gives Toro Rosso exactly the same position in the pecking order as last year – very near to and occasionally ahead of Force India. A bit behind this year, I reckon, due to the potential chassis compromise to fit the Ferrari PU.
I think the Renault chassis will be even worse than last year’s. Last year’s was already pretty bad – I remember Verstappen or Sainz saying in Melbourne that the STR is sooo much better in every corner, it’s just the Mercedes ngine that helps Lotus pull away on the straights. With next to no funds even keeping their 2015 project alive, I imagine their ’16 project suffered even more badly. And what applies to STR in the PU department, applies here as well: no way the ’16 Renault will be stronger than the ’15 Mercedes. Than means, on engine alone, Renault will be slower than the ’15 itself. ‘In F1, even if you stay stationary, you’re basically going backwards,’ imagine what will happen if you’re getting slower.
So my tl;dr list is:
4. Red Bull
6. Force India
7. Toro Rosso
11. Manor12th February 2016, 22:05 at 10:05 pm #312313
@hunocsi Oh, thanks, that’s a much brighter prospect – although, in that case, someone should have told us that 42 or 44% actually equals 100% here, lol.12th February 2016, 21:29 at 9:29 pm #312311
I like your quiz, I really do because it’s very deep, sufficiently deep for a very detailed study, but…
That’s the hard truth.
I’m sitting here for more than 15 minutes now and I’m barely past 30%. Now I guess if you just carelessly check all the boxes you’re asked about, you can do it in 12-15 minutes, but I think anybody who really thinks about his or her answer will take much longer.
And it misses the point here, because I think you want thoughtful answers for this one (it sounds serious enough), not just a bunch of half-hearted ticks.
I mean it’ll only make sense if you work with honest data… You may make the study even if you don’t care about data quality and want raw data points only but that’ll not be an accurate picture of what motorsport should be about.
I’d be happy to tackle this quiz if it would be about 1/5 of the length.
Cheers. (No offense, I hope there’s none taken.)10th February 2016, 21:33 at 9:33 pm #312236
I was a lot into Geoff Crammond’s Grand Prix 4 from the old days, now I use it for building tracks mostly.
I was a big fan of GRID Autosport since it came out mid-2014 – simcade fits my taste perfectly with it being easy to just strap yourself in and play, but not being entirely hell bent on either hardcore simulation or brainless arcade. I love touring cars and GT3s in it, Mount Panorama is a blast. It’s just very authentic with a lot of clever emphasis well-placed on damage systems, track limits, team radio, graphics (bar horrendous interiors) and sounds. No pitstop is probably the biggest drawback and it leads to some ridiculous situations – like going on after multiple punctures, etc.
Of the sim market, I love iRacing, probably the most accurate thing out there (no wonder, it’s from the same guy who’ve made Grand Prix Legends and NASCAR Racing 2003 Season, both of which were considered the peak in their time physically), Assetto Corsa a bit, but I really don’t like Project CARS – it was initially branded as real as possible, but physics is not as good as in iRacing and the tracks are mostly not laser-scanned (in contrast with iRacing). Even I’ve built a more accurate version of Watkins Glen than what there is in the game.
Overall, though, I’m playing ever more scarcely nowadays – I’ve put more emphasis on other things in life. I’m not gonna be a race car driver, nor do I believe I can make a profitable busines out of recording multiplayer videos of racing games and putting it on YouTube like some sim racers do. It’s just a hobby and I figured I’m gonna have to work pretty hard in my life to get somewhere before I get old – so very little time for hobbies.
EDIT: Good question and good topic though. :)2nd February 2016, 23:52 at 11:52 pm #312076
@mick61 No problem, enjoy your stay, guys. I can only second that you share info about your experiences, the more the better indeed.
@foleyger Yes, sir. It’s worth wandering around the general admission at least once during the weekend, there are a few sweet spots around the fence. As far as I remember, the closest you can get to the action there is at T12 at the bottom of the hill or up, right after the chicane (although I’m not sure about this, it’s been far too long I’ve been there on those parts).
As for the ‘main train station,’ we actually have three similarly-sized terminal in Budapest – but all three of them are on the line of either metro line 2 (red) or metro line 3 (blue), so I’m pretty sure you’re at the right place anyway.
Have fun. :)1st February 2016, 20:40 at 8:40 pm #312032
@cactises So, in effect and in layman terms, you’re researching whether more consistent driving leads to better results?
My hunch (let’s call it a presumption) is that you’ll find stronger correlation in the Pirelli era, especially in the last two or three years, than before.
Good luck with your work.1st February 2016, 15:25 at 3:25 pm #312025
You state that 2015 may have been Maldonado’s turning point and that there is more to come if only he would keep his/a seat.
Nope. I asked what if end-2015 was a turning point for him. I don’t personally believe so. (And I’ve never said that there’s more to come from him if he manages to keep a seat.)1st February 2016, 12:29 at 12:29 pm #312014
he drew level on pace with Grosjean last year, after all.
I was pretty sure that this point would be picked and under attack here the most.
Driver form guides are ‘just’ headline, OK medium-deep, data – if you want the whole picture you have to look beyond that, take note of best sectors (i. e. combined best laps, which Keith does not provide in his quali analyses anymore, sadly), compare race paces on the race charts, consider driver errors in quali and the race, deep data, stuff like that.
According to my notes, on one-lap pace (which doesn’t necessarily equal the ‘qualified ahead’ columns here,) Grosjean was quicker 14 times, Maldonado 4 times and it was almost dead even once. The average quali gap was much smaller than in the headline results. In terms of race pace, it was even (8 times) or, due to different strategies and/or traffic, inconclusive (10 times, but including all three lap 1 double-retirements) bar the Hungaroring where Grosjean was clearly quicker. So on one lap, it was indeed Grosjean, but a) not by the amount in the headline figure, b) it was not a whitewash, so Maldonado had the pace, if he pulled himself together and c) in race conditions he was just as quick as the Frenchman. (Only a bit more error prone, 7-6 on Sundays, but a lot more so in high-stakes, point-scoring positions.)
Now I’m not saying ‘OMG JEEEZZZ, WHY U NO KEEP MALDO,’ I also think he’s likely unable to produce the goods consistently, he’s likely not strong enough mentally, I’m just trying to encourage others to ponder whether his late season consistency surge signifies he might have had more to give. I presumed at least we, F1 fanatics, are on the same page when it comes to judging on-track performance.
I think it was @xtwl who sounded off most meaningfully on the intended purpose of the topic and I’m actually very much with him in terms of verdict.
EDIT: @geemac also provided an excellent angle while I was typing this reply.